Is Todd Tiahrt’s biggest trouble the fact that he has seemingly abandoned the Kansas District that he has represented for nearly two decades?
News came out of the 4th District recently that a Democrat is actually leading all Congressional candidates in that district in campaign contributions as his Republican adversaries are waging a bitter fight to see who will become the party’s nominee. Has Todd Tiahrt put the Republican Party at risk in his home district by running an unlikely Senate campaign as opposed to continuing to represent the fourth?
While Mr. Tiahrt is currently trailing in funds and support, he has also failed to tap a successor to take his place in the fourth district. He might say that he is a conservative first, but shouldn’t part of his duty as a Republican congressman be to help ensure that his district remains in GOP hands a year from now? The fourth district was a Democratic stronghold for years, and Democrats view this seat as a possible pick-up in an otherwise bleak year.
Todd Tiahrt is continuing to show that he has no sense of loyalty to the GOP and that he is bad for the party. He needs to do something now to make sure that the 4th District remains in Republican hands.
Rememberingly Yours,
Publius
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
But Where was Todd?
Last weekend, the sprawling Tea Party movement finally coalesced itself into something resembling a national organization by having the first ever National Tea Party Convention in Nashville. With key speakers such as Tom Tancredo and Sarah Palin rousing the crowds of the Convention, Kansas voters need to be asking the question: Where was Todd Tiahrt?
Time and again Mr. Tiahrt has said that he is a conservative first and a Republican second, but if this was really true then wouldn’t he want to be present and active at the first national meeting of the conservative movement that has been sweeping the nation for nearly a year? It makes no sense why this ‘true conservative’ would not be at the Tea Party Convention—unless he was worried about being labeled as too conservative.
The thing about the Tea Party is that while most real conservatives in America strongly agree with their founding and their merit, there are many moderates across America that see the movement as a national punch-line. By neglecting to go to the convention, is Mr. Tiahrt trying to gain the acceptance of this group of non-conservative Americans?
If this is the case, then Mr. Tiahrt is again showing how he will put his desire for political gain in front of what he claims to believe or what he actually believes. By not attending this important convention, Mr. Tiahrt is again proving that he has become a dishonest Washington insider like so many other politicians before him.
However, I think there is a different reason for Mr. Tiahrt’s failure to attend the convention.
Last month I questioned Mr. Tiahrt’s logic in participating in an ill-advised conference call with the Maryland Independent Party. Those that have listened to ‘the call’ know that it ends with the organization criticizing Mr. Tiahrt’s conservative credentials on abortion and then proceeding to fight amongst themselves for a really long time. I believe that Mr. Tiahrt stayed away from the Tea Party Convention because he and his advisors were worried that he would again be called out by a true conservative organization for his credentials as a true conservative.
As far as I can tell, the biggest issue for most factions of the Tea Party movement is the excessive government spending. The movement wants less government spending and they are seemingly angry at all of government: Republicans and Democrats. Because of this, I believe that Mr. Tiahrt was afraid that the Tea Party Conservatives would question him about his votes for stimulus packages when other representatives voted against all the stimulus packages last year.
I believe that Mr. Tiahrt and his staff were fearful of a repeat of ‘the call’ and decided to keep him away from the meeting of true conservatives that might damage his conservative ‘reputation’. I believe this stimulus issue could be even more damaging for the Tiahrt Campaign seeing as his opponent for the Senate nomination is one of the 17 Representatives that never voted for a stimulus.
At the end of the day, I don’t know why Mr. Tiahrt did not attend the National Tea Party Convention. Maybe he was afraid of being questioned about his credentials or maybe he did not want to be associated with the movement. Either way, this is a movement that Mr. Tiahrt should associate himself with if he wants to be known as a true conservative, and for now Kansas voters are just left to ask why he wasn’t there.
Tea-Drinkingly Yours,
Publius
Time and again Mr. Tiahrt has said that he is a conservative first and a Republican second, but if this was really true then wouldn’t he want to be present and active at the first national meeting of the conservative movement that has been sweeping the nation for nearly a year? It makes no sense why this ‘true conservative’ would not be at the Tea Party Convention—unless he was worried about being labeled as too conservative.
