Sacred Cods and Holy Mackerals

Obama, Wilson, and partisan gymnastics
September 10, 2009, 9:04 am
Filed under: Uncategorized

I thought President Obama’s speech was fantastic. (Then again, my politics can sometimes lean towards the Marxist commie pinko socialist Nazi end of the spectrum.) I didn’t realize that Aaron Sorkin was a speechwriter for Obama now. The last five minutes of that speech was something directly out of The American President or any one of Jeb Bartlett’s rainy night monologues on The West Wing. And I dug it.

I am a bit disappointed that South Carolina Rep. Jim Wilson backed down and apologized so quickly for his ourburst. He would have been received as the conquering hero on every right-wing show from Fox News in the morning, Rush and Glenn Beck in the afternoon, to Michael Savage at night. Sarah Palin would be bidding on a dinner with him. His constituents in Sakerlina would have built a statue of him next to John C. Calhoun. And Congress would have taken one step closer to resembling the British House of Commons. Oh well.

EDIT: Adamg over at reminds us that Wilson’s outburst may only rank as the second worst assault a South Carolina Congressman has perpetuated beneath the dome of the US Capitol.

The ongoing debate in the Massachusetts State Legislature over whether to allow Gov. Patrick to appoint an interim US Senator until the January special election is a great example of why partisan politics can be a dangerous game to play. The RIGHT thing is to allow for an interim appointment. John Kerry and Bill Delahunt were correct yesterday when they testified that Massachusetts voters deserve to be fully represented in Congress and there are hundreds of sensitive constitutent cases currently in limo.

But there is that nagging question: if these are viable concerns now, why weren’t these viable concerns back in 2004 and 2006 when the Mass. Legislature twice voted against allowing an interim appointment? Rep. Paul Frost – who hopefully someday will buy a suit that properly fits — asked the question of the day yesterday: If Kerry Healey was currently our governor, would they be here arguing so forcefully for an interim appointment? Naturally, it was a question that Kerry and Delahunt tried to duck.

So now legislative Democrats need to explain why they are going to vote for something they opposed purely for partisan reasons back in 2004 and 2006. And legislative Republicans are going to have to either vote for something they supported in 2004 and 2006, or appear like they’re caving in to Sen. Kennedy’s wishes. (Defending a vote on the grounds of intellectual consistency doesn’t fly back in the corner coffee shop.)

But hey, at least none of them are this guy.

Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: