Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Cenk Uygur riffed about this on yesterday's TYT show:

From the website of Tea Partier Stephen Fincher, (R) Tennessee:

"Government spending, deficits and debt are the greatest threat our country faces. We need to cut up the national credit card, reduce spending, and get our financial house in order. This must be our national priority..."
- Rep. Stephen Fincher

"Our budget deficit doubled in 2008 and again in 2009. We raised the debt ceiling to nearly $2 TRILLION dollars just this year. Our national debt stands at over $12 TRILLION, but that's not the whole story. The unfunded debt is closer to $70 TRILLION. Our children, our grandchildren and their children will be paying the price for our failures."

"Third, we need earmark reform. We need transparency. We need to change the culture in Washington. When a Tennessee family has to make tough decisions, they sit down and prioritize spending. Government just spends and borrows and taxes. We're going to have to make some tough decisions, cut spending and get our country back on the right track.

There are plenty of specific examples of wasteful government spending that we can cut, but mainly, it will take the discipline and will to do the right thing."

Tea Party Hypocrisy? Some Lawmakers With Tea Party Ties Are on the Government Dole
Which Tea Partiers Are Getting Hundreds of Thousands of Government Dollars?

By JONATHAN KARL and AVERY MILLER

The biggest recipient was Rep. Stephen Fincher, a Republican from Frog Jump, Tenn.

While the self-described Tea Party patriot lists his occupation as "farmer" and "gospel singer" in the Congressional Directory, he doesn't mention that his family has received more than $3 million in farm subsidies from 1995 to 2009, according to the Environmental Working Group.

When asked whether he would be willing to see all his subsidies go away, Fincher would not directly say he would no longer take any more subsidies.

"We need a good, better, we need a better farm program and we need to streamline it," he said. "We need to look at many many options. And that's a long way off."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-part ... 014&page=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, everything was going so well for him in my eyes right up until the last few paragraphs.

Another reminder that you better check your closet for skeletons before you start dishing out advice.

Long read about it here...

http://moderatelymarvelous.com/2011/03/ ... hypocrisy/

kalm wrote:he doesn't mention that his family has received more than $3 million in farm subsidies from 1995 to 2009

Ka-BOOM!!!

During the campaign last year, Fincher was repeatedly questioned about the subsidy payments he and his family have received over the years. An article in The Commercial Appeal on June 7, 2010 includes this statement by Fincher in direct response to the numbers cited by the EWG. Fincher says the amounts in the EWG database are incorrect.

“That amount is false. It’s a lie,” he said Friday, explaining that he typically receives between $170,000 and $200,000 a year in subsidies. “A lot of that (subsidy) money is loans that are repaid back through the cotton program and that money doesn’t actually end up in my pocket.”

Ka-Fizzle

89Hen wrote:

During the campaign last year, Fincher was repeatedly questioned about the subsidy payments he and his family have received over the years. An article in The Commercial Appeal on June 7, 2010 includes this statement by Fincher in direct response to the numbers cited by the EWG. Fincher says the amounts in the EWG database are incorrect.

“That amount is false. It’s a lie,” he said Friday, explaining that he typically receives between $170,000 and $200,000 a year in subsidies. “A lot of that (subsidy) money is loans that are repaid back through the cotton program and that money doesn’t actually end up in my pocket.”

Ka-Fizzle

Sure.

89Hen wrote:

During the campaign last year, Fincher was repeatedly questioned about the subsidy payments he and his family have received over the years. An article in The Commercial Appeal on June 7, 2010 includes this statement by Fincher in direct response to the numbers cited by the EWG. Fincher says the amounts in the EWG database are incorrect.

“That amount is false. It’s a lie,” he said Friday, explaining that he typically receives between $170,000 and $200,000 a year in subsidies. “A lot of that (subsidy) money is loans that are repaid back through the cotton program and that money doesn’t actually end up in my pocket.”

Ka-Fizzle

Well, that's not what Diane Sawyer, abcnews.com, and those idiots on the radio said so it must not be true.

What? Stop the presses.

There's a politician in Washington that says one thing yet does another?

(He's correct in what he says... it is just that one of those tough decisions is going to have to be his own)

Forget about Obama's brith certificate...just have this guy show the financial papers.

Should be easy.

If he is telling the truth, then abc should be sued for millions.

If he is lying, then a new politician should be elected that makes sure Fincher and his ilk lose their subsidies. Fincher can go back to being a gospel singer/farmer who has a lot less money with which to balance his budget.

Everyone wins.

By looking into USDA subsidies alone, you are going to find more than a hundred members of congress listed as recipients.

The guy is obviously a hypocrite. But that doesn't nullify what he said. If a person advocates tougher DUI enforcement, and is then arrested for drunk driving, that doesn't mean we don't have a problem with drunk driving.

The problem with farm subsidies is that they are a necessary evil. The ability to feed ourselves is probably our greatest strategic resource, and it is frequently overlooked (except when there's a 'gotcha' moment like this). I have less of a problem with this guy taking the subsidies than I do with the potential damage to those subsidies that his hypocrisy may cause.