The thing about the Tea Party is that while most real conservatives in America strongly agree with their founding and their merit, there are many moderates across America that see the movement as a national punch-line. By neglecting to go to the convention, is Mr. Tiahrt trying to gain the acceptance of this group of non-conservative Americans?
If this is the case, then Mr. Tiahrt is again showing how he will put his desire for political gain in front of what he claims to believe or what he actually believes. By not attending this important convention, Mr. Tiahrt is again proving that he has become a dishonest Washington insider like so many other politicians before him.
However, I think there is a different reason for Mr. Tiahrt’s failure to attend the convention.
Last month I questioned Mr. Tiahrt’s logic in participating in an ill-advised conference call with the Maryland Independent Party. Those that have listened to ‘the call’ know that it ends with the organization criticizing Mr. Tiahrt’s conservative credentials on abortion and then proceeding to fight amongst themselves for a really long time. I believe that Mr. Tiahrt stayed away from the Tea Party Convention because he and his advisors were worried that he would again be called out by a true conservative organization for his credentials as a true conservative.
As far as I can tell, the biggest issue for most factions of the Tea Party movement is the excessive government spending. The movement wants less government spending and they are seemingly angry at all of government: Republicans and Democrats. Because of this, I believe that Mr. Tiahrt was afraid that the Tea Party Conservatives would question him about his votes for stimulus packages when other representatives voted against all the stimulus packages last year.
I believe that Mr. Tiahrt and his staff were fearful of a repeat of ‘the call’ and decided to keep him away from the meeting of true conservatives that might damage his conservative ‘reputation’. I believe this stimulus issue could be even more damaging for the Tiahrt Campaign seeing as his opponent for the Senate nomination is one of the 17 Representatives that never voted for a stimulus.
At the end of the day, I don’t know why Mr. Tiahrt did not attend the National Tea Party Convention. Maybe he was afraid of being questioned about his credentials or maybe he did not want to be associated with the movement. Either way, this is a movement that Mr. Tiahrt should associate himself with if he wants to be known as a true conservative, and for now Kansas voters are just left to ask why he wasn’t there.
Tea-Drinkingly Yours,
Publius
Sunday, February 7, 2010
What Does He REALLY Believe about Illegal Immigration: PART 2
A couple months ago I wrote about Todd Tiahrt’s unclear stance on illegal immigration. While Tiahrt had claimed that he was true conservative and that he was strong on illegal immigration, he supported the DREAM Act (a position that put him in hot water with many true conservatives).
Recently, Mr. Tiahrt has apparently changed his views on illegal immigration by introducing the Fairness For American Students Act, which would close current loopholes that allow children of illegal immigrants to gain access to in state tuition, even when students from neighboring states are not eligible to pay this tuition.
While I commend Mr. Tiahrt for changing his views on immigration, I again must question what he really believes when it comes to illegal immigration. While he is now seemingly taking a strong stance against illegal immigration, Kansans have to question the timing of his announcement as it came just days before the largest meeting of Kansas Republicans.
I believe that it is disingenuous for Mr. Tiahrt to change his positions and views all the time, and that it is even more troubling that he would change these positions so close to an important political gathering. What is obvious here is that Mr. Tiahrt wanted to bolster his ‘conservative’ credentials going into the important meeting, but what remains to be seen is whether or not he will continue to support these types of immigration laws in the future.
Consistency is important for politicians. Not only do they need to support their rhetoric with actions (such as voting for or introducing legislation), but they also need to support these actions again and again on a consistent basis. Mr. Tiahrt has proven that he is not only inconsistent with his voting record, but he is also inconsistent with his actual position on issues that impact Kansas voters.
Changing his position on the eve of Kansas Days just shows that Mr. Tiahrt is not the honest and forthright politician that Kansans should be looking for to represent them in the higher chamber of Congress. The state deserves consistency, and it deserves honesty, and Mr. Tiahrt is proving to have some trouble with both of these things.
