Posted: June 16, 2011 at 7:46 am

With Sloppy Earmark, Dennis Rehberg Really Does Want to Hurt Your Kids

If you’re paying any attention to what Montana’s congressman is doing (Intelligent Discontent is), you probably know that Dennis Rehberg has spent the last two weeks defending his controversial earmark on a House spending bill.  The earmark, or “rider” as it is known, was so bad, Rehberg’s own party leaders had to pull it from the bill yesterday amid an uproar from health advocates and anti-smoking groups.

 

As The Hill reports:

 

“Rehberg’s language was seen as controversial, and even Rehberg himself agreed to remove the language from the bill.”

 

Whoa.  Why?

 

Immediately after Rehberg introduced and passed the earmark in his committee two weeks ago, the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids and the American Academy of Pediatrics—to name just a few—sent urgent warnings to members of Congress.

 

Rehberg tried to require the FDA to make regulations based only on what he calls “hard science.”  If he had his way, tobacco companies would get free rein to market cigarettes to kids by adding menthol and flavorings.  It means schools lunches don’t have to stick to basic nutrition standards.  The unintended consequences of Rehberg’s sloppy earmark abound.

 

But apparently Rehberg had no clue about the controversy until just this week, when he finally agreed to pull his earmark under intense pressure from everyone but Montana’s press corps.

 

That’s right, major national newspapers have been covering the Rehberg earmark daily.

 

The LA Times editorialized even against it.  U.S. News and World Report called it“gibberish”—slamming Montana’s Congressman in the process.  After this story crossed yesterday questioning Rehberg’s ties to big tobacco, his Twitter trend tanked.  Even Larry David’s ex-wife jumped into the debate (yes, that Larry David).

 

But incredibly, not a single newspaper or reporter in Montana has written about the controversial Rehberg earmark (I take that back, Missoula Independent, I guess you sort of did).

 

I know Montana editors aren’t known for allowing their reporters to aim for ace journalism, but come on!

 

As for the earmark itself, it’s yet another classic example of Rehberg shooting first, then asking questions later.

 

Sloppy legislation is what happens when, after a full decade in Congress, a lazy millionaire goat collector finally tries to do something other than name post offices.

 

16 comments

  1. Jackson89

    Just another case of Denny Rehberg inserting language into legislation he knows nothing about. He continues to critizize other lawmakers for not reading legislation before voting and we all know that Rehberg doesn’t have the intelligence to understand much of anything.
    The main difference between Conrad Burns and Rehberg is that Burns hired good staff members to do his work while Rehberg hires political hacks who are just as dumb as he is.
    The difference in the race between Tester and Rehberg is that Denny will continue to make stupid mistakes just like this and it will cost him the election.
    Thank goodness!

  3. Buckminster

    “What’s the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist or a sociologist and a geologist?”

    Are you f*ing joking? How does this idiot keep getting elected?

    • Lynn

      The fact that the owners of the “Newspapers” left in Montana support him totally… I’m amazed at how respectfully the news anchors are of him. It’s like you say a word against Denny and your fired…..

  5. Robert L.

    Natelson is the TEA Party lawyer and, as such, the legal theory and beliefs of his constituency does not stand up to academic standards. The TEA Party (like Derek Skees) believes that the Civil War was not fought over slavery but over “states’ rights.” The TEA Party believes that the only true citizens are males who are born to a male parent that was also born in America. They believe in nullification of federal laws. None of this garbage is true. It would be an embarrassment of the highest order for any academic institution to affiliate itself with such lunacy.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

      I’ve oftened wonder just WHAT Jack Mudd, a democrat, SAW in this idiot Natelson? I mean, my god, five minutes talking to the guy should be enough to show anyone he’s nuts. And yet Mudd paved the way for this guy to come to Montana. And Natelson has done irreparable harm ever since. Mudd should be embarrassed and ashamed of his “judgement” such as it is.

      Kudos to the U for doing the right thing. Looks like they FINALLY got a little revenge. Must be real hard to get rid of a nutjob once they have a teaching job therre or Natelson would have been gon looong ago.

