brucemaples dot com

The esteemed senator from Kentucky is so concerned about federal debt that he refuses to extend unemployment benefits past Sunday. Because of his single NO vote, millions of people will lose their unemployment on Monday.

So, Mr. Bunning, how concerned have you been about debt, and about everyday people, in the past? Let's take a look, shall we?

• 2005 -- Voted WITH the credit-card industry on the bankruptcy bill.


• 2005 -- Voted WITH oil companies by giving them more tax breaks.


• 2006 -- Voted FOR higher deficits by extending the Bush Tax Cuts.


• 2007 -- Voted AGAINST children by opposing S-CHIP.


• 2008 -- Voted AGAINST helping people facing foreclosure.


• 2009 -- Voted AGAINST women by opposing the Ledbetter Act.


• 2009 -- Voted AGAINST children again by opposing S-CHIP.


• 2010 -- Voted AGAINST reducing the debt by opposing the Debt Commission.

Given a chance to help the poor and helpless, Senator, you have voted against them almost every time. And given a chance to stand for fiscal responsibility, you voted FOR the Bush tax cuts and AGAINST the Debt Commission.

Your angry NO vote on unemployment benefits isn't a principled stand against unrestrained spending, as you claim. It is a pathetic attempt by a grumpy old man to prove to himself that he is still relevant.

Up to this point, Senator, your votes followed a predictable Republican pattern. With this vote, you have fallen below even that standard, and set a new low for meanness. Even your Republican peers are embarrassed by your hatefulness.

The only good thing that may come out of this is a change in the Senate rules. Republicans and Democrats alike are trying to figure out a way to prevent this in the future. I think they should name it after you: the Jim Bunning Don't-Be-an-Ass Rule. If that happens, you can retire in peace, knowing that you were, after all, relevant.