Standing With Matt Bevin

redstate.com ^ | 2/21/14 | Erick Erickson

[cotton1706]

Matt Bevin ran a company, something Mitch McConnell has not done.

While running that company, Matt Bevin put his signature on a prospectus for his company in which the company touted the economic benefits that would be derived from TARP. Pretty much every financially oriented business in America did the same at the time. That’s what Mitch McConnell, George Bush, Hank Paulson, and virtually everyone in Washington was telling everybody.

Matt Bevin did not vote for TARP. He did not lobby for TARP.

Mitch McConnell not only voted for TARP, but he whipped up votes for it. McConnell called passing TARP one of the finest days in the Senate’s history.

Mitch McConnell and his supporters are now attacking Bevin for touting the positive economic benefits to his business from TARP. It is, they say, hypocrisy for him to beat up McConnell for voting for it.

I think we should get rid of federally subsidized student loans. I sure used them though. Under our existing system, I could not have afforded law school otherwise. Doesn’t mean I don’t think we could have a better system and less costly schools if we got rid of federally subsidized student loans. And if they’re around when my kids are ready for college, we may use them.

I want lower taxes. But I drive my kids on roads paid for with those taxes. Should that mean I should support higher taxes?

The arguments McConnell supporters are making against Bevin on this issue are the same arguments Democrats make against Republicans who want a roll back of the welfare state and a reduction in the size and scope of the federal government.

Is it any wonder these people are supporting a man who handed a blank check to Barack Obama?

[cotton1706]

I’m sticking with Matt Bevin. I want to save America. To do that, Washington must change. But Washington won’t change unless we change the leadership of the Republican Party.

[jsanders2001]

Send the turtle home and back in his shell.

[jsanders2001]

> I want lower taxes. But I drive my kids on roads paid for with those taxes. Should that mean I should support higher taxes?

I think the real problem isn’t putting the taxpayers on the hook to pay a little more taxes. Its that the “taxes” end up being a pretext for more funds they can raid and divert into their own backpockets.

[Joachim]

Bevin simply signed the legally required certification, at the end of the report, that the accounting data reflected in the report was correct--that the past and present financial position of the company was correctly represented.

He did NOT sign the report itself, just the accounting certification. It was NOT investment advice delivered over his signature, as most reports state or imply.

He did not write, let alone endorse, the economic forecasting stuff (the forward-looking statements) which attributed growth in asset prices to TARP (and essentially treated it as positive).

Liars with an agenda other than the truth are portraying this as something big and evil.

[skinkinthegrass]

The *itch McConnell, Is (thru his minions) broadcasting the lie all over KY.
i'm still standing w/ Matt Bevin.
*itch McConnell, main media support is coming from bribery @ the USA CoC.

[grania]

Bevin's got to turn this into a passionate endorsement of constitutional conservative values. Giving an excuse doesn't do it. Maybe a passionate "where should we have gone after TARP" speech would do it.

But he's got to do the inspiration thing. We've been stung before by people who made great promises in order to get elected, but turned their backs on us as soon as they got to DC.

How about an impassioned speech about how the feds are making it near impossible to start and grow a small business?

[Jabba the Nutt]

If promoting TARP benefits for your business is bad, isn’t it worse if you promoted TARP and are directly responsible for the $100 of billions you personally authorized be spent, taxpayers money?