Martha Robertson just cut-and-pasting DCCC talking points (#NY23)
Talking points on congressional perks sound very familiar — because numerous Democratic candidates are using them.
Martha Robertson is the Emily’s List-backed, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) “Red to Blue” Democratic challenger in NY-23, my home district.
The “red-to-blue” designation means she’s considered at the top tier of Democratic candidates who might flip a current Republican seat. So she will be showered with national money.
We have been following the race closely, and have exposed a number of issues that have helped frame the narrative of the race, including Robertson’s false fundraising claim that GOP operatives hacked her website during a critical fundraising period, her support for Obamacare as a pathway to single payer, and her misunderstanding of the Veteran’s administrative crisis.
In an attempt to gain some momentum, Robertson held a press conference today to announce her challenge to Reed on several issues revolving around congressional perks. This was her statement at the press conference, as reported by the Elmira Star-Gazette:
“I’m deeply troubled by the leadership in our own current representation in Congress. Congressman Tom Reed has a record of accepting and abusing the perks that he’s enjoyed throughout his tenure in office,” Robertson said.
“Lawmakers don’t have to report the free luxury trips that they receive from private groups while in office,” she said. “I call on Congressman Tom Reed to renounce these perks and demand greater, not less, transparency in reporting gifts that members of Congress receive.”
Those talking points sound familiar. They appear to be DCCC talking points about congressional perks being used by numerous candidates, as Jazz Shaw reported several days ago at Hot Air, Multiple Democrats come up with the same “surprising” proposals.
At the press conference, WETM television report Ben Amey asked Robertson about whether she used DCCC talking points, but she dodged the question (something she has a habit of doing):
.@MarthaforNY dodged question when directly asked if campaign had gotten Rep perks from @dccc or if campaign came up w them. #NY23
— Ben Amey (@BenAmey18) July 2, 2014
Reason asked is @MarthaforNY release abt perks had very similar wording to number of other Dems running for office released last week #NY23
— Ben Amey (@BenAmey18) July 2, 2014
Cut and paste?
I’d email the Robertson campaign for comment, but they never respond anyway.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
This cut-n-paste of Democrat Party talking points is a clear indication that Robertson will be a robotic Democrat Member of Congress, voting, not based on the Constitution (to which she will take an oath of faithfulness; fingers crossed of course), but on whatever whim enters Pelosi’s socialist mindset.
Robertson will NOT check and balance against the executive despite this Democrat president clear violations of law.
“I’d email the Robertson campaign for comment, but they never respond anyway.”
You could send them a Scan-Tron formatted questionnaire, Prof.
0 Our candidate spoke about this issue prior to the DCNCC sending out that fax.
0 She mentioned this three months or more ago.
0 Ms. Robertson solemnly swears the identical language used in her materials and the DCNCC material is an unfortunate happenstance.
(Be sure to completely darken the “0” beside your response with a No. 2 lead pencil.)
Democrats are like the major media: they all seem to rehearse the same talking points on every issue.
I take great encouragement that the Democrats see NY-23 as a major “red to blue” pickup opportunity. For one thing, it means they don’t have many to choose from.
So it is based on the close balance (R+3) of the voting record of the district, and the fact that Robertson appears to be female.
BTW, Tom Reed’s ACU ratings are 52 this year, 77 lifetime – or almost exactly the same as Thad Cochran (although on fewer years for lifetime, of course).
Why am I not surprise that you don’t try to defend Reed’s actions but decided to attack the messenger? It is bad enough that he voted to shutdown the government, but he also voted to House Gym, Barbershop, Salon and Dining Room open while people in our district had their cancer treatments delayed.
Why am I not surprise that you don’t try to defend Reed’s actions but decided to attack the messenger? It is bad enough that he voted to shutdown the government, but he also voted to keep the House Gym, Barbershop, Salon and Dining Room open while people in our district had their cancer treatments delayed.
As the old staying goes, “people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.” Robertson has a sweet series of perks of her own as county legislator and former chair. She sits behind a 100K desk. She had the shoulders of her own road painted green to (ineffectively) slow down traffic in front of her home at a cost of 17K. She took pay as chairperson of the legislature for a period before she actually got elected to the job. Given her voting record, Robertson must focus on Reed, her voting record won’t sell outside Tompkins County. It’s all a diversion.