Combine derangement and deceit from a liberal radio talker and what you get is singularly repellent.
Much like her lefty soulmate Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, Randi Rhodes is a huge fan of "infrastructure" spending. But while conservatives hear "infrastructure" and are likely to think, oh say, roads and bridges, Rhodes hears it and thinks, ka-ching! Much like the Democrats in Congress for whom she so heartily shills. (Audio after the jump)
Listen, poor Colorado, this is breaking my heart to look at Colorado. Of course, I have friends that live in Colorado, very good friends that live in Colorado and 500 people are missing there. You've got what they're calling a thousand-year storm there. And so, obviously, roads have been washed out, bridges have been washed out. Now, of course Obama is going to be in favor of rebuilding roads and bridges in Colorado. Does that then mean that the Republicans are going to be against rebuilding? Now, don't put it past them because you know that you had after Sandy, you had Republicans saying they didn't want to do relief in New Jersey. They didn't want to rebuild New Jersey. They didn't want to rebuild the boardwalk. They didn't want to rebuild the businesses. They didn't want to give anybody FEMA help. They didn't want any emergency response at all!
Wow, this is shabby even by the low standards of left-wing radio. Since Rhodes flatters herself as well-informed, one is left to conclude that she is claiming something she knows isn't true, otherwise known as a lie.
Allow me to refresh Rhodes's selective memory. What Republicans were actually against was Democrats responding to Sandy by inserting their snouts in the public trough and not coming up air.
As described by Breitbart reporter Wynton Hall last December, the Senate passed a $60.4 billion bill to help victims of Sandy with such porcine necessities as $150 million for Alaska fisheries, $58 million to plant trees on private property in areas unaffected by Sandy, and $2 million for roof repairs to Smithsonian Institution buildings.
In late January, President Obama signed a $50.5 billion, trimmed-down version of the bill -- with an estimated half of its funding not scheduled to be spent until after 2015. "Not exactly time-sensitive, emergency spending," Heritage Foundation's Owen Graham points out.
