The news today from Arkansas's First Congressional District, where I grew up, is that Representative Marion Berry (not to be confused with Marion Barry) will not seek a seventh term in office. It's a bad year for holders of that office—Berry's predecessor in the seat is present Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln, who is consistently numbered among the most vulnerable Democrat senators up for re-election this year. She will likely fall to Gilbert Baker's campaign this Fall.
Of course, the retirement of yet another Democrat lawmaker is hardly news worthy of blogging considering the pallor of the Donkey's complexion these days. What is remarkable is what Berry had to say about the attitude of our President. For the complete story together with commentary, see James Taranto's story in the Wall Street Journal, aptly entitled "You've Got Me, Babe." The money quote: "Well, the big difference here and in '94 was you've got me."
Title quote by Dante Alighieri, Inferno 6.73-75
16 comments:
"Well, the big difference here and in '94 was you've got me."
No disrespect to our President, but do the Dems still want him? At least the ones who tread the knife's edge at each election?
Andrew,
I suspect that the answer to your question will come in the form of Air Force One sitting on the tarmac at Andrews AFB a lot more than the President had anticipated. Candidates are unlikely to request his campaign assistance as much as they might have thought that they would a year ago.
In my opinion, many people who "sit on the fence" that voted for the Obamassiah honestly believed that he was going to live up to the rhetoric of change and that he was not going to be one of the Washington Fat Cats but instead would look out for the interest of the little guy.
What they got was the most dangerous socialist this country has ever seen. I'm hoping the Massachussets election is just a harbinger of things to come in the upcoming election.
I can't believe he would say that.
At any rate, I am glad that there will, apparently, be a reigning in of the excesses of the last year - to the extent that can be done. Some of the stimulus money is out the door and the damage will come in the form of inflation.
At any rate, I believe that the Republicans run a risk if they focus only on the healthcare issue or do too much bragging at this point.
I would say that it was not only healthcare that caused the administration a problem. But also the way they have handled (or not handled) security. The stimulus is also an issue.
But the Republicans need to remember that the Democrats were successful in pointing out the failings of and issues surrounding healthcare. There are a lot of uninsured people who will lose everything they own if they face a major illness. That is not going away.
Still, it will be interesting to watch.
Louis
Bart:
I know you were not trying to be political by labeling this under Barrack Hussein Obama. He is President Obama whether you like it or not. But I know you and others are rejoicing in his failure. What a great thing his failure is for the American people. I'm sure you could not bare the thoughts of him succeeding.
Tom,
Whatever I've done or however I've labeled something, I know that I can count on you to hang around and read the worst possible interpretation of it, speculating the most horrific motives possible on my part.
You need to let it go, brother, for your own good.
Louis,
It is a severe comment, no doubt. From someone who has spent a little bit of time with Rep. Marion Berry, I believe that he is credible in this account.
You also do well to note that Republicans must not grow complacent. These are volatile times. People don't know what they want their government to do; they just know that they aren't doing it.
As a response to Tom's wrongheaded (again...strike three) accusation towards me, I provide the text of a comment in which I explained my policy back on 3 November 2008:
**************BEGIN QUOTED MATERIAL************
Bill,
I think that some of the sentiments expressed in my post echo those with which you've chosen to upbraid me. I regularly use President Bush's middle initial when referring to him. Is it disrespectful to refer to a person by name?
John McCain's middle name…to tell you the truth, I don't know what it is. So I didn't use his middle name. But in general, when considering the election and inauguration of a person to office, it is normal to employ the full name on such a formal occasion. I'm betting that Nixon wasn't all that fond of "Milhous" either, but rising to such prominent position normally means that people start to employ your full name from time to time.
I think you'll find copious occasion throughout my blog where I've simply gone with first, last. And if he is elected, I will begin to refer to him as President Obama, although perhaps at times by fuller name for variety's sake.
*********** END QUOTED MATERIAL ************
Bart:
There is some exciting new for Republicans today:
1 story about Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer of South Carolina (R)
and 1 story about the 4 attempting to wiretap the senator from louisiana's phone.
Tom,
I'm asking you to apologize for your previous comment, which attributed to me motives that I did not have.
Republicans lost in 2008 because Bush gave us a recession and unprecedented deficits. Brown won in 2010 because under Obama the recession lingers and we have unprecedented deficits. The nation has an official 10% unemployment (real unemployment 20%). To parrot a political truism: "It's the economy stupid."
Obama is also shackled in a malaise of red ink. Government spending will dwarf revenue again this year. Deficits are projected to be enormous even five years out. Like administrations before it (excepting Bill Clintons's), Obama is seen as incapable of managing the nation's credit card.
Bart:
I apologize for atributing motives to you that you did not have. I will strive to do a better job of not guessing at other's motives.
Tom Parker:
That was really neat.
I was not involved in the exchange, but I appreciate what you did.
Hope your day is a really good one.
Louis
First of all, Baur was NOT comparing unemployed people or children to stray animals. He was making the very clear point that if you give someone somthing they are not entitled to for long enough, the begin to expect it as a right and that some people take no thought to the consequences of their actions (i.e. someone who can't support themselves or the children they have choosing to have more children). I was glad he said it. Somebody needed to.
Oh, I am beyond happy to see that the Obamassiah's plans may very well fail.
Tom,
Thanks for the apology. I appreciate it and will mention the matter no more.
I welcome your often-opposing viewpoint on this site. Keep it as sharp as you like, but let's keep it civil. We'll find enough to differ over, I imagine, without having to invent anything! Your apology goes a long way in that direction. When I step over the line, feel free to point it out to me.
Bart:
You said:"Tom,
Thanks for the apology. I appreciate it and will mention the matter no more.
I welcome your often-opposing viewpoint on this site. Keep it as sharp as you like, but let's keep it civil. We'll find enough to differ over, I imagine, without having to invent anything! Your apology goes a long way in that direction. When I step over the line, feel free to point it out to me."
I promise you I appreciate your willingness to show me grace and I assure you I will be civil from this day forward. I look forward to our learning from each other.
Post a Comment