Letter of the week, 3/23/09: Holding Chris Murphy accountable -- do readers agree?

[David]

Chris Murphy
Editor:

An open letter to Congressman Chris Murphy:

I just received your taxpayer-funded, self-congratulatory flier entitled, "What's in it for Connecticut" which discusses the massive spending bill you helped to ram through Congress without proper debate or proper analysis.

The critical fact you left out of your flier is who's going to pay for this unprecedented level of federal spending. But those of us who pay taxes every year know precisely who's going to pay for it: we are! We taxpayers are also the ones on the hook for the tens of billions paid out to foreign banks by bailed out financial firms.

Meanwhile, the bills you've supported and proposed seek to distract from these billions by stirring up anger about "bonuses" paid to those hired to fix the mess. Mr. Murphy, as my Representative in Congress, I'm offended by your attitude that citizens should be asking government: “What's in it for me?" That attitude perpetuates the entitlement mindset that is infesting and destroying our country. That attitude makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Please do some research: we wouldn't need a "Recovery Act" if Congress had chosen to better regulate GSE management of mortgage-backed securities in 2004. Instead, Barney Frank stated outright that those securities would be guaranteed by the federal government! In their zeal to buy votes with "affordable" mortgages, Frank and others - including ACORN - pushed banks to lower lending standards via CRA and legal action, laying the foundation for a house of cards that has now collapsed on U.S. taxpayers.

None has been held accountable, or had their campaign contributions taxed at 90 percent. Why Not? Connecticut is beginning to see Senator Dodd for the equivocating career politician he is. Time to prove you're different. Or we'll find someone who is.

RON ROMANO MERIDEN

[flatrat]

Chris Murphy
Editor:

An open letter to Congressman Chris Murphy:

I just received your taxpayer-funded, self-congratulatory flier entitled, "What's in it for Connecticut" which discusses the massive spending bill you helped to ram through Congress without proper debate or proper analysis.

The critical fact you left out of your flier is who's going to pay for this unprecedented level of federal spending. But those of us who pay taxes every year know precisely who's going to pay for it: we are! We taxpayers are also the ones on the hook for the tens of billions paid out to foreign banks by bailed out financial firms.

Meanwhile, the bills you've supported and proposed seek to distract from these billions by stirring up anger about "bonuses" paid to those hired to fix the mess. Mr. Murphy, as my Representative in Congress, I'm offended by your attitude that citizens should be asking government: “What's in it for me?" That attitude perpetuates the entitlement mindset that is infesting and destroying our country. That attitude makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Please do some research: we wouldn't need a "Recovery Act" if Congress had chosen to better regulate GSE management of mortgage-backed securities in 2004. Instead, Barney Frank stated outright that those securities would be guaranteed by the federal government! In their zeal to buy votes with "affordable" mortgages, Frank and others - including ACORN - pushed banks to lower lending standards via CRA and legal action, laying the foundation for a house of cards that has now collapsed on U.S. taxpayers.

None has been held accountable, or had their campaign contributions taxed at 90 percent. Why Not? Connecticut is beginning to see Senator Dodd for the equivocating career politician he is. Time to prove you're different. Or we'll find someone who is.

RON ROMANO MERIDEN

This topic has been pretty much discussed from all angles in various other threads. "Super" moderator, have you been reading or paying attention?

Do we need more tired worn out Republican talking points? The whole "Its Barney Frank-ACORN fault" has pretty much been discredited by facts.

But then, I would be repeating myself.

[Snakebite]

I come back from a sunny vacation and their is very little new on these threads.
The first I open is Flat in his typical Democrat defender mode. What was the "real" story about Dodd partnering up with a guy, buying property in Ireland at dubious prices. -I am sure you can find a spin on that-. A guy that was found guility of crooked financial dealings then banned from ever trading and then received a pardon pushed by Dodd during the last days of the Clinton. A real noble group. And thats only whats known.
This comes from The Hartford Courant front page and long article. Its long and in depth.
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-rennie0222.artfeb22,0,3796755.column

[Modica]

The Republican whining is getting tiring. I never *****ed about Bush as much as these Neo-Cons ***** about Obama. I feel confident that Obama is moving in the right direction and the Republicans don't want that, because if he succeeds it will be a long time before we see another arrogant Republican douche in the White House. Trying to obstruct things is ridiculous since their power is minimal. I don't think that Obama is going to let the Republicans get away with all the BS, because he will give them a painful ass-whooping if they try to put the brakes on his vision of what he wants America to be.

[iwantwallingfordbetter]

i agree with flatrat how much more beating can this subject take.......

[RonRomano]

Holding Chris Murphy accountable... ?

Er, thanks for singling out my letter, which was one of quite a few, but I'm not sure I quite get that subject line, David.

I mean, on the one hand, we should certainly be holding ALL elected representatives accountable for any action they take. But on the other, it's a little too easy to read that subject line as though I were holding Murphy accountable for something other than his support of the insane spending bill just pushed through Congress and his glib, public declaration that we should be asking government "what's in it for me". Chris is no John Kennedy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB6hLg3PRbY), that's for sure.

New to the forum, I took a quick stroll through some of the other sub-forums and nothing jumped out as discrediting Frank's religious obsession with "affordable" mortgages, or his (and his cohorts') resistance to the regulation so many folks claim President Bush and/or the Republican Congress never pursued. There's plenty of raw video online displaying Democrat support for the policies that corkscrewed the credit market.

I suspect the real fatigue some feel in hearing more than once about the origins of the credit meltdown is caused by the very scary possibility that, eventually, the entrenched media - chastened by the outcome of their conscious choice to avoid properly vetting their candidate - are going to start asking hard questions along these lines. Folks like Cuomo, Frank, Waters and Obama have been desperately working overtime in the wake of the AIG flap, frantically (and in President Obama's case, rather shamefully) pulling at the levers of public opinion, pointing at anyone else to ensure their past actions aren't scrutinized too closely. I can't say I blame them.

I've since gotten a reply from Congressman Murphy, as it happens. I'm not sure which one of his five offices sent it. Naturally, it was a form letter that didn't address any of my points. It was a sloppily copy/pasted email (multiple fonts, multiple sizes, etc.) that recited the same "what's in it for Connecticut" rhetoric he had printed up and sent out to taxpayers - at their own expense. That rhetoric ignores the obvious, and I pointed that out to him (or to whomever reads his mail) by reply. Most specifically, it ignores how all this wonderful spending will be funded in the midst of a recession when the government has yet to figure out how to fix the credit sector they broke - regardless who was responsible. It also ignores the question of how the economy will be 'stimulated' by the creation of government jobs and individual (though meager) tax cuts, when the economy needs more, thriving private sector businesses (read: employers) in order to grow.

Each 'green' job created will likely cost working people two jobs (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0) in return. Multiplying the deficit into the trillions has already triggered requests by other nations to change global currency rules, and abandon the US Dollar. The spending bill completely reversed the welfare reforms implemented during the Clinton Administration, and will stimulate increased dependence on government through expanded welfare rolls. The list goes on and on.

It's difficult to see how any of this carries America in the direction of "Recovery". But it's pretty easy to see how folks interpret all this as a move toward socialism.

[Snakebite]

Nice to point out the governments own Ponzi scheme.
The contributions that Murphy amassed in his first day in office were completely opposite to his campaign rhetoric. Politics as usual.