Kathy Weppner : So Proud of Her Radio Program She Deleted All Evidence of It

On her website, Republican candidate for Congress in NY-26 Kathy Weppner adds this to her biography: 

She began her broadcasting career on WBEN’s Straight Talk with Kathy Weppner in 2005 focusing on citizen advocacy and engagement in the political process. On air, Kathy earned a reputation as a strong voice for those who have a difficult time speaking for themselves due to inequity in power. She intends to carry that voice to Washington to help overcome the unique challenges facing Western New York.

Being a strong voice for the weak sure sounds good, but is that really what she did? Until she declared, her site was still up. Then she scrubbed a few especially outrageous items from it. Then she got rid of the whole site, but it was still available on the Internet Archive

Here is Kathy Weppner’s website archive as of Sunday afternoon.



If you can’t defend what you say when no one’s paying attention, how can you say you deserve the voters’ trust? This candidacy just got a whole lot more interesting, and I’m going to spend this week culling what we still can about “Kathy from Williamsville”, starting with her several calls to the Rush Limbaugh program. 


  • Lamont Cranston

    Like all teabaggers, she’s a coward and a liar.

    • True dat.

      I love how so many conservatives think they’re so macho….as they hide behind their guns. Never have I seen such a frightened, wimpy crowd of misfits.

      • Can we stop correlating all conservatives with the Tea Party? I can make the very same statement as you did for those on the far left. All parties have a vocal group whose members’ views reflect badly on the party as a whole. I lean toward the right and certainly identify more as a conservative than a progressive, and am certainly not a Sarah Palin worshipping Tea Party associate.

        Furthermore, guns are not a Conservative issue, nor are they a Tea Party issue. In WNY especially, gun owners are more likely to be registered Democrats than Republicans.

        • I’m not sure about that….gun owners tend to be more conservative than democrat especially here in WNY (might be different in NYC) City people tend to vote democrat as opposed to republican. The NRA has long associated itself with the reps/cons and I don’t think you will see Mr Leppier speaking at any liberal/dem conventions in the near future…wheras he is usually a regular at the rep/con get togethers….

          • In my sportsmens club, 90% of the membership are blue collar union members, who largely support Democrats, but are now voting Republican based on the gun control issue. I can say the same for a lot of other sportsmens clubs that we work with.

            The NRA only represents a very small percentage of gun owners. I, for instance, am not a member.

          • Sad to see these folks voting against their own economic and political interests just because of guns. It makes you wonder where their real priorities are.

          • if that’s true, it’s insane.

          • Not really. I spent a lot of energy making sure my firearms were compliant under the old laws. Now, I had to spend a lot of time and money to (hopefully) be sure my firearms are in compliance with the new laws. You can be sure I’m angry about it, as are a lot of others.

          • I understand that. However voting for Republicans who would be tickled to death to see unions disappear, if you belong to a union, is insane. It is their livelihood at stake compared to a pissmeoff. I agree with BFL on this one.

        • Very true. I guess I’m just annoyed more by the idiocy currently streaming from the far right.

        • The far left is a small minority with little if any voice or political power, the far right now dominates the Republican Party, I don’t think the comparison as equals is valid. I agree our political debate would benefit from more reasonable conservatives making a credible argument instead of allowing the crazy fringe to seize the agenda.
          Gun owners can be of any political persuasion but gun fanatics fall solidly on the right. Guns are like a religion to these fanatics and conservative politicians shamelessly pander to their paranoia and delusions.

          • It’s funny, because I feel that both parties are dominated by the small vocal minorities.

            Also from my perspective, and to borrow from your statement:

            Gun owners can be of any political persuasion but gun control fanatics fall solidly on the left. Gun control is like a religion to these fanatics and liberal politicians shamelessly pander to their paranoia and delusions.

            Fanaticism is bad on both sides.

          • Most observers would agree the far right is much more organized powerful, and visible. As I stated, they pretty much own the Republican Party. The left really doesn’t have much influence, most Democrats are moderates or even lean right on some issues.
            Some gun control advocates do fall on the left but most are moderates looking for a reasonable middle ground (suburban moms come to mind). There is no benefit to a politician to advocate for gun control, the pushback from the NRA and the pro-gun lobby is overwhelming. In my opinion it takes real balls to stand up against these thugs, few politicians Democrat or Republican have that kind of courage.

