Nan was at the fall foliage festival in Highland Falls and despite the threat of rain, many attended.
We find it curious that Nan Hayworth, former Congresswoman and current candidate for her old spot would dare to show her face in that lovely municipality, considering that she voted NO when it came to funding the school district in Highlands. Either she has seen the error of her ways or she too, suffers the supreme audacity that so afflicts many of our elected officials.
We hope someone asked her about it. And if they did, we hope that she had the decency to be a little apologetic.
Although, somehow Auntie Alibi and the Team don't think so.
(Recap: The school district there needs federal funding because of extraordinary circumstances. You see, while most school districts are funded through property taxes, the majority of the land there is owned by the federal government, which is tax exempt, However, the school age children from federally owned land aka West Point, attend these schools. That is why "impact aid" is required to keep the schools going. Roxanne Donnery was more than instrumental in obtaining that impact aid funding for the past twenty years or so. NAN voted against the impact aid because she signed a "pledge" against "earmarks". How unbelievably stupid!!! SHE VOTED AGAINST PEOPLE IN HER OWN DISTRICT!!!)
There's only one pledge you should make, Nan:
It would seem the only pledge that Dr. Nan took was to have her picture taken as many times as possible with all the other politicians who have the same disease.
ReplyDeleteThe anti-earmark pledge and the earmark ban is beyond stupid.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Constitution, it is up to the Legislative Branch to decide how monies should be spent. The earmark ban and limiting of approps has essentially and effectively ceded CONSTITUTIONALLY GIVEN AUTHORITY to the Executive branch.
So, instead of our elected legislators deciding how monies will be spent, now, it is the Obama Administration and his technocrats within his various Executive Branch agencies deciding.
Further, and let me emphasize this, this move ... SAVED NO MONEY!!!! THE MONEY WAS ALREADY APPROPRIATED, ALL IT DID WAS CEDE AUTHORITY AS TO WHO WOULD DECIDE HOW IT WAS SPENT!
This was an incredibly stupid move. It demonstrated two things:
1. A clear lack of understanding of what the Constitution laid out as to whose authority it is to appropriate
2. And even clearer lack of understanding of how the federal government works
This move cost states like NYS, and districts like ours, DEARLY! Because we pay more in taxes than we get back from the federal govt. in services, approps, etc ....
Now factor in we have a total, do-nothing drip in Nan Hayworth who does not fight for anything for the district, making the imbalance even worse. As I have posted frequently, we might as well have a "fathead" in office, it would do just as good. We need disaster aid, we need the river dug, we need bridges fixed, these things take federal dollars and we need a Congressional Rep. to fight for those things.
Hayworth never did. She delivered NOTHING for the district.
Now, check out this video from 9/12, as Rep. "Do-Nothing" made a quick reference to the earmark ban at the Goshen Chamber breakfast (go to the 2:50 mark)
http://youtu.be/CaVGaLclgyM
First, she with a straight face mentions the black dirt farmers and her concern ... well that is pure horsecrap. She doesn't give a hoot and her sustained ACTIONS demonstrate that, including her continued lack of support of including our losses from August 2011 in any drought aid packages floating around at the time (unlike much of the other members of the NYS delegation members) and her still AWOL actions on the Wallkill River cleaning project ...
but ...
in this segment she actually brings up the earmark ban, though, if you didn't know any better you would never know it was actually House and TPC driven. But carefully listen to her and her very tacit admission that earmarks are an easier way of getting approps done and the ban has made things much more difficult in getting projects accomplished ... sans demonization of them.
No kidding genius. Congratulations! Of course no admission you have have also ceded Constitutional authority of deciding how the money will be spent to the Executive Branch without saving the taxpayer a dime.
Auntie is fond of her Nephew Chris and admires his advocacy and that is the ONLY reason that she is republishing his 6:10 PM post with the inappropriate word deleted. Auntie usually just deletes them. Otherwise it is in it's original form as follows.
ReplyDeleteChris, don't make Auntie get a bar of soap...
Chris Pawelski said:
She now claims she was in favor of disaster aid and delivered so much post Irene-Lee. That claim is 100% crap. After she took the well deserved public relations beating for backing Cantor's position of no increased funding for FEMA unless offsets were found House leadership put on a do-nothing Hurricane Irene relief caucus that in fact did little. Shame on the xxxxxx Peter Welch for not slamming her when she was put on this joke of a caucus.
The Congress delivered in our behalf later when Irene and Lee losses were included in the Sandy approp. This was thanks in large part to our 2 Senators and other members of the NY Congressional delegation that fought for this.
Hayworth, thankfully, was not around at that point. She would not have supported it unless given the go-ahead by Cantor.
She has absolutely no shame.
Oops, sorry about that Auntie!
ReplyDeleteI should add that there is a recent letter going around (I saw it from multiple sources, including a local labor source) that attempts to address Hayworth's lies and exaggerated claims of what she did and delivered post Irene. It is a very good piece. It has numerous quotes from Peter Welch, praising Maloney and his efforts after he took office. It is appropriate praise.
ReplyDeleteBut what is beyond irritating is that just like back in 2011 Welch has no criticism of Hayworth whatsoever. Obviously it is implied but like in 2011 it is not implicitly stated.
To Peter Welch and others like him: your silence and "get along-go along" attitude hurts people. You in a position of authority, responsibility and public trust. It's your duty to call out bad conduct and bad public service. Putting Hayworth on that caucus was purely a cynical move designed to give her much needed political cover after her monumental gaffe of echoing Cantor's position.
But let's remember, she went into office under the promises of delivering NOTHING in behalf of the district. And she kept that promise. Welch should have called out her appointment to that caucus and hammered her afterward.
Period. Shame on Peter Welch.
Thank you Dear Nephew Chris! Insightful commentary.
ReplyDeleteNice flag
ReplyDelete