Consistently Yours,
Publius
Recently, Mr. Tiahrt has apparently changed his views on illegal immigration by introducing the Fairness For American Students Act, which would close current loopholes that allow children of illegal immigrants to gain access to in state tuition, even when students from neighboring states are not eligible to pay this tuition.
While I commend Mr. Tiahrt for changing his views on immigration, I again must question what he really believes when it comes to illegal immigration. While he is now seemingly taking a strong stance against illegal immigration, Kansans have to question the timing of his announcement as it came just days before the largest meeting of Kansas Republicans.
I believe that it is disingenuous for Mr. Tiahrt to change his positions and views all the time, and that it is even more troubling that he would change these positions so close to an important political gathering. What is obvious here is that Mr. Tiahrt wanted to bolster his ‘conservative’ credentials going into the important meeting, but what remains to be seen is whether or not he will continue to support these types of immigration laws in the future.
Consistency is important for politicians. Not only do they need to support their rhetoric with actions (such as voting for or introducing legislation), but they also need to support these actions again and again on a consistent basis. Mr. Tiahrt has proven that he is not only inconsistent with his voting record, but he is also inconsistent with his actual position on issues that impact Kansas voters.
Changing his position on the eve of Kansas Days just shows that Mr. Tiahrt is not the honest and forthright politician that Kansans should be looking for to represent them in the higher chamber of Congress. The state deserves consistency, and it deserves honesty, and Mr. Tiahrt is proving to have some trouble with both of these things.
Consistently Yours,
Publius
Friday, February 5, 2010
Tiahrt's Troubles Twitter
Inspired by the tweeting sensation Vicki Tiahrt, I've created an accompanying twitter account to supplement this site. You can access it at:
https://twitter.com/TiahrtsTroubles
I plan to update it daily to highlight the antics of Mr. Tiahrt. With his campaign solidifying itself as the challenger campaign of desperation, I'm sure there will be no lack of material to discuss.
Yours in Tweeting,
Publius
https://twitter.com/TiahrtsTroubles
I plan to update it daily to highlight the antics of Mr. Tiahrt. With his campaign solidifying itself as the challenger campaign of desperation, I'm sure there will be no lack of material to discuss.
Yours in Tweeting,
Publius
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Money Talks
I hate being righteous, but yesterday's predictions came to fruition today. Todd Tiahrt's campaign released their 4th Quarter numbers, and they were far more damaging that expected.
Mr. Tiahrt's campaign raised a measly $195K and spent $271K.
Yes that is correct fellow Kansans. Mr. Tiahrt, the denizen of fiscal conservatism outspent himself once again, dwindling his Cash-On-Hand to a paltry $1.32 Million. Mr. Tiahrt's opponent raised $404K and has over $3.7 Million Cash-On-Hand.
These embarrassing numbers, coupled with the new poll showing Mr. Tiahrt 7 points behind lays the groundwork for a possible exit from this race, and retirement to the Tiahrt home in Virginia.
In the next couple of days, I will provide full analysis of the finance report. Suffice to say, there appears to be a reason Mr. Tiahrt has elevated the petty rhetoric of his campaign.
Cents-ibly Yours,
Publius
Mr. Tiahrt's campaign raised a measly $195K and spent $271K.
Yes that is correct fellow Kansans. Mr. Tiahrt, the denizen of fiscal conservatism outspent himself once again, dwindling his Cash-On-Hand to a paltry $1.32 Million. Mr. Tiahrt's opponent raised $404K and has over $3.7 Million Cash-On-Hand.
These embarrassing numbers, coupled with the new poll showing Mr. Tiahrt 7 points behind lays the groundwork for a possible exit from this race, and retirement to the Tiahrt home in Virginia.
In the next couple of days, I will provide full analysis of the finance report. Suffice to say, there appears to be a reason Mr. Tiahrt has elevated the petty rhetoric of his campaign.
Cents-ibly Yours,
Publius
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Where's the G's?
February 2nd, and still no sign of Todd Tiahrt's campaign finance reports...