      Any thoughts?

      • Moorcat

        Natelson – in my opinion based on what he has posted online – is the worst kind of lawyer. He decides what the outcome should be, then he tried to shoehorn it into the law. I decent lawyer would research what then law says, then make a determination. It does not surprise me at all that he was passed up for emeritus status.

  6. Hilarity

    There is some funny stuff being posted by the TEA party in defense of Natelson over at the Missoulian in the comments. Its like they took their “war on christmas” rhetoric and pasted in Natelson’s name instead of baby jeebus. If you are bored at work right now, go read it.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

      I’m gonna go read’em for sh*ts and giggles. NUTHIN’ more fun that watchin’ the teatards whine and cry ’bout there hero! Karma’s a funny thing, but by god even ol’ Bobby Nasalsound got his comeuppance! Luv it! Ooo! would I love to hear the comments at the facutly lounge at the U Law School! I’ll be them folks is absolutely REVELING in it! Good riddance to the nuttiest piece-o-crap that EVER taught at the U.! He besmirched our ENTIRE state with his nonsense! What did he expect? Flowers? What a loser.

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

        Well, I went and read’em. All the comments at the Missioulian.com. I always KNEW he was a slimey cheeseball, but the really powerful comments are the ones written by the folks who actually had to ENDURE his classes!

        Nasalsound is a freakin’ PSYCHOpath! And apparently a racist and a sexist. ‘Course, those are actually perfectly good teatard, conservative values! (Moorcat excepted I’m sure. Moorcat’s a different breed of cat) But for many extreme rightwingers, sexism is INDEED a value, as is racism. And Nasalsound exhibited ALL of these in the classroom, along with being a worldclass jerk.

        HENCE, it is only right that the U be done with this little worm. HEY, the worm turns! And THIS poor widdle worm WON’T now be able to put “emeritus” after his name when he writes his little crap articles for his conservative Kockh-funded “think tanks”.

        Ah gee, think I’ll shed a tear for Bobby……NOT!

        • Moorcat

          Thanks for the kind words, Larry, but I think you find that there are quite a few of us moderate conservatives that are just as done with the Tea Party (as well as the racist, sexist, god raptured Neocons) that have tried to take over the Republican Party. Many of us are Pre Reagan Republicans… you know, the ones that started the EPA, passed the Clean Air Act, etc. We may not be as progressive as you Democrats, but we are at least rational. Rehberg is an idiot that has bought into the Neocon mantra (well, as long as it makes him richer…). There are just as many Conservatives that are complaining about Rehberg as there are Liberals right now. Expect Rehberg to do an about face in the near future on some of his positions.

          As far as Natelson, he is a self serving wingnut that will never change. As I pointed out before, he will attempt to make the facts fit his conclusions rather than let the fact determine a conclusion. He is the very definition of a Neocon.

          As an aside, I spoke (online) with Wanzenried today and came away impressed. During the course of that “discussion”, he made a statement that floored me – not because of it’s truth (which is self evident), but because he is only the second politician I have met to say it –

          ” Politicians, it seems, rarely endear themselves to the electorate. In the 2011 Legislature, I detected an intentional willingness on the part of the majority to disrespect the will of the voters (initiatives especially) and the members of the public who came to testify on legislation. A “we know better than the voters” attitude for far too pervasive.”

          This is very similar to something Lindeen said in one of the conversations we had. By making this statement, Wanzenried has definitely gone to the front of the class as a candidate with me.

  7. Publius II

    Oh, what a tangled web the ‘Baggers’ weave, and BRILLIANT assessment of Denny’s ‘accomplishments’ in naming post offices and shilling for Corporations while Sen. Tester DRAMATICALLY raised mileage reimbursement for Veterans, helped get more centers up and running, asked TOUGH questions of the ‘Banksters’ while he was on banking committee and more……

    Denny’s shameless pandering to Corporations and the Tea/Koch Party speaks for itself.