The National Republican Congressional Committee has launched a new website against Kathy Boockvar, the Democratic challenger for PA-8 against Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks).
The website, titled “Radical Kathy,” attacks Boockvar as a radical leftist lawyer and includes articles to support their claims. The website’s is set up with a dark background, pictures of riots at “Occupy Wall Street” and other pictures of radical leftist movements.
The launch of this website coordinates with the NRCC’s definition of Boockvar as “a radical activist lawyer on the fringe of the left.”
“Boockvar’s troubling past makes her unfit to represent the people of Bucks County,” said NRCC Communications Director Paul Lindsay.
“With Washington Democrats’ big-government takeover of health care and reckless spending sprees that hamper economic recovery, Pennsylvania families don’t want a radical activist with a partisan agenda representing them in Congress.”
Boockvar Campaign manager Jon Blair said that this website is simply a distraction to Mike Fitzpatrick’s true nature and voting record.
“This is yet another blatant attempt to distract Pennsylvanians from Congressman Fitzpatrick’s record of voting the Tea Party agenda, rather than in the best interest of his constituents in Bucks and Montgomery counties. Try as he may, Congressman Fitzpatrick will not be able to hide from his actual votes to protect companies that outsource Pennsylvanian jobs, end Medicare as we know it and defund Planned Parenthood.”
The launch of this website could be seen as confirmation that Fitzpatrick and other Republicans are worried that the PA-8 seat could fall into Boockvar’s hands. Boockvar has put up a formidable fundraising effort thus far, and was deemed by PoliticsPA to be Congress’ second-most vulnerable seat in the state.
Loading ...
21 Responses
I looked at the “Radical Kathy” website, determined I could not possibly for her. After seeing their rendering of her record, I’m thinking she’s worth a second look.
Those guys are really bad at propaganda!
Reading the comments by you idiots moves me to contribute to the Boockvar campaign.
Jack Lyons
Doylestown
Susan Gibbons again doesn’t discuss the specific facts presented from Boockvar’s record. This women specifically says that HIV infected women who are drug users should not lose parental rights.
I can’t make this stuff up.
Radical Kathy also details how the prerequisite of the child’s welfare should only be a secondary thought when deciding whether or not a child belongs with the mother. That the mother’s addiction is irrelevant when deciding parental rights of the mother.
Interestingly she does not make the same claim for the father of a child, which seems sort of sexist and bigoted to me.
The book is scary and to think Radical Kathy is running for congress only makes it scarier.
Correcting an unfinished sentence .
Amendment IX
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”
And defending selfishness by implying it is what the founders wanted is refuted by the Constitution.
The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution’s fundamental purposes and guiding principles. It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers’ intentions regarding the Constitution’s meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The Constitution gives full legislative power to the congress to make all laws necessary and proper and they empower the legislators to collect the taxes to achieve the purpose.
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
Amendment IX
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by”
I added amendment 9 to establish that not everything was possible to be enumerated…so to say if its not in the Constitution its not legal is wrong. Social Security was not enumerated, Medicare was not enumerate, Unemployment compensation was not enumerated, and all passed the SCOTUS test. A nation cannot have a more perfect union, or promote the general welfare if people are dying in poverty and illness. How do people enjoy the blessings of Liberty or Prosperity if they sick, out of work, and have no hope?
The founders wanted a more perfect union. Given the life of the times in which the preamble was written, how would you define a more perfect union? They clearly wanted progress and did not want the status quo to remain.
To Plain Jane..
Her values are not yours. Too bad. What values are left? The values of me first? Ayn Rand values, “mans purpose is to make himself happy”?…
To Dr. Sklaroff..
There is nothing to refute, her work is very admirable…very much in the keeping with Christian/Judeao principles.
To define the downtrodden, the recovered mothers, the minorities and women as “small people” defines the mindset of the republicans who believe there the “small people” and themselves. Class warfare.
A very wealthy woman in NY went to jail for not paying taxes, she learned her lesson that her belief that only the “little people” pay taxes was not true. There are no “small people” or “you people” …just people.
Standing up for mothers who have gone through rehab is not standing up for drug addicted mothers. To say a mother who has gone through rehab does not guarantee sobriety is like saying taking swimming lessons guarantees you will not drown. NOTHING in life is guaranteed, and no one ever asks the kids what they want. The goal is to help put a family together and there is lots of merit in that .
Boockvar is basically a socialist. She will lose badly.
Why is it that the Republican party has to constantly use “scare tactics” and falsehoods, statements taken out of context to get people’s attention? I am so sick of it. I am switching my party – to Democrat.
As might be expected from those in the party of BHO, Boockvar’s supporters cannot refute the factual allegations on this website.
And, as might be expected from those in the party of BHO, invoking “moral egalitarian” logic [“I just might not vote”] by creating a false-premise [” an inarticulate, phony career politician like Fitzpatrick”] cannot be justified.
Although it’s always wise to run as if the race is close, it is unclear why Mike should be perceived as endangered.
I am so sick and tired of my choices being a left-wing nut job and an inarticulate, phony career politician like Fitzpatrick. I just might not vote.
Kathy Boockvar’s record is one of taking the extreme position on each issue. Her book that is quoted on the site claims that drug addict women should receive full parental rights. She specifically details that when a mother of a child goes thru a rehab program, that the courts should not use the welfare of the child as the measurement on whether to return custody to the mother.
I wish I could make this up.
She sees the courts that remove children on the grounds of neglect from drug addicted and/or HIV positive women as a move by the state against women in an attempt to subjugate them.
Again, I wish I could make this up.
This goes beyond abortion (which she argues should be “unfettered” in all cases) she wants to put the child into a situation that is not judged to be healthy for the child but rather is judged by whether the mother has completed a program. Which is no guarantee of sobriety and with addiction being the life long battle that it is it should not be the only prerequisite for custody.
This is the extreme position of Kathy Boockvar and this is only the tip of the ice berg.
If you want to do something really good for yourself, your fellow citizens of all economic classes, your beautiful Bucks County, and your country, VOTE FOR KATHY BOOCKVAR for congress.
She has the 3 C’s required for government service: Compassion, Commitment, and Competence! Regardless of your party, go listen to her speak, you will come away impressed.
Susan,
Her values certainly aren’t mine.
This is one of the most moderate districts in the state. Jim Greenwood held the seat for so long because he was a master at walking the Bucks County tightrope.
I’m not sure if Fitzpatrick is enough of a centrist to hold the seat for much longer but Boockvar certainly won’t be long for this world in Bucks county if she tries to run a hard left campaign.
Kathy Boockvar must be doing something right. Voter’s will see through the scary words. She will win.
You are correct, she stands for all the small people. That is good but she wants to do it on tax payer money. More spending, higher taxes, more central DC control. NOT what the founders wanted.
By the way, “radical” has been demonized by the wing nuts. Do they forget our Founders were “radicals”?
Boockvar, right up there with the founders.
It actually makes her more likeable. She stands up for the downtrodden, mothers turning their lives around, the minorities and women. She defends the truth…and the right of voters not to be intimidated. She is everything I want in a representative, and she is everything the bigots and racists hate.