Michigan Rep. Candice Miller was one of those Republican obstructionists who got up on the floor of the U.S. House to rail against what a bad deal the stimulus package is for Michigan.
But because she didn't have her facts straight -- really, because she didn't have a clue what she was talking about -- she is ending up as the butt of a big joke pulled off by the Obama administration.
As Politico.com tells the story, negotiators for Obama inserted money into the bill for a massive upgrade to high-speed rail systems. Republicans, desperate to trivialize the stimulus package, seized on the item and decided it was intended to pay for a railroad between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Without a shred of factual information on which to base their conclusion, Republicans began accusing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of including the money for his home state's project.
Miller was one who not only bit on that story, but fell for it hook, line, and sinker. From politico.com:
"Here is Rep. Candice S. Miller (R-Mich.) explaining her vote against the bill Friday despite the benefits to her home state: 'Michigan is a state of about 10 million people, and we are the hardest hit, as I said, by this economy. And yet we are expected to get approximately $7 billion from this bill. And apparently the Senate majority leader has earmarked $8 billion for a rail system from Las Vegas to Los Angeles? You have got to be kidding. You have got to be kidding.'"
No Candy, Republicans weren't kidding. They were just plain wrong.
Turns out it wasn't Reid at all, but Rahm Emmanuel who wanted the money for Obama's signature issue -- creating high speed rail links between American cities.
And that says a lot about the quality of Republican arguments against the stimulus bill.
37 comments:
The Republicans used every lie that came down the path to reason their way out of voting for the families of Michigan.
It is my hope they all lose their next election for putting party politics over the needs of the people from the State of Michigan.
Shame on them, shame on them for their lying ways!
Candance Miller should make a formal apology to the families of Michigan.
Her rant was just crazy.
This woman wants to be Governor? She shouldn't even be a Congresswoman. I would like to see a Republican talking point on the stimulus bill that was actually true. The fact they have to make up stuff out of thin air speaks volumes.
Somehow they get away with their lies!
I wish the Press/Argus would do a story on the Repulican lies tied to the stimulus package!
Now that would be a real eye popping story!
So, Miller does not deserve to be governor because of her comment?
What, then, about the current governor who, in a State of the State, said in a few (5?) years we would be blown away?
Was she lying then, or just wrong? I'm curious.
She was lying that Michigan was getting rail roaded. she was lying about a train from Vegas to LA as her reason.
There is no train planned for that route and that would not make Michigan rail roaded if theere were such plans for a train.
She looked like a lunatic.
What is with Republicans hating trains anyway?
Was Jennifer Granholm lying when she said we would be blown away? Or did she just not know what she was talking about?
Also, what is it about Democrats who like to raise taxes but not pay them...which seems to describe a large segment of Barack Obama's appointments.
The Governor has been putting plans together for alternative energy and while she has since said she wished she hadn't used those words.
She truly believed her plans would have not been so derailed by the economy.
Our Governor is one of the hardest working women I know.
I think you will see where her planning will pay off, we are ready for that stimulus money!
The Republicans I undertand now want a say on how the stimulus money is spent and I think this is a silly notion if they think they can all vote no and then take part in the decision making.
They lost their right by spreading the lies about the stimulus bill in the first place.
How did Gov. Granholm know Republican policies would run the country into the worst recession since the Great Depression when she made that statement?
So...guru's position is that the governor of the state of Michigan isn't very bright. Odd position to take, but that would explain a lot.
You continually say the governor can't be held accountable for anything. Which is the same as saying that she is ineffective.
I don't know whether or not she works hard...but the test is in the results. Our results suck. Despite an income tax hike and a business tax hike, the budget is still not balanced and now schools are going to take a big hit in funding.
It's either her fault, or she's ineffective. Neither speak well for a governor.
The Governor is not a CEO of any of our auto companies.
Unfortunately the State of Michigan had almost all of its economic eggs in the auto industry and related industries.
So even if the Republicans had played nice, Michigan would be in trouble due to the problems with the auto industry and most manufacturing.
Wow, you had to do some serious spinning to reach that conclusion, who-ever-you-are. No wonder you post anonymously. The governor, any governor, can only do so much to affect the economy. They cannot affect monetary policy, trade policy or banking policy. You refuse to hold George Bush accountable for his actions, but you want to hold the Governor accountable for Bush's failures. Sad.
Both Guru and Bluzie make my points for me. Thank you. You state that it was the auto/manufacturing drop that caused the problem. I agree. But that means the Granholm either didn't understand the economic landscape...or she purposesly distorted the picture...when she made her infamous "blown away" pledge.
You don't recognize it but you've made my point: She is ineffective. It may not all be her fault, but she is ineffective, by your own reasoning.
Well I certainly can see how you have believed the Republican talking points all these years. But the Governor gets high scores for running Michigan in these troubled times and she certainly didn't cause them.