Both his Republican and Democrat opponents have released their financial statistics, but Mr. Tiahrt seems unwilling or unable to produce the Year-End report for the Federal Election Commission. The deadline for reporting was yesterday, however, Mr. Tiahrt apparently took advantage of the loophole that stipulates finance reports must be postmarked by February 1st.
This action is likely indicative of several troubling items for the Tiahrt campaign.
First, poor fundraising numbers are likely. It is improbable Mr. Tiahrt managed to raise the $400k+ that his Republican opponent secured. But then again, Mr. Tiahrt claims time and time again grassroots is how he'll win the election. I find it ironic that Mr. Tiahrt was unable to run away with a decisive victory at the Kansas Republican convention, a meeting of the most dedicated grassroots activists in our great state.
Second, it is almost certain he was unable to keep pace with his Republican opponent in building the Cash on Hand statistic. As I previously wrote, Mr. Tiahrt spends his campaign cash quicker than Martha Coakley can throw a foot in her mouth.
Finally, the biggest question, "What is Mr. Tiahrt hiding?" Why is this routine process taking so painstakingly long? Wouldn't a fiscal conservative have the most basic synopsis of the financial health of his campaign ready within quick order; Mr. Tiahrt has now wasted over a month putting this report together, and now is delaying the damage a few more days.
Mr. Tiahrt, it's best to admit bad news up front. Ask John Edwards.
Disclosingly Yours,
Publius
Both his Republican and Democrat opponents have released their financial statistics, but Mr. Tiahrt seems unwilling or unable to produce the Year-End report for the Federal Election Commission. The deadline for reporting was yesterday, however, Mr. Tiahrt apparently took advantage of the loophole that stipulates finance reports must be postmarked by February 1st.
This action is likely indicative of several troubling items for the Tiahrt campaign.
First, poor fundraising numbers are likely. It is improbable Mr. Tiahrt managed to raise the $400k+ that his Republican opponent secured. But then again, Mr. Tiahrt claims time and time again grassroots is how he'll win the election. I find it ironic that Mr. Tiahrt was unable to run away with a decisive victory at the Kansas Republican convention, a meeting of the most dedicated grassroots activists in our great state.
Second, it is almost certain he was unable to keep pace with his Republican opponent in building the Cash on Hand statistic. As I previously wrote, Mr. Tiahrt spends his campaign cash quicker than Martha Coakley can throw a foot in her mouth.
Finally, the biggest question, "What is Mr. Tiahrt hiding?" Why is this routine process taking so painstakingly long? Wouldn't a fiscal conservative have the most basic synopsis of the financial health of his campaign ready within quick order; Mr. Tiahrt has now wasted over a month putting this report together, and now is delaying the damage a few more days.
Mr. Tiahrt, it's best to admit bad news up front. Ask John Edwards.
Disclosingly Yours,
Publius
Monday, February 1, 2010
Home is Where?
At the Kansas Republican convention last week, Mr. Tiahrt spoke out against apparent criticisms against his family by declaring, “I just think going after the families is out of bounds.” While I certainly agree that unwarranted criticisms against families are something that should be kept out of this dirty political process, I disagree with Mr. Tiahrt’s complaints as he was responding to criticisms that were decidedly NOT about his family.
Tiahrt was responding to his opponent’s (US Representative Jerry Moran) claims that Mr. Tiahrt moved his family out of Kansas to Washington. Mr. Moran’s main criticism of Mr. Tiahrt is that Tiahrt moved his family out of Kansas (while Moran continues to live in Kansas) and is therefore out of touch with Kansas voters. Setting aside Moran’s assumption that Tiahrt must be out of touch with Kansas voters because he no longer lives there, I want to look at the response from Mr. Tiahrt.
Instead of actually responding to the legitimate concern (that Mr. Tiahrt is more of a Washington insider than he is a Kansan), Mr, Tiahrt attempted to de-legitimize these comments by making false claims about how his family had been criticized. Not only was his family never criticized, but this response seems to be intentionally withholding important information from the voters that Mr. Tiahrt is asking to elect him to the Senate.
