With his political attack on opponents Rick Waugh and Floyd Bayne, Eric Cantor has run afoul of the League of Women Voters.
For months, the question in VA-07 has been, why won't Cantor debate?
At first, Cantor claimed that he was too busy -- what with spending 4 or 5 days a week in Washington. But then it turned out that he was actually on tour promoting his book and other Republican candidates.
On the night of the debate for the League of Women Voters, he he was a mere 10 miles away...at a fundraiser with Lynn Cheney.
So, he made up a new excuse. His opponents are at fault, he says, because they are merely seeking a food fight.
This has been a pattern for Cantor. He dodges debate and blames other people for his failings.
This time, however, Arrogant Eric has irked the LWV.
"No Food Fights With League in Charge"
Dear Editor of the Richmond Times-Dispatch,
It was demeaning to the sponsors of the 7th Congressional District Candidates Forum for Eric Cantor to say that their event would have been "a platform for a food fight." While there is always a risk in holding an event that has not been staged and rehearsed in advance, the League of Women Voters and the Richmond First Club made every effort to promote a civil discussion of the issues at the forum held on Oct. 11, 2010.
The two participating candidates had signed a list of rules for the proceeding that not only forbade whistles and catcalls, but also requested that the audience hold its applause until the end of the program. The Henrico police had been notified that a political gathering was to take place at the Tuckahoe branch of the Henrico Public Library. No campaign literature, much less men in chicken suits, were allowed inside the building. If the event had turned ugly (as some political meetings do), it would have been canceled.
When the forum actually took place, the rules -- read to the audience by the respected moderator Lou Dean -- were accepted and adhered to by the audience. The candidates -- both perfect gentlemen -- concentrated on discussing the issues. The forum -- a civil exchange of ideas which helped the audience understand each candidate's political philosophy and position on specific issues -- fulfilled the sponsors' goals.
It would have been more exciting if the incumbent had been present, but a food fight? Not while the League of Women Voters was in charge.
Virginia Cowles
President, League of Women Voters, Richmond Metropolitan Area. Richmond.
Nice letter, eh?
Arrogant Eric -- too good for the League of Women Voters, and too out of touch to realize how bad he looks when he insults them.
In the same edition of the Richmond Times Dispatch, on the same page as the letter from Virginia Cowles, Arrogant Eric tried to explain why his massive lieon the Daily Show was ... um ... justified ... or something
Cantor Apologizes For Unclear Comments
Editor, Times-Dispatch: During a recent appearance on the Jon Stewart show, I was less than clear in a response to a question about the reckless spending that has occurred in Washington during the of the Obama administration's first 20 months. [Editors' note: The statement earned a "pants on fire" rating from PolitiFactVirginia.] I appreciate the opportunity to clarify my remarks.
In attempting to explain the reckless spending spree of President Obama and Speaker Pelosi, I said that those controlling Washington have "taken advantage of a crisis in late 2008 and early 2009 and spent more money than this country has spent in the last 200 years combined." What I meant to say was that the budget submitted by Obama will add more to the debt than the outstanding debt of the previous 43 presidents combined.
The fact is that after assuming office, several of Obama's first actions as president focused on increasing government spending. In addition to the stimulus, which with interest cost taxpayers approximately $1 trillion, the eighth bill that the president signed into law was an enormous omnibus spending bill costing over $400 billion, an increase of $29 billion or 7.7 percent.
I regret the error and any confusion it may have caused, but hope that residents of the commonwealth look at the broader point, which is that federal spending is out of control. America is at a crossroads, and the decisions we make today will determine the type of country that we pass on to our children. Eric Cantor, U.S. House of Representatives, 7th District.
What in the world is Arrogant Eric talking about?
His lie was that
In the past two years, Democrats have "spent more money than this country has spent in the last 200 years combined."
But his statement above has nothing to do with that. It merely says that the administration has had a couple of spending bills. That is it!
No attempt to explain himself. No apology. Instead, Arrogant Eric says he was less than clear. Not that he lied, not that he was engaged in unrealistic hyperbole.
We first looked at federal spending for 2009 and the estimate of spending for 2010. Combined, federal spending in those two years amounted to a little more than $7.2 trillion.
We didn't have to add up all 200 years -- you only have to add together 2006, 2007 and 2008 to reach $8.3 trillion, which exceeds the $7.2 trillion of 2009 and 2010. So by that measure, Cantor is wrong.
Want to use the data for 2010 and 2011 instead, under the assumption President Barack Obama was completely in charge for those budget years? Fine. Using those two years ups the total to a bit under $7.6 trillion. The three years before that by themselves total $9.2 trillion. So Cantor is wrong that way, too.
What about using projected spending based on the course set by the Obama Administration and the Democratic Congress? Not even bending the rules to include the period 2009 to 2015 would do it. Outlays for the 2009-2015 period increases the cumulative amount of federal spending to about $27.3 trillion. Exceeding that amount only requires combining the federal spending from 1995 to 2008 -- a period of 14 years, not 200. So he's still wrong.
What if Cantor misspoke, substituting "spent more money" for "created more debt"? We did that calculation with the help of a different OMB table.
The increase in public federal debt between the end of 2008 and the end of 2010 has been almost $3.5 trillion. But the debt from the nation's birth through the end of 2008 was $5.8 trillion. So Cantor isn't right that way, either.
When we asked Cantor's staff about it, they tried to move the goalposts. They told us Cantor was actually referring to the debt that will be added by 2015. That would be $8.2 trillion, which exceeds the $5.8 trillion debt accumulated between the birth of the republic and the end of 2008. (Actually, to make the numbers work, they only need to go as far as 2013, which would be the last budget assembled during President Barack Obama's first term.) But even though this number "works," it's not what Cantor said on the show. He didn't say debt, he said spending. And he said "in the two years since," when his staff later claimed he was actually referring to a seven-year period.
Like PolitiFact Virginia says about Cantor's staff, Arrogant Eric's letter to the Richmond Times Dispatch merely moves the goalposts: I was talking about spending, so, here are some examples. Basically an F-you to the voters: "if you are smart enough to understand my slight of hand, then don't vote for me. The rest of you dummies are enough votes for me, and I will lie to you whenever I please"
Arrogant Eric: not just too good for the LWV, but too good for logic, ethics, facts, and smart voters too.
We know he is all high hair and empty suit. But how big is his head?
DONATE TO RICK WAUGH