Krystal Ball: Dishonest? Or Just Plain Dumb? (UPDATED)

One would have thought that Krystal Ball – the Democrat running against Rob Wittman for Congress –  would be more careful with her words (and her funds) after planting her foot so firmly in her mouth last month.  Amazingly, one would be wrong, as her latest mailer reveals.

Ball claims that Wittman “repeatedly voted against our veterans and men and women in uniform.”  She cites five of Wittman’s “no” votes: HR1105 (2009), HCR85 (also in 2009), HCR 312 (also 2008), and two on HR2642 (2008).  There’s only one problem: some of these votes had nothing to do with our veterans and in the case of two of them, “no” was actually the pro-vet vote.

Let’s take these one at a time, shall we?

HR 1105: This was the Obama Omnibus Budget for FY09, basically a roll-up of nine appropriations bills that hadn’t been passed when they were supposed to be passed (September 2008), because the Democrats in Congress wanted then-President Bush to have as little a role as possible in the actual budget.  Never mind that this bill including runaway deficit spending (including double-digit percentage increases in some agencies), and focus on this – none of the nine funding areas included Defense or Veterans Affairs, which were funded in separate appropriations bills.  (UPDATE: The only affect the bill had was a rider that froze pay for federal workers called into active duty). In other words, Krystal Ball defines a vote against reckless spending that has no impact on the overwhelming majority our troops . . . as a vote against our troops.

Onward, to HCR85 and HCR312.  These were the Democrats’ budget resolutions for FY10 and FY09 respectively.  They reveal the priorities Congress will set for the coming years, including DoD and DVA.  However, they do not appropriate a single dollar of government funds.  They are nothing more than political statements that can (and usually are) ignored by Congress when it sees fit.  Once again, Krystal insists that votes for a bunch of politically-driven numbers that will become irrelevant as sooned as they are passed (as resolutions, not bills, the President cannot sign or veto them) and have no impact on our troops  . . . are somehow votes against our troops.

Wait, it gets better; here comes HR2642.  This is the only legislation cited that actually affected our men in women in uniform – it was the 2008 WBK War supplemental (WBK War = Wahhabist-Ba’athist-Khomeinist War: my term for the War on Terror).  Wittman voted against two amendments to the bill.  Now hears the kicker: one of the amendments demanded a withdrawal from Iraq beginning in 30 days and a “goal” of complete withdrawal in 18 months, while the other included a boatload of unrelated domestic spending.  As President Bush promised a veto of any bill with these amendments, voting “yes” in either case meant delaying funding for our troops in battle.

So now, Krystal would have us believe that votes against amendments that would effectively delay crucial funds for our troops on the front . . . are somehow votes against our troops.

I had hoped that Ball’s last missive was a simple rookie mistake, but after this fiasco, I’m not sure if she is patently dishonest or just transmogrifyingly dumb.  Either way, she is clearly not qualified to represent me in Congress.

Cross-posted to RWL


9 thoughts on “Krystal Ball: Dishonest? Or Just Plain Dumb? (UPDATED)

  1. D.J, it is very interesting how you are such a name caller and so easy to call people dumb when your own post doesn’t have its facts straight. If you are going to call Ball out, get it right. HCR 1105 contains the Non Reduction in Pay While Serving in the Uniformed Services or National Guard. This protects Federal workers who serve our country, of which there are a lot in the first district. You may not like that bill or you may be able to say that Wittman had reason to vote against the omnibus bill in spite of that provision, but don’t lie or be sloppy and say it has nothing to do with the military. I haven’t fact checked the rest of your rant because you have no credibility.

  2. Well, geez, Herb, don’t hold back.

    Seriously, good catch. Still, a small benefit for a minority of troops marbled into that monstrosity hardly absolves her here.

  3. DJ….you didn’t even mention the best part of that mailer. It also advertised Krystal’s new website That site posts a video of her riding through the district with a life size cutout of Rob meeting people. There is even a scene where stops by Wittman’s field office in Tappahannock. She so happily points out that it is empty. Well, observing that what she wore in the video is the same outfit she wore in the Irvington Parade on July 5, it wouldn’t surprise me at all that it was empty since it was a federal HOLIDAY! I am sure the federal buildings in Washington DC were mostly empty as well. That video has got to be the most juvenile campaign tactic I have ever seen.

    And Herb, nice pointing out the Non Reduction in Pay provision in that bill. Nothing angers me more as a soldier and as a veteran the stunts that politicians pull in order get their bills passed. They tact on military provisions on a non military bill or a non-military provision on a military bill, forcing the hands of others to vote against it, then turn around and say that their opponents don’t support the military. That is exactly the case in HCR 1105, where the Democratic Congress looked to swell the deficit even more. They added on the Non Reduction in Pay onto it in an effort to embarrass the Republicans who were going to vote against the bill on its original merits.

    So, I throw the Bullshit flag on Krystal Ball’s play on Rob Wittman’s voting record. 10 yard penalty, 3rd down!

  4. Ah, Herb, so D.J. misses ONE provision and he has no credibility?

    If you are such the excellent fact-checker, why don’t you prove your claims of no credibility instead of doing the same name-calling that you accuse D.J. of.

  5. DJ, sorry about that. I probably was a little harsh. But here’s the thing. Just be straight up. It took me 30 seconds to find that provision. If we’re going to call somebody dumb, we need to be more careful. Otherwise it’s just gotcha politics against gotcha politics and nobody cares about accuracy. Chipper, you are right about the way both parties use veterans, and it makes me sick. We should have our own Veterans Party…but that On the Road with Rob is totally disrespectful. How would she like it if Rob had an On the Road With Krystal?

Comments are closed.