« D/A endorses Mowen | Main | »

March 10, 2006

Is Evans anti-defense?

The D/A has a story today in which GOP congressional hopeful Andrea Zinga is quoted as saying, "The first and foremost thing we can do is get a congressman who is not considered so anti-defense."

The suggestion that Lane Evans is somehow anti-defense has come up repeatedly over the years. I personally think it's off toward the bs end of the meter, but let's assume for the sake of discussion that it's an open question. In which case, what specifically has Evans done and what specific votes has he cast that would support the notion that he's "anti-defense?"

It's an open book test. The legislative page on Evans Congressional website has issues information and links to official House voting records and bill texts. The Evans page on Project Vote Smart has tons of voting/financial/special interest information.

So, where is the justification for the charge?

Posted by jcb at March 10, 2006 05:14 PM


This is so unfair of Zinga. She is always badmouthing one of the great leaders of our time. She is a very shallow person to attack a man that is going through so much. I hope the Republicans are silly enough to elect her and not either of the other two. Evans will beat her worse than the last time.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 11, 2006 11:59 AM

Isn't Evans the highest ranking dem on the armed services committee?

Posted by: Anonymous at March 11, 2006 01:43 PM

"one of the great leaders of our time"

You gotta be kidding me!!

Posted by: Anonymous at March 11, 2006 11:37 PM

As for Zinga saying Evans is "anti-defense", I take that with a grain of salt. Republicans are inclined to say Democrats are "anti-defense" with the same regularity that Democrats are inclined to call Republicans "greedy bigots, who hate blacks, women, children, the working class, trial lawyers," etc. Whatever.

The Project Vote Smart page was interesting. Lane only got a 25% on national security issues, although he was big on women/noncom servicepeople issues, so it's possible a case could be made that Lane is anti-defense. Andrea will have to give us some proof if she expects to win over the skeptical.

The most interesting thing I saw about Evans' voting record was that he had 100% rating from NARAL (no surprise, really) and only an 8% rating from National Taxpayer Union. Hey Lane--- connect the dots. Stop aborting our future taxpayers!

Posted by: paladin at March 12, 2006 04:19 PM

Oh yeah, one more thing I found interesting about Lane Evans on the Project Vote Smart page----except for a brief period (80-82) when he was in private practice, Lane's livelihood has been taxpayer financed. Wow!

Posted by: paladin at March 12, 2006 04:37 PM

It doesn't matter if Lane is pro or anti-defense, we love him for who he is. Thank heavens for Lane Evans, Mike Jacobs, Pat Verschoore and Mike Boland. What a great Democrat Team for our area!

Posted by: MrDemocrat at March 12, 2006 07:34 PM

Evans is the workhorse of this area. Lay off Lane Evans.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 13, 2006 07:29 AM

Why is it that the Evans supporters behave as if this is the Soviet Union and they are the commissars and must squelch all dissent? Evans is running for his bazillionth term, backed by the Politburo and in a gerrymandered district. Why can't Evans take criticism and dissent?

Maybe the commissar who commented @7:29 AM can shed some light as to why Evans and his proles are so thin-skinned. Evans is obviously a seasoned pol and ought be able to handle himself.

Maybe the commissar @7:29 AM is just being protective of Evans, since he is in fragile health. If true, say so, but your attempt to shut me up is just hilarious. Nice try, though.

Posted by: paladin at March 13, 2006 04:31 PM

These people are picking on Lane because they know that he can't defend himself. This is dirty politics at its worst. Evans does a great job for the people. Pick on someone else. Evans deserves better. He is a veteran after all.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 14, 2006 08:24 AM

Anon@8:25 AM gives the perfect reason why Evans should either be defeated or drop out of the race. If Evans can't even defend himself when his own constituents question/criticize him, how is he able to defend and promote our local interests in the cutthroat world of DC politics?

Also, I don't know what the hell being a veteran has to do with Lane's inability to defend himself.

Hmmmmmm---I guess Lane could always pull a Denny and resign a few months after the election (if he wins!) due to "health reasons" so the Politburo can handpick his successor. Wouldn't that be sweet?

Posted by: paladin at March 14, 2006 10:45 AM

It's astounding that Evans' supporters see him as too weak to defend himself, and want the rest of us to see Lane as a weakling. How is this politically beneficial? Is this how Lane sees himself----too weak and helpless to answer questions or deal with dissent?

I don't expect to see much of Evans before October, but if there is an opportunity to see him in person, I intend to do so, in order to see if he is the feckless weakling his supporters claim he is.

Posted by: paladin at March 14, 2006 02:09 PM

I hope you feel better. Evans sickness has caused him to miss work for the first time in his carreer. Let him mend so that he can do the work that he is so good at.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 15, 2006 08:39 PM

good idea on your posting above Paladin.-that would be the smartest thing Evans could do is name a successor so the seat is not lost to a Replican or someone from the Green Party. You are genius!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2006 11:04 AM