We’ve just released another newsletter – this one featuring 7 pages of Congressman Garrett’s regressive ideas and policies. Here’s an excerpt illustrating Garrett’s unwillingness to admit fault despite leading the country into its current economic downturn:

“His political pronouncements and his voting record clearly show one of his very favorite ideologies to be that of anti-regulation: Regulation by the government is wrong and will lead to catastrophes even worse than global warming. He is one of those, like Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairperson, who believes that the market, that amorphous collection of buying and selling, will punish investors who invest unwisely, and is thus self-correcting – no need for government regulation. The major difference between Mr. Garrett and Mr. Greenspan is that Mr. Greenspan, in light of the great recession of 2008-9, admits he was wrong. Mr. Garrett has made no such concession to the facts; he soldiers on spouting his anti-regulation ideology in the face of the typhoon of evidence to the contrary.”

Read the rest of Marty’s spot-on analysis of Garrett by clicking on the link below.

Retire Garrett Newsletter – Volume 2 Issue 1

Scott Garrett issued the following statement regarding the humanitarian disaster in Haiti:

“I am gravely concerned about the situation in Haiti. I am saddened over the tragic loss of life and I am remaining in close contact with the State Department regarding the state of the constituents from my district who were in Haiti at the time of the earthquake. My prayers are with their families and I will do everything I can to ensure their safe return home.”

Now, I’m not going to compare quotes or statements from others, but there is so much wrong with this statement, starting with the utter lack of compassion for the magnitude of this disaster. This “situation” in Haiti is something along the lines of 200,000 – 500,000 dead and a disaster “like no other in UN memory”.

Usually, one can tell a lot about someone by their initial thoughts or statements, or how they react to tragedy. In this case, I remember how Garrett was the only NJ Representative to vote AGAINST Katrina relief. Here, he makes no mention of the citizens of Haiti, the families of those who live in Haiti or anyone other than the people in his district who happened to be visiting at the time the earthquake struck.

What a guy.

Someone recently told me that Scott Garrett spends more on mailers to his district than any other Congressman or Congresswoman. And while I’d love to find out if that is actually true, I tend to ignore (probably foolishly) his 3 or 4 page glossy “newsletter” that I receive a few times each year. My reasoning is that I know his schtick – he routinely votes against bills that 400 other members of the House vote for because of some “technicality” and then tells his constituents that he is really in favor of the bill but couldn’t have it 100% his way so he has to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

So when I got his latest mailer, I tossed it with the rest of my recyclables (of course), but then had the fortune to come across this post by a former Goldwater conservative who hits fat cat CEO’s favorite Congressman right between the eyes with a brilliant takedown of the fluff, misdirection and outright twisting of the facts contained in Garrett’s latest mailer.

I won’t repeat all of Michael Fremer’s arguments, especially since we have made them here  issue by issue, and there really is nothing new. He rails against the stimulus (which presumably would include the vote he cast against the largest middle class tax cut in history and scary teabagger talk about healthcare. That being said, it is refreshing to see someone say it so plainly when it comes to Garrett’s hypocrisy regarding unemployment:

“You offer no job creation plans in your email other than more tax cuts.“A job creation engine” was the supposed purpose of the Bush tax cuts for the rich back in 2001 that produced the weakest job growth out of a mild recession in recent history. All it produced was a deficit from what had been a projected surplus.

Had we allowed G.M. and other businesses to fail, the unemployment rate would now be catastrophic, yet that would have been your “solution.”

So I find your carping about unemployment churlish and dishonest.

Lest we forget that Garrett’s proposed solutions include his very own stimulus bill that he introduced consisting entirely of corporate tax breaks. When Wall Street needs more tax breaks, they call on their “Hero” to champion a bill for them. And when AIG executives want to keep the bonuses they paid out from Government money, they call on “Wall Street Hero” Scott Garrett. But when families in his district are struggling, they get smacked in the face by his votes and his disingenuous rhetoric.

Cross posted from Blue Jersey – hat tip to Jason Springer, who wrote this originally.

*************

In an effort to make sure gay people cannot share the love, members of Congress – notably New Jersey’s Scott Garrett – are ready to hit the courts in order to overturn the recent passage of Marriage Equality in Washington, D.C. It amazes me how they will set aside core principles in order to fit an ideology:

Thirty-nine congressional Republicans, including House Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.), have filed an amicus brief in D.C. Superior Court calling for a voter referendum on whether to legalize same-sex marriage in the District.

Joe Sudbay made this note over at Americablog about how Republicans are now moving to the courts to get the results they want here:

Just leave it to Republicans to think a public vote to strip away the rights of citizens is a good idea. Funny, in a hypocritical way, how Republicans are always bashing lawyers and lawsuits, but run to the courts when they can thwart equality.

It’s kind of ironic he’s joining them in the effort when you look back at this legislation Congressman Garrett has sponsored:

A quicker and more effective solution was published here a few issues back by Congressman John Hostettler. It would use Congress’ Article I, Section 8 and Article III, Sections 1 and 2 powers to limit the jurisdiction of inferior federal courts and to set exceptions to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. His bill, H.R. 3313 (co-sponsored by congressmen Mike Pence, Nick Smith, Scott Garrett, Virgil Goode, Todd Aikin, Gil Gutknecht, Dave Weldon, Walter Jones, Roscoe Bartlett, Michael Forbes and Ron Paul), would remove federal court jurisdiction over the issue of marriage. This goes directly to the root problem and sends a shot across the bow of judicial activism everywhere. Massachusetts legislators could follow the same path if inspired by national leaders and solve their problem now, whereas even a state constitutional amendment would come too late to stop the courts from legalizing same sex marriages. And the bill only needs a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate to go into effect.

If I’m following along correctly, Garrett wants to go to court to ask them to do something he wants to take away their power to do? So the moral of the story for Republicans like Scott Garrett is that activist judges are bad, bad, bad, unless they’re being active for things you believe in.