Sorry, you can believe your lies, but that doesn't make them true!
Are you playing dumb or are you really that dumb? She has been attempting to diversity the economy and bring other industries and jobs to the state so that when the car industry suffers a slump, like is always does, the state is not hurt so badly. She has brought new jobs and industry to the state, but not enough to offset the Big 3 teetering on bankruptcy.
I not only did not make your point, but neither did you. I'm still waiting for you to tell me how a governor is responsible for the auto industry and the country going into a recession.
We've been in a 7-year recession in Michigan. Did she not recognize that when she made her "blown away" claim? If she didn't know it, she is clueless; if she knew it, she was devious. Your choice.
She is in her 7th year as governor. She got an income tax hike AND a business tax hike last year. Yet we still have a $1 billion or worse deficit.
I'm not saying it's her fault. I'm saying she hasn't done anything effective about it. She either can't or won't. Again, your choice.
You have indeed made my point. You've said a person who has been governor for more than 6 years is ineffective. I'm not arguing that. You are right.
Bluzie...you are great at name calling. Tell me, what lie did I tell?
Then every Governor is ineffective!
Every state in the country is in trouble.
Not one of them is not having problems.
How many other governors said we would be blown away in five years?
I'm blown away. I amazed that she did what she said she would do in that one line in the 2006 speech. She has diversified the economy, and the five years are not even up yet. She has cut more spending then any governor in Michigan history, and there are less government employees now than in 1973. It's just too bad Bush policies ran the country into a ditch. Just think what this state would be like with a healthy auto industry and the diversified economy we have right now.
Given how Guru's heroes seem to be guys who pay for sex, I have to wonder what he means when he says he is "blown away."
Our economy isn't diversified. We have the highest unemployment numbers in the country. We pay well above the average in state labor costs per capita than the national average. Despite all the talk about cuts, the current state budget was actually 3 percent higher than the previous year.
You keep saying the economy is diversified...but just saying it doesn't make it so. We do have less of a percentage of manufacturing jobs...but that's because those jobs have gone away.
I have never said that she was responsible for the automotive industry's woes. I do say that she's been ineffective as a governor. Even her own party doesn't respect her. She wasn't allowed to choose her own party chairman, so the the party had two chairman until one was arrested for paying for sex with a Detroit hooker (what is it about Democrats and paying for sex?). It was common knowledge that she and Dillon weren't speaking during the last budget fiasco and word is that the relationship isn't much better now. If her own party doesn't like, respect or even fear her, why should the Republicans take her seriously?
I'm not saying she isn't bright and engaging and a fine person. But she's been a failure as a governor. She came in under-qualified and inexperienced and had few allies within her party. She surroundedh herself with people who weren't very good at their jobs...some were quite smart, just not good at government.
Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle were constantly frustrated that they couldn't get anyone at meetings with authority to make a decision on her behalf...or if a decision was made, it was countered a day or two later. Some say her husband had a role in changing policy decisions.
She drew a bad hand with the economy and the tax cuts left by Engler, no doubt about it. But she's been governor for more than 6 years and she's failed to make much of an impact, which is a point her defenders unwittingly make.
Your comment on sex is so out of line.
Trouble with Republicans is that their are too many perverts like you who think only through a prism of sex.
Where your mind goes your energy flows and yours flows into the gutter.
Sickening
Disrespectful and way too typical.
Spitzer pays tens of thousands of dollars for sex. Stabenow's husband throws a few dollars on the table and gets a blow job from a troubled girl in a hotel room...and I'm the one who is sickening?
By the way, I was talking to Guru who defends and even praises Spitzer, defends Stabenow's husband because he was never convicted of anything, and has no problem bringing up sexual matters related to Mike Cox and Rush Limbaugh. Exactly what prism is he leering through?
And since you are always taking up for the small guy who is taken advantage of by Republicans; and since you say Republicans hate women, especially working women, I'm wondering why you haven't shown your outrage that only the women in the Spitzer and Stabenow husband case were forced to go through the legal system. The men got off with no criminal prosecution whatsoever. Where is your outrage? Could it be that you avert your eyes when the creep is a Democrat? No that couldn't be it...that would suggest you aren't all that sincere when you say you are looking out for the little guy and women. That would suggest that all your positions are nothing more than political theater.
Come to think of it, Granholm's party chief Butch Hollowell also get arrested for giving special attention to a hooker. And he got off as well.
Aren't you outraged that these men can use women as sex objects, pay them for sex, risk bringing STDs into their households? And only the women get prosecuted.
Doesn't seem fair to me. But then, I'm perverted so I probably can't understand. Enlighten me so I can be as upstanding as Elliot Spitzer.
"Given how Guru's heroes seem to be guys who pay for sex?" Well, nothing you have said yet has been true, and neither is this. You most be one of anonymous trolls who once attacked me on my blog, based on you twisting that around.
