Remember back when Rep. Peter King (R-NY) was outraged, simply outraged that his fellow Republicans were
refusing to vote for Hurricane Sandy aid?
"These Republicans have no problem finding New York when they're out raising millions of dollars, they come to New York all the time filling their pockets with money from New Yorkers," he said. "I'm saying right now: anyone from New York and New Jersey who contributes one penny to congressional Republicans is out of their mind because what they did last night to put a knife in the back of New Yorkers and New Jerseyans was an absolute disgrace."
King said the decision to screw New York and New Jersey was motivated by a bias against the northeast. "The Republican Party has this bias against New York, this bias against New Jersey, this bias against the Northeast," he said. "They wonder why they are becoming a minority party? Why we are becoming the party of the permanent minority? What they did last night was so immoral, so disgraceful, so irresponsible."
It marked a permanent souring between King and his party, the moment when King realized that the central party tenet of Not Helping People was immoral and disgraceful, thus leading him to rethink his stances on—ah, just kidding.
I had you going there, didn't I?
Please read below the fold for more on Rep. King.
[Peter King's] campaign committee recently gave $1,000 to the Senate candidacy of Rep. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), a rising conservative star who was a vocal and unapologetic opponent of the legislation last year to help Sandy victims.
Nearly one year ago, on Feb. 18, 2013, Cotton spoke with disdain about the idea that his state — which receives far more in federal aid than it pays in federal taxes — should help to bail out Sandy victims in New York and neighboring states.
Surely, this was a mistake. You would have to be exceptionally craven to overlook "voted against aiding hurricane relief efforts in my state" after making that big a public stink over it.
King said he overlooked Cotton's position on the Sandy legislation because he strongly endorses Cotton’s hawkish views on national security.
Oh, well that explains it. He may have personally voted to screw your constituents during a time of great need, but he likes bombing people so all is forgiven. Bombing always carries more import than helping, that's just common sense.
So then, a hard-right conservative Republican was proven to be a total hypocrite on one of his signature "issues." File it in the bin with all the others, I suppose.