Monday, April 10, 2006

KingWatch Index - King vs. Constituents

For new readers of KingWatch, we are creating index posts of similar topics that are in sprea out in our archives.
Today's index is of King and his interactions with constituents.

King has a problem with people who do not agree with him and he tends to lash out.
Here are a series of letters to and from King - King vs. Constituents Pt. 1
Note that in his first response he outright lies to his constituent about what President Clinton said.
The next is a letter exchange between another constituent - King vs. Constituents Pt. 2
And the next is an incident at his Washington DC office - King vs. Constituents Pt. 3
In 2005, King avoided a Social Security town hall meeting and attacked those that attended - King vs. Constituents Pt. 4
In another Social Security issue, King goes after religious leaders who disagree with what Bush's plans for Social Security - King vs. Constituents Pt. 5

For such a wanna-be tough guy, King is pretty thin-skinned.

Image hosting by Photobucket


Anonymous said...

You're really getting desperate recycling old posts. Are you getting worried about all the support King's gotten recently from his constituents with his stand on the Dubai Ports situation and on illegal immigration? And the rallies against King by illegal aliens don't count, as they can't vote while the 70% of Americans who want tough immigration reform do.

TimJ said...


many of those at the rally were legal immigrants, just because they are hispanic does not make them illegal. also their is a difference between immigration reform and this disaster in the house, most Americans support some type of citizenship and are against the house bill.

King actually did something right with the Dubai ports Deal and took a tough stand, however right after doing that he voted against more funding in order to inspectmore containers that enter this country. $300 billion to give the Bush admin for Iraq?? for King, no problem, $1 billuion to help secure American ports and King has a problem with. Thats just insane. Other than somethng every eight years King has been nothing other than a rubber stamp for the right wing of the GOP, and on virtually everything has been a rubber stamp for the Bush admin. We need someone in Washington who is not afraid to stand up to the right wing of the GOP and the Bush admin more than once every few years.

Anonymous said...

You guys just don't get why people like King. I know you guys preach that he is in step with Bush on everything. But does the average voter even know how King votes on the budget or other smaller items. Yeah King voted for Iraq as did many Democrats (before they voted against it). On issues that constituents are passionate about King is on the same side (Homeland Security, Port Security and immigration). People like that he sticks his neck out when nobody else does. It only helps King's stock with his constituents when people (illegal or legal) are protesting in front of his office. Unfortunately for you guys, it does make him look like a maverick even if you don't want to admit it.

J said...

anonymous says -
"ut does the average voter even know how King votes on the budget or other smaller items."
No they don't and that's the problem.
King has voted against the middle class with this new budget. he voted for decreasing student loan aid.
King voted against increased port security twice; most recently as 3 weeks ago.
King voted for the MTBE additive which pollutes ground water.
He ranks as the second worst rep in the NY delegation for the environment.
H has a 37% lifetime voting record with the very unions that support him. He votes against the working man consistantly.
King only jumped on port security AFTER Schumer made it public.
where was King 2 years ago when Bush was telling Kerry that checking 5% of cargo was enough and we couldn't pay to check more?
King has been on the wrong side of homeland security until he needed to gets some credibility on the issue. King was on the wrong side of port security, even deriding Schumer 3 years ago when Schumer was pointing out how inadequete teh security really is.
The more people learn about the real Peter King, the more they will want to get rid of him.

TimJ said...


King has been a joke when it comes down to Homeland Security, same with port Security. Getting his name out there is what he is good at, but when it comes down to actually getting things done, King doesn't do his job and sides with Bush on virtually all the issues. The vote against more funding to port security shows that, his unwillingness to call out the administration for thhe way it handled the homeland security funding shows this.

Granted some Dems did vote for the war, but King seems to think that the War is the best thing ever and that Bush is running in a competnet fashion. Which is an utterly mmind boggiling conclusion.

His Consitutents really aren't with him on the immigration bill. just because they agree more needs to be done to secure the borders (as do I) does not mean they are in lockstep with his plan or agree with his plan.

King has been able to win because in past elections he has been able to play the phony moderate card at election time. his consituents are starting to wise up to the fact that King is no moderate, he is a right wing loony who is in lockstep with the National GOP and Bush admin on the vast majority of the issues. His consitutents are starting to see that standing up to the President on one issue and actually being right on one issue simply is not enough. King has been around as long as he has because the Democrats have not had the ability to show King as a puppet for Bush and the National GOP. King's own aarogance is starting to show things about him that the Democrats haven't been able to in the past (that he is really a sock puppet hard right nut who plays moderate)and this will really be seen if the Democrats can add on what King has already shown as a Right wing Bush puppet. Something which bode well for King, in a district where Bush is as popular as Red Sox fans who go to Yankee Stadium

Anonymous said...

That port security funding increase was proposed by a democrat who was trying to look tough on Homeland Security. The bill basically increased funding without any plan on how to use it, essentially waisting money. It was worse than not increasing funding.

As far as the MTBE situation King publically stated the reason he voted for it was that he received assurances from the GOP leadership that the final version negotiated with the Senate would include a trust fund and other remedies for those impacted by MTBE contamination. He also stated if the trust fund wasn't in the Senate version he would vote against it.

King, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, when Pres. repealed Davis-Bacon, which reduced wages for builders in the area, stepped up, went against Pres. Bush, on behalf of the unions to get Davis-Bacon reinstated. King has also publicly gone against Bush on his Tax Code reform.

Finally, to say King isn't strong on Homeland Security is ridiculous. Since he has been named Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, he, not Schumer (Just because the liberal media covered Schumer first doesn't mean King jumped on his coat tails) took down the Dubai Ports deal and has now brought Border Security to the table and recently had hearings on increased port security. That's more than anyone else I can think of down in DC.

J said...

1) The ports security amendment was specific in where the funding should go. As was the 2003 amendment that King also voted against

2) So with the MTBE issue, he voted for it before he voted against it??
There is no MTBE trust fund. With an 11% voting record with the League of Conservation Voters, King is doing a poor job.

3) King was silent on Davis-Bacon until it became a public issue. King has a 37% lifetime voting record with the AFL-CIO. Not a strong pro-union record. He also voted for the holemland security bill that would have stripped collective bargaining.

4) King was a supporter of terrorism up until 9/11. King DID jump on Schumers coattails. Schumer broke the story. By the time King jumped on board, the outrage across both parties was already being heard.
King has been dismissive of Port Security. H was dismissive of it when Schumer brought it up 4 years ago. King was saying Bush was doing a great job by only checking 5% of all incoming containers.
Kings REAL record is a poor one.

Paul said...

Until now, I never realized how immature and obnoxious a Rep. could be to his own constituents just for letting him know what they think. I received 3 letters degrading any opinion that disagreed with his. The last letter told me I should "get on my knees and thank God that Bush is President". NEVER has any politician responded like that regardless of what was said. (being as atheist only maked it humorous)
He should continue to write his "angry letters", then grow-up and learn how to repond to and respect people that allow him the privledge to represent them. They can quickly take that privledge away from him also.