We certainly have diversified our economy under her leadership; more than with any other governor. I'll list just a few companies she want after in the last three years:
- Advanced Photonix (API) invested $2.2 million to relocate its headquarters from Camarillo, California, to Ann Arbor with new 105 high-tech jobs.
- Carbone of America, an international leader in the electronics industry, expanded its Ultra Carbon Division in Bay City
- Google locating in Ann Arbor, creating 1,000 high-paying direct jobs and more than 1,200 spin off jobs.
- Hemlock Semiconductor; major expansion of its Michigan operations, which will create more than 200 new jobs.
- Tiara Yachts chose to invest $14 million to expand its existing facility in Holland, that will create 594 new jobs.
The budget has been cut every year that Gov. Granholm has been governor. Considering the inflation rate was almost 5 percent last year, it's not surprising that the budget would grow by 3 percent, if that is true.
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_Rate/CurrentInflation.asp
No one is doubting manufacturing jobs have been lost, but for the life of me I can't understand how a governor, any governor, can be blamed for that. When your number one employer is on the verge of bankruptcy, it's not surprising you have the highest unemployment rate.
Yes, you have said repeatedly that "she's been ineffective as a governor." It has been untrue every time you said it. "Even her own party doesn't respect her?" Also not true.
I don't know how the Republicans do it, but in Michigan the Democratic Party Chair is elected by the members, and that's why I'm voting for Mark Brewer on Saturday. Here's the thing about Democrats: we have such a big tent we don't always agree on everything. Republicans don't have that problem, and we don't march in lock-step like you do.
"What is it about Democrats and paying for sex?" I don't know, why don't you ask Sen. David Vitter, Sen. Larry Craig or Rev. Ted Haggard?
The Governor and Andy Dillon were not speaking? That's simply not true. You have Dillon and Mike Bishop mixed up. Bishop is one the most partisan person I have ever encountered, and his biggest concern is Mike Bishop and his next office.
Where are you getting this stuff about." few allies within her party," or "some say her husband had a role in changing policy decisions?" I would say you are making it up, but I don't give you that much credit. "Some say," what some say that lie? She's been elected Attorney General and Governor twice, so she has lots of allies in her party.
Engler kicked the can down the road by doing things like collecting taxes early so he could pass the problem down the road, and then he fled the state so fast you would think he was a horse thief. Then, she had to deal with Bush's failed policies that plunged the country into a recession and lost thousands of good paying, manufacturing jobs.
Considering she always had to scramble to balance the budget, she has done an excellent job. We certainly not facing the problems like California. She also had to deal with a hostile GOP Congress until 2006 when Democrats took the House.
Hopefully not the same one you are leering through!
By the way, I never, ever defended or praised Spitzer, and you know it, troll. "I have no problem bringing up sexual matters related to Mike Cox and Rush Limbaugh?" Here's the big difference. Democrats do not pretend we are the party of family values, morality and the religious right. "Exactly what prism is he leering through?" Give me a break.
I don't recall defending Tom Athens. First, he doesn't need defending. He was not only not convicted of anything, he wasn't arrested for anything. What I said about Elliott Spitzer in a direct claim from you - or some other anonymous troll – was that Democrats never take responsibility for their actions. I said I offered Spitizer as an example of a person who took responsibility, and I stand by it. When will Vitter and Craig take responsibility?
Butch Hollowell was never arrested, and the case was thrown out of court. So, he wasn't "leering through a prism," whatever that means.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/metro/0501/14/metro-60303.htm
Nice short and long answers that totally ducked the issue...understandable since you have no defense.
If Butch Hollowell wasn't arrested, then how did his case get thrown out of court? His case was indeed tossed on a trumped up technicality about the authority of the police department that made the arrest.
So Athens needs no defending? You are saying then that what he did was fine. Real nice position for you, but it proves my point...you don't give a damn about the welfare of women; you just want to make political points.
The guy paid money to a troubled woman so that he could engage in oral sex. And you think that's okay.
I never said sexual perversion belonged to one party or the other. But I do say...and you prove it...that you are so partisan that you won't even criticize these three guys for their hooker activities. They get a free pass from you because they are Democrats. Sad.
Oh, that's right...he was never arrested or convicted of having sex with a prostitute. That's true. And communications guru has never been arrested or convicted for child molesting.
What a chicken shit coward you are, troll. Now we know why you are anonymous; because you are a coward. I would suggest you stay that way, coward.
I didn’t duck anything, and the issue was Candice Miller lying.
I gave you a link, and you still have to ask. Not only are you a coward, apparently you can’t read either. “Circuit Court Judge Prentis Edwards said Wayne County sheriff's deputies did not have the authority to issue a citation to Hollowell on Aug. 17 near his home.”