  • Kathy is such a soldier-groupie that I wonder how much influence she had in THREE of her 5 kids signing up. It’s like your frustrated poser sports Dad getting you to sign up for 3 different baseball leagues.

    • KathyWeppnerNY26


      • I’d go with Larry’s advice and “seek gods help”, you sure won’t be able to convince many voters with your message of ignorance, hate, and intolerance.

          • What’s this got to do with the price of tea in China?

          • BlackRocklifer brings up intolerance. Just pointing out the intolerance of Governor Cuomo.

          • Being intolerant of someone for something they can’t help (being black, being gay, being female, being of a particular ethnicity, religion, or nationality) is different from Cuomo saying that there’s no place in New York politics for ultra-right wing douchebags.

          • So if folks can’t help believing and having faith in a particular religion, and their religion requires them to reject the idea of same-sex marriages, abortion, etc., how is it that intolerance of these viewpoints is acceptable to you?

          • Intolerance of intolerance has marked the upward progress in this nation since its birth. Americans shouldn’t tolerate bigotry and ignorance and the coming electoral whupping that Kathy Weppner: American Cretin is going to experience will further prove Cuomo’s point.

          • I sincerely hope Weppner gets trounced, but intolerance is intolerance. Cuomo’s assertions were just plain wrong. He is intolerant of anyone who disagrees with him.

          • He was stating a political fact. Tea party is lucky to break 30% in any statewide race, and that’s what Cuomo was saying.

          • 1. Cuomo’s statement in question wasn’t related to the “Tea party” (and didn’t distinguish “statewide” races), but to specific issue viewpoints that are mainstream among NY state Republican voters.

            Two views that Cuomo said “have no place in the state of New York”: right-to-life and being pro-(so called)-assault-weapon-rights, are both mainstream opinions of NY state Republicans says recent polling from Quinnipeac (NYS R voters oppose legal abortion, 49%-41%, crosstabs here) and Sienna (NYS R voters oppose the SAFE Act, 54%-39%, crosstabs here).

            2. To your point about “lucky to break 30% in any statewide race”, the same could also be said about the Green Party and the Socialist Party.

            Yet Cuomo would never, ever say candidates of the Greens or Socialists “have no place in the state of New York” as he directly did about R politicians who are right-to-life or favor assault weapon rights for example.

            So, Farmerjohn seems correct about Cuomo revealing intolerance.

          • When being a member of a political party or movement is included within the definitions of a protected class for purposes of discrimination legislation, you can get back to me on the furious parsing of an offhand remark that Cuomo made when discussing statewide races and a schism in the NYS Republican Party – which for decades had been nominally conservative on fiscal issues and pretty liberal on social issues.

            I remember guys like Bill Weld very fondly. No sarcasm.

            In the meantime, if you’re running a statewide race as a tea party conservative who is any or all of those things – anti-abortion gun hugging homophobes – you’re not going to win. That was the discussion that was being held, not one about the already wildly marginalized Green or Socialist Parties. Indeed – you get back to me when either the Greens or Socialists start getting transformed into astroturf by billionaires’ PACs so as to create a Randian dystopia, or get even a microscopic fraction of the attention that the Paladino/Trump tea party cretins get in this state.

          • Lamont Cranston

            So if folks can’t help believing and having faith in a particular religion, and their religion requires them to reject the idea that black people are humans, I guess we should make sure there aren’t any laws that might offend the tender sensibilities of those folks. FREEDOM!!!!!1!

          • But that’s not what we’re talking about at all is it? Dehumanizing black people isn’t the same as humanizing fetuses.

          • Lamont Cranston

            I thought we were talking about whether or not we should be tolerant of everyone’s religious beliefs. I guess you think some religious beliefs should be tolerated and others should not.

          • You’re exactly right, I do. But what Alan said was that people cannot help being religious, and therefore should not have to suffer intolerance. But when those same people practice their religion by morally rejecting single-sex marriage and abortion, then they are ultra-right wing douchebags and should be subject to intolerance. But what if I’m an ultra left wing douchebag who happens to be completely against abortion? Do I no longer have a place in this state? What if I support late-term abortions and am against a ban on “assault weapons”? I still don’t have a place in the state? That’s just wrong.

            It seems to me that the criteria for being able to live in the state of NY are:

            1) Have progressive liberal viewpoints.

          • My point is that religion is a protected class under federal and state civil rights statutes. Being a conservative isn’t.

          • Hey now. I resemble that remark.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.