Mr. Moran’s criticism was not addressed towards the Tiahrt family because it addressed actions that Mr. Tiahrt himself took. Would the Tiahrt’s live in Northern Virginia now if Todd was not a US Representative? NO. Do we even know if Mr. Tiahrt's children wanted to move to Virginia before their father was elected? We have no idea. I don’t personally know the opinion’s of Mr. Tiahrt’s family (except, of course, what I can glean from his wife’s Twitter account), but I fail to understand how it is a criticism of them that they moved to Northern Virginia because of their father.
The larger problem with Mr. Tiahrt’s comments, however, is the snide way in which he attempts to brush off a legitimate criticism (that he is out of touch with Kansans) by making an illegitimate one (that the original comment was insulting of his family). I think we need Mr. Tiahrt to explain to Kansans how he is fully able to understand the needs and concerns of Kansas voters, if he doesn’t even consider the state his primary residence.
Deep down, the core of this issue is that Mr. Tiahrt has become more of a Washington insider than he is a representative Kansan. He doesn’t honestly answer a criticism when asked, but he dodges by making an even worse criticism of his opponent in the process. This is not the type of behavior that Kansans should expect from somebody that is claiming to represent them (even if he is no longer one of them), it is the type of behavior we should expect from somebody that is deeply entrenched in the Washington establishment—somebody that is accused of ethics violations, attends White House Christmas parties, and writes earmarks like it is his job.
I think Mr. Tiahrt needs to answer this criticism about why he no longer lives in Kansas, and how he can properly represent Kansans while he lives in Virginia; and I think he needs to answer this criticism without making further baseless remarks.
Critically yours,
Publius
Tiahrt was responding to his opponent’s (US Representative Jerry Moran) claims that Mr. Tiahrt moved his family out of Kansas to Washington. Mr. Moran’s main criticism of Mr. Tiahrt is that Tiahrt moved his family out of Kansas (while Moran continues to live in Kansas) and is therefore out of touch with Kansas voters. Setting aside Moran’s assumption that Tiahrt must be out of touch with Kansas voters because he no longer lives there, I want to look at the response from Mr. Tiahrt.
Instead of actually responding to the legitimate concern (that Mr. Tiahrt is more of a Washington insider than he is a Kansan), Mr, Tiahrt attempted to de-legitimize these comments by making false claims about how his family had been criticized. Not only was his family never criticized, but this response seems to be intentionally withholding important information from the voters that Mr. Tiahrt is asking to elect him to the Senate.
Mr. Moran’s criticism was not addressed towards the Tiahrt family because it addressed actions that Mr. Tiahrt himself took. Would the Tiahrt’s live in Northern Virginia now if Todd was not a US Representative? NO. Do we even know if Mr. Tiahrt's children wanted to move to Virginia before their father was elected? We have no idea. I don’t personally know the opinion’s of Mr. Tiahrt’s family (except, of course, what I can glean from his wife’s Twitter account), but I fail to understand how it is a criticism of them that they moved to Northern Virginia because of their father.
The larger problem with Mr. Tiahrt’s comments, however, is the snide way in which he attempts to brush off a legitimate criticism (that he is out of touch with Kansans) by making an illegitimate one (that the original comment was insulting of his family). I think we need Mr. Tiahrt to explain to Kansans how he is fully able to understand the needs and concerns of Kansas voters, if he doesn’t even consider the state his primary residence.
Deep down, the core of this issue is that Mr. Tiahrt has become more of a Washington insider than he is a representative Kansan. He doesn’t honestly answer a criticism when asked, but he dodges by making an even worse criticism of his opponent in the process. This is not the type of behavior that Kansans should expect from somebody that is claiming to represent them (even if he is no longer one of them), it is the type of behavior we should expect from somebody that is deeply entrenched in the Washington establishment—somebody that is accused of ethics violations, attends White House Christmas parties, and writes earmarks like it is his job.
I think Mr. Tiahrt needs to answer this criticism about why he no longer lives in Kansas, and how he can properly represent Kansans while he lives in Virginia; and I think he needs to answer this criticism without making further baseless remarks.
Critically yours,
Publius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)