“Trumped up technicality?” How about, the “Wayne County sheriff's deputy who issued the citation did not see any sexual activity, hear any financial propositions or witness any illegal activity.”
Yes, he needs no defending. If you say he did something illegal, fine. So in your opinion I “don't give a damn about the welfare of women?” Well, you are wrong again, and who gives a darn what a cowardly, anonymous troll thinks?
You’re calling me out as a partisan? I notice you had no problem with Vitter, Craig or Haggard. They get a free pass from you because they are Republicans. Sad.
That last paragraph is the only one that is correct. Of course I have never been arrested for child molesting. I’m not a Republican, the party of Mark Foley.
You make up stuff Guru. You are a pathological liar. I have never defended Vitter, Craig or any of the others. Show me where I did and I'll personally give you $10,000 to donate to any candidates of your choice. I think what they did was distasteful. Funny, you won't say that about Spitzler or Hollowell or Athens. Then you lie about me having no problem with Republicans who similarly behaved badly and criminally, even after I specifically said I recognized that both Republicans and Democrats have been guilty of sexual misconduct. You are the one who tries to make it a characteristic of a particular party.
Will you say that Athens was wrong for paying a hooker for oral sex? Will you say it was a double standard for him to go free for "cooperating" with police while the young woman was arrested?
And I agree that authorities have never been able to produce evidence that you are a child molester. Have you escaped charges the same way that Athens, Hollowell and Spitzler escaped charges?
Why is it so hard for you and your type to say that Athens was wrong to do what he did? Spitzer, too. They degraded women, they broke the law, they embarassed their families...and you find nothing wrong with that. Amazing.
Bluzie and Judy...do you share Guru's position? Do you think it's okay for men to pay for sex with women as long as the men are Democrats?
Will either of you say that Athens and Spitzer were wrong and should be criticized?
At least one of you...if not both...has critized Mike Rogers for getting divorced. So will you criticize Spitzer and Athens for treating women as sex objects, breaking the law, bringing shame to their families and risking the spread of STDs?
Your silence indicates that you think that these actions are fine...as long as they are done by Democrats.
All you have to say is that these were bad things done by these two men. It doesn't say a thing about the Democratic Party; it doesn't say a thing about political positions or policies; it merely says that you recognize bad behavior and will call it out, rather than judging everything by a political standard.
Bluzie..you criticized me for making a sexual joke at Guru's expense. Did you have any problem with him referring to a guy as having a limp dick? Or is that just good, clean fun?
Whether you realize it or not, you folks are just like Hannity and Limbaugh and Coulter. Just as vicious; just as hypocritical and equally uncaring about the truth. And you are very much what is wrong with this country today.
Once again, guru is proven to be a habitual liar. He says he has never praised Spitzer. When, in fact on his own blog he praised Spitzler for...get this... being man enough to admit that he paid for a hooker's services and then he also praised him for resigning from office.
Faint praise, considering that Spitzer didn't admit to anything until the evidence was piled up higher than his bank account. And he resigned as part of a deal to avoid a conviction and embarassing public trial.
But the main point here is that guru definitely praised the guy and now claims he never did. So he was in favor of the guy before he was against him...where have we heard words like that before?
I've read on this site about how quick you are to say the Mike Rogers hates women. That was your conclusion after a Rogers vote in which you over-simplified the issues.
But given your great concern about the welfare of women, I would think you would be outraged that men regularly abuse women by paying them for sex..and then only the women get prosecuted.
I've asked you to comment on this scandal...yet you are strangely silent. Why could that be? I just don't want to believe that your principles are so shallow that you would toss them aside in a moment rather than to criticize men who happen to be Democrats.
That can't be the reason, can it?
Your silence speaks volumes.
I never praised Elliott Spitizer. You made the ridiculous and untrue claim that Liberals and Democrats never take responsibility for their actions. No wonder you post anonymously. I offered Spitizer as an example as one who did, and I strand by it. Anybody with a half a brain can see that's not praising him, and no matter how you try and twist the words it's simply not true. If you want to see an example of someone who did not take responsibility for basically the same thing Spitizer did, you just need to look at Larry Craig and David Vitter, yet you have no problem with them.
I don't know; where have I heard those words before?
I never said Mike Rogers hated women, but I can't speak for everyone on this blog. It's not that he hates them; it’s that he just doesn’t care about their well-being, and I would add children to that list, anonymous.
So the way that Democrats show how much they "care" for young women is to pay them for sex and then to cooperate with the local police so that the woman is charged, but not the man.
Anonomyous you have no interest in discussion, you are just looking for a fight and saying the most untrue and ridiculous things!
I have no respect for you and do not see why you even post on this blog!
If I post on a Republican blog I am always respectful and just have a point or question.
There is no reason for me to ever respond to you as you don't even try to be civil.
Post a Comment