It pains us- you have no idea- to continue to serve as a mouthpiece for Jim Ryun's campaign. But, oh, we simply cannot resist helping knock the snot out of Lynn Jenkins.
What follows is a letter written by Jim Ryun's campaign manager Kyle Robertson as found in the Kansas City Star:
Kansas treasurer should be accountable for TV adsSaying Kyle Robertson lives in Lawrence isn't a lie- as far was we know, he does. It's unfortunate to insinuate he's a Kansan, though, because Mr. Robertson is nothing more than a NRCC operative who has been sent from on high to manager Ryun's race for him. But, regardless, we're perfectly happy to help him let people know Lynn Jenkins is unethical- and just another member of the Republican Culture of Corruption.
Kansas state Treasurer Lynn Jenkins is under fire from the media for taking unethical campaign contributions from an American Century Investments’ then-CEO and chief lobbyist less than 60 days before awarding the company a $1.6 billion contract.
Instead of admitting that it was a mistake to take the contribution, she has repeatedly attacked those holding her accountable for her actions.
The media, especially in Kansas, has scrutinized her decision to run advertisements promoting a program that is at the forefront of her campaign as a 2nd District Republican candidate for Congress. (The Kansas City Star, Candidate’s links to firm questioned; Lynn Jenkins’ appearances in ads for a college-savings plan give her an unfair edge, Ryun campaign says, March 3).
She argues that it is her responsibility to appear in the ads because “polling shows” it is good for the program. This does not pass the smell test.
In order to deflect attention from her questionable judgment, Jenkins redirects the scrutiny onto American Century Investments, its lobbyist and her staff. She should be ashamed of herself for avoiding the real issue here: accountability.
Jenkins chose to accept unethical contributions, she chose to schedule time to film TV ads, and she chose to award a $1.6 billion contract to a firm that a “personal friend” just happens to represent. It must be nice to be one of her “personal friends.”
Jenkins appears to be exceptionally skilled at navigating the gray areas of campaign finance law and that should send a chill up Kansas taxpayers’ spines. In order to reduce the appearance of impropriety, Jenkins should return the political contributions and demand her name and image not be used in advertisements going forward.
More than $1.5 million in “management fees” have been spent promoting an obscure politician’s personal ambitions. This needs to stop.
The political smell test is simple: is this right or wrong?
Is it right to accept contributions from a CEO and lobbyist who profit off their relationship with her office?
Is it right to run such TV ads during a political campaign?
Is it right to attack the media for holding you accountable for your actions?
You be the judge.
Personal accountability is the foundation of a person’s character. Jenkins’ avoidance of accepting responsibility for her actions is troubling. Her unethical approach to politics is something Kansans should take into consideration when judging her candidacy.
She may argue that her “vote is not for sale” but who is she kidding? Kansans know when someone fails the smell test.
Kyle Robertson is the campaign manager for Jim Ryun, Jenkins’ GOP primary opponent. He lives in Lawrence.
What did you say? Jim's calling the kettle black? Well, by golly, you're right!
14 comments:
This story is going nowhere - Ryun is grasping at straws by attacking Jenkins - he must see the writing on the wall. Recall Ryun's ties to Foley, Abramoff, a million dollar townhouse...
More than $1.5 million in “management fees” have been spent promoting an obscure politician’s personal ambitions.
that's FANTASTIC!!
Right. Let's go over this one last time. Ryun bought the house above the assessed value and then dropped another $50k into house repairs that had to be done. I am not sure how that can be called a sweetheart deal. And it wasn't a million dollars, try in the neighborhood of $400k. Ryun's been pretty public about that. No secrets there.
Ryun's ties to Abramoff? One $250 donation in 1996 at a time when Majority Leader Harry Reid took $61,000 from Abramoff clients? Yeah, I am sure Ryun had super close ties with old Jackie boy, esp given all the votes Ryun cast AGAINST Abramoff backed gambling bills.
Hello, you all are the wacky left-you live on Google! Can't you find any of that on your own?
Ok, then how about paying his kids to help on the campaign, how about Tom Delay bail money, how about mis use of campaign funds. Ryuns ethics problems are only going to get worse, that is why he is attacking.
None of that passes the smell test either, but then the Ryuns can't smell.
they're both miserable alternatives to nancy boyda- and she's going to get re-elected because of it.
Nancy Boyda can only hope that Jim Ryun wins the primary.
That is the real reason Boyda Bloc has been putting this stuff out there. They don't like Jim Ryun but they know they have a better shot at beating him.
The great thing about nancy's republican opponents is that they BOTH have ethical problems
when jenkins responds and calls Ryun out for being unethical, i'm sure the blog will hit on that, too.
and, if you watch that video, it is much meaner to jim than it is to lynn...so, i guess, it's whatever you want to think...but your spin sucks
Why is it that whenever a republican complains about something they're engaging in that exact same behavior? It never fails, especially when it comes to republicans who rail against homosexuality.
republicans are hypocrites...that's all the explanation you need
I'm completely aware of that fact, but why doesn't it seem like republicans recognize it? They'd save themselves a lot of grief if they did.
lol... very true
personally...i think lynn jenkins is more unethical than ryun...i don't htink he ever did anything wrong, but she has obviously been horribly inappropriate.
jim's going to kick her butt
If Ryun was so confident that his house deal was above board, why didn't he simply take it to the House ethics committee in May? All he had to do was present his side and get their stamp of approval and nobody could have said a word about it.
He never took it to the ethics committee because he was scared. He knew that there was a good chance he would get an unfavorable decision. He was going to take it to them after the election, but after he lost he decided not to.
If he truly believed his home purchase was legal, ethical and completely above board he should not have had a problem taking the purchase to the ethics committee.
Post a Comment