There is a surprising feeling among the assorted right-wingers and centrists of my association that Democrat or no, she has, Iraq campaign votes aside, been pretty representative of the District and done more for the District than her Republican predecessor, Jim Ryun. I've not taken the time (I frankly don't have it at the moment - I'll leave it to others) to do a piece-by-piece examination of Ryun's legislative record vice Boyda's - what's important, especially in the political sphere - is the general consensus of opinion was a politcally-reluctant conclusion that Ms. Boyda was in general exceeding their expectations on most metrics if not the one that is not surprisingly most important among my highly-but-not-exclusively military circle of correspondents.

All of them feel kicked in the teeth, in a sense, by the events of last Friday, as reported. Some have taken a "Ah, she's showing her true colors!" attitude, shading into "She's parroting the Party Leadership, who are making her march to the drum" to - "Damn, she really needs a lot of education about the military if she thinks Jack Keane is a shill for anybody." And there's a real grumbling about she needs a lot of education about war, warfighting, and the difference between the role of Congress and the role of the President on the issue of who does what.

My own feeling is that Ms. Boyda thus far has been batting about .600 on my issues - that's an unweighted scale, mind you. Doesn't mean I'm going to support her for re-election, we'll have to see who the competition puts up. But while I'm reliably Right Wing, and I'm aware of the strategic issues involved in party politics, I decided long ago to eschew doing my bloviating from a purely partisan perspective.

I think it's paid dividends - I've far more access and with that I have *some* influence with Congresswoman Boyda's office than I *ever* did with Jim "Send 'em the standard boilerplate" Ryun. Influence in that I know my voice is heard, and my opinions respected - which is *not* the same thing as accepted... which is fine. But that approach to blogging and politics is why I bring this up - from the Congressional Record, Boyda's floor speech in support of the Accountability in Congress legislation - which she is a co-author of. Because Iraq campaign aside - she *is* doing good stuff, and she ought to get credit for that, too:

Chair: Pursuant to the order of the House of January 4, 2007, the gentlewoman from Kansas (Mrs. Boyda) is recognized during morning-hour debate for 3 minutes.

Rep. Nancy Boyda [D-KS]: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of accountability in Congress. This year, taxpayers will pay the retirement benefits for Dan Rostenkowski, Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney. What do these men have in common? All are retired Members of the U.S. House of Representatives. All are convicted criminals. Each abused his office by committing fraud, bribery or conspiracy, and each was found guilty in Federal court.

Despite their convictions, these three representatives and over a dozen other former lawmakers remain eligible to draw taxpayer-funded pensions for their service. The exact amount of the payments vary, of course, but the average is about $47,000 per year. That's more than the average American makes. Let me tell you, it's certainly more than the average Kansan makes. Certainly a lot more than the average person in the Second District of Kansas makes.

Mr. Speaker, when the new majority was sworn into the House of Representatives, we had a clear mandate from Americans--End the scandals. Clean up Congress. We've already taken meaningful first steps toward reform. In our first days, we passed an ethics package that banned Members from accepting gifts from lobbyists. We blocked representatives from flying on corporate jets. And we prevented Congressmen from pressuring businesspeople to fire or hire for political reasons.

That last one to me is especially important. Before this Congress, our Congressmen were out there actually influencing people and saying, if you don't agree with my politics, we're asking you to hire or fire businesspeople. It was so wrong.

But our work is not done and it never will be done as long as convicted criminals can draw a congressional pension. Congress can and should revoke the pensions of convicted lawmakers. But for decades now, even as payments have totaled millions of dollars, this body has quietly ignored the problem. But no longer. Today, the bill we will consider this afternoon incorporates legislation that I authored to strip the pensions of these crooked lawmakers. The final bill also sets limits on the so-called revolving door of lawmakers who are turning into lobbyists, and it imposes financial disclosure requirements on the lobbying industry. Sunlight is the best disinfectant and we need a whole lot more transparency still.

Taken together, these changes represent the most significant ethics overhaul to pass the Congress in decades. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. By enacting these sweeping reforms, Congress can begin to recover from the long years of scandal and corruption. Congress can begin to earn back Americans' trust.

Key phrase is "Begin to earn back" Heh. One thing you learn as a leader - never assume trust, and *always* work to earn it. Don't work to *keep* it, that's coasting. Always work as if you are *earning* it - and you'll do fine.