Farm subsidies were meant to 1) keep the small farmers in business and 2) ensure that we would never become a net food importer.

The problem is that the agricultural subsidy system is antiquated. People want to get rich, not just stay afloat, and as a result we see these mega farmers who own very large operations and are able to realize a larger profit margin because of the subsidies only.

tampa_griz wrote:The guy is obviously a hypocrite. But that doesn't nullify what he said. If a person advocates tougher DUI enforcement, and is then arrested for drunk driving, that doesn't mean we don't have a problem with drunk driving.

Then he should show up with his fucking checkbook, and refund this tainted money to the same taxpayers that elected him and that he is preaching to. Apparently he feels entitled to his entitlements, where his constituents are not.

PUT AN END TO HYPOCRISY, ELIMINATE PARTISAN HACKERY, STAMP OUT POLITICAL STUPIDITY!

Wedgebuster wrote:Then he should show up with his fucking checkbook, and refund this tainted money to the same taxpayers that elected him and that he is preaching to. Apparently he feels entitled to his entitlements, where his constituents are not.

Wedgebuster wrote:

tampa_griz wrote:The guy is obviously a hypocrite. But that doesn't nullify what he said. If a person advocates tougher DUI enforcement, and is then arrested for drunk driving, that doesn't mean we don't have a problem with drunk driving.

Then he should show up with his **** checkbook, and refund this tainted money to the same taxpayers that elected him and that he is preaching to. Apparently he feels entitled to his entitlements, where his constituents are not.

PUT AN END TO HYPOCRISY, ELIMINATE PARTISAN HACKERY, STAMP OUT POLITICAL STUPIDITY!

I'm not arguing that they isn't a hypocrite. But budget problems exist outside the hypocrisy of individual pols. You can use his hypocrisy against him as an individual....but not to deny that we have to reign in spending....including farm subsidies.

The Tea Party is exactly who we thought they were... No surprises here

Chizzang wrote:The Tea Party is exactly who we thought they were... No surprises here

Everybody is in favor of eliminating earmarks unless they are your own.

as my sig says: They're full of shit. All of them.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:as my sig says: They're full of shit. All of them.

Why do you work for them?

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:as my sig says: They're full of shit. All of them.

Yep, I thought about your sig as I was posting this, and that is entirely the point. Taibbi spent a couple of months amongst the Tea Party for his investigative piece last fall. And I distinctly remember some of his time being spent at rallies in Tennessee. I'll check his blog and see if he has commented on this.

Most people derive at least some portion of their success as a result of government spending. The Tea Party just happens to be deliciuously hypocritical about this.

While I can appreciate the irony in railing about government benefits while receiving them, I cannot completely demonize this man assuming he pays into the system his fair share. Anybody know what his personal & corporate tax bill is historically? There's nothing wrong with bitching about the system you've paid into while at the same time receiving lawful benefits. It's foolish not to take the same breaks afforded other law-abiding tax payers...

Appaholic wrote:While I can appreciate the irony in railing about government benefits while receiving them, I cannot completely demonize this man assuming he pays into the system his fair share. Anybody know what his personal & corporate tax bill is historically? There's nothing wrong with bitching about the system you've paid into while at the same time receiving lawful benefits. It's foolish not to take the same breaks afforded other law-abiding tax payers...

Absolutely. Which makes this guy, Goldman Sachs, and the labor unions all about the same. Right?

Appaholic wrote:While I can appreciate the irony in railing about government benefits while receiving them, I cannot completely demonize this man assuming he pays into the system his fair share. Anybody know what his personal & corporate tax bill is historically? There's nothing wrong with bitching about the system you've paid into while at the same time receiving lawful benefits. It's foolish not to take the same breaks afforded other law-abiding tax payers...

not quite. it's hypocrisy in action. to decry anyone receiving money from the government as some strung-out layabout milking everyone else is Tea Party textbook. vilifying and demonizing them to whip their voters in to a frenzy... and spouting about "ending handouts" and the like - while taking those benefits yourself is entirely hypocritical.

however - i hope to God these jokers try the "my welfare isn't as bad as other welfare" schtick... that's a john kerry level of nuance...

Still really trying to give a damn about this...

Subsidies are no different that using legal loopholes that are available to reduce your tax rate.
Just hope the guy has the bag to eliminate them if given the chance.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:While I can appreciate the irony in railing about government benefits while receiving them, I cannot completely demonize this man assuming he pays into the system his fair share. Anybody know what his personal & corporate tax bill is historically? There's nothing wrong with bitching about the system you've paid into while at the same time receiving lawful benefits. It's foolish not to take the same breaks afforded other law-abiding tax payers...

not quite. it's hypocrisy in action. to decry anyone receiving money from the government as some strung-out layabout milking everyone else is Tea Party textbook. vilifying and demonizing them to whip their voters in to a frenzy... and spouting about "ending handouts" and the like - while taking those benefits yourself is entirely hypocritical.

however - i hope to God these jokers try the "my welfare isn't as bad as other welfare" schtick... that's a john kerry level of nuance...

This guy gets it.