Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Where’s the Consistency on Finance Reform, Senator McConnell?

Dear Senator McConnell:

Before you think I went off the deep end or gave up what little life I have, I’m writing twice today by special request. I had already started on the support the troops/veterans letter that my cousin’s Facebook activity prompted when a friend requested that I ask you about your misguided views on finance reform. I wonder if that means you don’t accept letters from THE American People in other states*, or if your form-letter response didn’t make sense to her. It looks like one of us is becoming popular – and maybe not in a good way.

I’m as confused as my friend about your views on finance reform. Even after the White House issued that rebuttal of your misguided views, you kept right on repeating them and denying that you’re in bed with Wall Street. I understand that denial, since you might think people mean it literally and that’s how rumors get started. They don’t. They actually mean that you are courting them, which I believe is a fair statement since you did meet with them to ask for campaign money and we all know they aren’t going to give you anything without some strings attached. I will say, right here for everyone to see, that I don’t think the favors they ask are sexual, if that makes it any easier to swallow.

First, you keep pretending you want bipartisan bills, yet you refuse to cooperate with the party that the American people elected (I know, I’ve been on you about saying THE American people, but it sure fits better when I speak about the MAJORITY than when you mention the teensy minority you represent). Does this, in any way, make sense to you? When your party hijacked the country through stolen elections, you called it a mandate, rubberstamped everything Bush wanted, and filibustered anything the Democrats proposed because – well, I guess because you weren’t interested in bipartisanship back then. Now that the Democrats have won control, you think that mandate means nothing? Isn’t that hypocritical, even to you?

Your party has proven that you don’t really want anything bipartisan, and are even saying you don’t want the things you said you wanted a few months ago. (Remember when you voted against pay-as-you go? And when you pushed for quick rubberstamping of Bush’s bailouts for Wall Street, saying we’d clean up later? I say we should call your bluff; scrap Dodd’s bill and start over with NO concessions. Those were only granted to appeal to your non-existent sense of bipartisanship and you don’t appreciate them. Shoot, you even whine about having to read them. You’d save face and maybe even earn respect if you would just say, “I don’t want to read this so I’ll trust what those who have worked on the bill think.”

Again, (this is why the authoritarian family members make fun of me for always looking for facts, and facts, and more facts) I searched to make sure my memory was correct. Sometimes it fails me and I’d hate to make a fool of myself by accusing you of something you haven’t done. Unfortunately, almost every site that documents your campaign contributions is too busy to get into tonight. Guess I’m not the only one double-checking my memory. I know you didn’t get all of your campaign money from Abramoff, and that Wall Street means a great deal to you but will have to come back with details later.

I did find a few things of interest, however.

You made the CREWS corrupt list with a couple of ethics scandals.

And Hillary Clinton raked you over the coals (ouch) about some things that look even more dualistic now than they did a year ago: incomes went down under the Bush/McConnell regime, you voted to balloon debt under Bush . . . Wait, hear it for yourself (gets good around 4:07)

What I've said here might not be totally related to your comments about Finance Reform, but I think consistency is the most important trait we should look for in a politician. In that respect, everything you have been inconsistent about is related.
I know this isn’t quite what my friend had in mind, and I apologize to her. It’s the best I can do tonight, and it might give you a starting point from which to start explaining.

Running to catch MSNBC in case this is the day you decided to come clean,


• I think politicians in federal seats are responsible to all of us. When what is best for everyone concerned doesn’t meet the desires of their constituents, it is their job to explain the bigger picture so that their constituents understand a vote that might appear strange without that understanding. So, if any of you outside Kentucky would like me to deliver your letters to him, I will be happy to do so.

No comments:

Post a Comment