Image 01 Image 03

Democrat’s fat shaming ads backfire in key House race (#NY23)

Democrat’s fat shaming ads backfire in key House race (#NY23)

Growing local and national media coverage of Martha Robertson’s questionable attack ad strategy.

Media coverage of Martha Robertson’s fat shaming ads against Congressman Tom Reed in the swing NY-23 district continues to grow.

The ads, which deliberately use old photos of Reed when he was very heavy, have received coverage from national outlets such as Buzzfeed and national Fox News.

In addition, local WETN and Capital Tonight News, have covered the story.

Now WENY is on the case:

Notice how Robertson refuses to acknowledge what her campaign has done, and just changes the subject.

That’s the wrong answer.

The right answer: “I’m sorry.”

Until she gives the right answer, this story will not go away.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


At the risk of being accused (probably with good cause) of “ugly shaming,” I have to wonder if a woman who looks like this chick does really should have been criticizing anybody else’s appearance?

If NY-23 conservatives retain any hope of replacing Tom Reed with a Representative they like better, they had better help vote him out now.

    Freddie Sykes in reply to whungerford. | September 5, 2014 at 1:14 pm

    The most important vote by a representative is for Speaker of the House who is next in line for president after the veep.

    I will gladly settle for a Northeastern liberal Republican over a Northeastern progressive Democrat between now and the next primary season.

    Sorry. No. I would rather not have a flaming leftist in that position.

    Sometimes it can be appropriate to force out a RINO if you can find a reliably CONSERVATIVE Democrat. THAT IS NOT THE CASE HERE. Better to have a RINO in the position than someone who will try to actively advance a “Progressive” (read Marxist) agenda.

For anyone who has ever fought the battle of the waist line and so many Americans have, Robertson’s “fat attack” on Tom Reed is an insult. It also reflects her lack of sensitivity and character and decent respect for a political opponent. But what else to expect from a person who spent over 100K on a desk, who spent 17K of taxpayer money painting the shoulders of her own road green (now largely vanished), who took pay as chair of the county legislature before she was elected to the job, who voted both ways within minutes on the SAFE Act, who voted to throttle corporate free speech rights, who is very partisan but claims she is a “bi-partisan” leader, and who makes things up (Republican operatives hacked her site, no proof offered). Now, she mocks overweight people. Well, there are a lot of them Martha and they vote!

    whungerford in reply to Cicero. | September 5, 2014 at 2:58 pm

    Reed grows more liberal day by day. He no longer talks debt and deficit, but proposes to spend a billion on the COPS Act. (Federal money for local police)

    Now I understand why I can only see an inner ugliness when I look at her picture…. the woman is corrupt.

William A. Jacobson | September 5, 2014 at 11:00 pm

We have a troll here. whungerford is a contributor at a pro-Martha Robertson website. I let him comment here because we welcome differing views. But we don’t welcome trolls who make arguments that the Republican is not conservative enough when they are supporting (undisclosed) the liberal Democrat. Bye-Bye.

I WAS beginning to wonder. His constant attacks on Reed as developing Liberal voting habits was starting to smack of attempting to demoralize those that, while not thrilled with him, would at least hold their nose and vote for him as clearly less Marxist than Robertson. The psychological aspect of attacking as “not conservative enough” to be worthy of support seemed odd when facing a hair-on-fire Progressive Marxist/ Leninist.