Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About this Blog   |   On Twitter   |   Follow us on Facebook   |   RSS Feeds RSS Feed

Dems call Cantor a hypocrite on stimulus

Anita Kumar

For months, Democrats have dubbed U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia a hypocrite for strongly opposing the federal stimulus package only to promote aspects of it later.

Here's the latest example:

Nearly half of the 30 organizations participating in a job fair Cantor is holding Monday in Culpeper were recipients of the stimulus.

The list includes a slew of government agencies and schools that have directly benefited from the package and may be using stimulus money to hire people (as the money was originally designed to do), including the Orange County public schools, the Transportation Security Administration and Virginia Department of Labor, and some companies that may have indirectly benefited such as Comcast and Terremark.

Cantor, a Richmond area congressman and the No. 2 Republican in the House, was one of the most vocal critics of the $787 billion economic stimulus bill that Congress passed in February. He has since said the package was a failure.

Cantor's spokesman John Murray said it's ludicrous to call his boss a hypocrite when the congressman is trying to find jobs for his constiuents. The job fair is designed "to help people get back to work,'' he said.

In the summer, Cantor came under fire after he talked about his support of using stimulus money to build a rail project from Washington to Richmond.

"The continuing hypocrisy from Republican leaders, like Eric Cantor, who try to block solutions in Washington and then take credit for them back home, is reaching epidemic proportions,'' said Jesse Ferguson, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "If Representative Cantor's 'Party of No' policies were in effect, this event would have been an unemployment fair not a jobs fair."

By Anita Kumar  |  November 18, 2009; 6:31 PM ET
Categories:  Anita Kumar , Eric Cantor  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Fairfax libraries set to lay off 107 employees
Next: 44: McDonnell on how he won, Robertson comments


"For years, free and thinking Americans have dubbed goodly parts of the main stream media (fill in the blank)"....ahem. Let's establish that the stimulous meant different things to different people. If its intent was to create some minimal level of confidence by signalling the government's willingness to "get involved," then so far (barring a double dip) it has been a success. If one were to take the White House's position at the time that the stimulous would keep unemployment below 10%, it has been an abysmal failure. If one were to take say, the Limaugh perspective that the stimulous was really pork for left wing groups (a la ACORN), then it seems to be a mixed bag, since some citizens have embarassed the executive and legeslative branches into some more modest accountability. Congressman Cantor seems to have also embarassed the left by pointing out a few too many shortcomings, and yeap, he is still a politician who seems to be concerned about helping his constituents by trying to get them jobs, something that used to be the purview of the Democratic party of old. Since I pay taxes, I do wish him success and hope that all the other members of Congress follow his example. We want sustainable jobs.

Posted by: kterweele | November 18, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

He is, of course, a hypocrite. The G"No"P is united in their obstructionism, blocking anything and everything passing over President Obama's desk.

The hypocrisy comes directly from the Republican opposition to the ARRA, which was partially presented as a jobs creator. Bad enough to oppose, but good enough to take the funds when they are available, right, Rep. Cantor?

In my opinion, I wish the Democratic leadership had the foresight not only to see this hypocrisy (not just from Cantor, but from Frank Wolf as well, along with other Republicans) but to also have inserted a clause stating that if a congressman opposed the bill then he/she was not entitled to funds from it.

It's simply disgusting politics.

Posted by: BigDaddyD | November 19, 2009 10:01 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company