Does anyone remember the 2006 primary campaign, where Tim Walberg was constantly attacking then-Congressman Joe Schwarz? Does anyone remember the repeated lines about the "Bridge to Nowhere" that Joe Schwarz supposedly supported?

In fact, I think it's safe to say that if there were three things that Walberg wanted you to know about Joe Schwarz, it was that he was pro-abortion, he was anti-gun, and he voted for the Bridge to Nowhere, so obviously he wants to waste your tax dollars.

Do all of you remember that? Thankfully, Susan Demas does. In a column this week, she points out something everyone apparently missed. Walberg has kept up his anti-earmark and anti-"Bridge to Nowhere" rhetoric even as he voted for it himself.

"The American people are disgusted by Washington's wasteful, pork-barrel spending. Taxpayers are tired of their hard-earned money paying for things like a bridge to nowhere in Alaska, fruit fly research in France and a hippie museum in New York." - U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) on Feb. 8, 10 months after he voted for said bridge to nowhere

Help me again on why we needed to send Tim Walberg back to Washington.

He was going to take fight the tax-and-spend power. That's why he and his pals Club for Growth ran non-stop ads to knock off another Republican, then-U.S. Rep. Joe Schwarz, slamming him for voting for a rainforest in Iowa, a swimming pool in California and yes, that bridge to nowhere.

And yet Walberg voted for H.R. 1495, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, which the free-market Heritage Foundation blasts as a "pork-laden" bill "intent on diverting taxpayer dollars from core responsibilities to water-sports and other low-priority schemes. Indicative of this bill's misplaced spending priorities is the authorization of more money for one of Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) infamous Bridges to Nowhere."

(Emphasis added.)

"But, that's not fair!" shout those that would defend Walberg. After all, it's not like he voted for the Bridge to Nowhere, he just voted for a big, massive bill, HR 1495, which just so happened to include a wasteful earmark! It's nothing like Joe Schwarz! Walberg is still the maverick conservative, out to fight for smaller government!

Except, that when Joe Schwarz voted for the same sort of earmark, it was under exactly the same circumstances--Schwarz voted for a massive bill where Congressman Don Young managed to slip it in. Schwarz was torn apart by his own party over this, because there was a lot of good in the bill, and it was worth it to put up with some pork in order to get it through. That's the way Washington works, as Tim Walberg has apparently learned.

It bothers me that Congressman Walberg criticized Joe Schwarz for something and then went and did the same thing. It bothers me a lot. But you know what bothers me more? Re-read Demas' column:

"The American people are disgusted by Washington's wasteful, pork-barrel spending. Taxpayers are tired of their hard-earned money paying for things like a bridge to nowhere in Alaska, fruit fly research in France and a hippie museum in New York." - U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) on Feb. 8, 10 months after he voted for said bridge to nowhere

That's right. Walberg was complaining about the "Bridge to Nowhere" wasteful spending after he voted for it himself. He is as responsible for the "disgusting" way Washington works as anyone else.

Demas closes her column:

I could give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, appropriations bills are thousands of pages long. Of course you end up voting for some earmarks you don't agree with.

But I don't recall Walberg being so charitable to the "embarrassingly liberal" Schwarz. And I don't see Club for Growth blasting Walberg for the exact crimes it's slandered its latest victims for, moderates U.S. Reps. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) and Heather Wilson (R-NM). Nice going, CFG. Keep pushing radical candidates and you'll help the Dems pick up another 30 seats in the House and help them reach the magic number of 60 in the Senate.

Since he's no longer the pork-fighting prince, I look forward to Walberg telling us exactly why he deserves to go back to the city of Satan, as John McCain says. Maybe Timmy can send out another campaign ad, er, educational piece at taxpayer expense.

Thanks, Susan.

Labels: 110th Congress, Issues, Tim Walberg, Walberg Voting Record