In politics, "sorry" no longer implies regret; it is simply the preamble to a coming fundraising appeal. With any luck, out-right celebrity will follow. It's the Joe "You Lie" Wilson road map to success and an indication that the line between shock-jock and politician gets thinner every day.
Last week Georgia Congressman and Republican candidate for Governor, Nathan Deal got caught on video using the term "ghetto grandmothers." Doesn't that make you just tingle with pride? Galloway reports that first Deal was sorry, then he was just misunderstood and mostly needed you to send him money to ward off the evil leftest media. Really, he was just trying to have a meaningful discussion about the importance of extended family support among the growing number of Georgians living in poverty.
No worries, Deal has plenty of company. Earlier this year, John Oxendine twisted himself into a figure eight to make himself a "victim" of the AJC "hit piece" (a.k.a. reporting) about his own questionable campaign contributions. Tuesday, Robert Lowery, a Floridian who hopes to unseat Congresswomen Debbie Wasserman Shultz, joined fellow GOPers for an afternoon of fun with assault rifles. Lowery chose to shoot at a full-sized silhouette labeled "DWS." Nice. First he called it a joke, then, he called it a mistake. I'm betting that by Monday, he's calling himself a badly misunderstood supporter of the second amendment who needs your money to fight off the evil media. His buds, who were shooting a cut-outs depicting Muslims, were not about to apologize for exercising all of their constitutional rights, presumably including their right to stupidity.
One thing is certain, no one should confuse running for office, or even winning (see Mark Sanford, John Edwards, Charlie Rangel et. al) with public service, and certainly not with leadership. These guys seriously need to decide whether they want to govern or have their own radio shows (see Fred Thompson) because the choices are mutually exclusive.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Cashing in on Bad Behavior
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Should Progressive Bloggers Give Dems a Pass?
This should be a lively debate.
Should progressive bloggers refuse to speak ill of other Democrats? Yesterday, I spoke about blogging at the Georgia Federation of Democratic Women's Spring Meeting. (It was, by the way a very well put together, well planned event thanks to people like Tina Simms, Kathy Bird and others. Great work, ladies.) Catherine Smith from Blog for Democracy was also there and chimed in with some helpful information. Toward the end of my remarks, Gail Buckner who served in the Georgia House and then was the Democratic nominee for Secretary of State stood and, in summary, expressed her concern about some things that were written about her on blogs during the last cycle, observed that she does not see conservative bloggers bashing Republicans (must not have been reading Peach Pundit lately) and opined-I am paraphrasing-that perhaps we should not speak ill of our own, and if we do, we should be sure that what we say is true.
Well, I certainly agree with the last part of her statement-that we shouldn't write something unless we believe it's true, but what about the rest? I have taken, and will continue to take Democrats to task on issues important to me personally. I was critical of Jim Marshall for his vote on Children's Health Insurance, and I questioned John Barrow about his statements about children of illegal immigrants. I took a couple of Democrats in the Georgia General Assembly to task for co-sponsoring the "Personhood" legislation and fussed with Kevin Levitas about his position on reducing the number of jurors required to impose the death penalty. I have challenged campaign tactics and the lack there of. I could go on. But, on balance, I spend far more time challenging Republicans than Democrats.
My thought has always been that if we are unwilling to challenge our own, then how do we have any credibility when we challenge Republicans? But, my question to you is, should progressive bloggers back off other Democrats and instead adopt Regan's Rule? If there's a line, where is it?
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
New Rules
We need new rules for our elections, and tonight, I found just the right list. When my mother died in 2002, she left each of her daughters a folder of memories-certificates, papers, cards, newspaper clippings-things that would make us remember, laugh and think. This is not a fancy scrapbook, but instead just a manila folder tied with a piece of twine. I came across that folder tonight and in it found the purple mimeographed list of rules for candidates from when I ran for student government office at East Rutherford High School in Forest City, NC. I share these with you, and propose that we use these rules-or at least the principles behind them-for our "real" elections. Imagine the difference it would make! Here's you go:
1. No candidate is allowed to spend over $10.00 on his or her campaign. The candidate must present his receipts for expenditures to the Student Council Advisor before he will be allowed to present his campaign speech.
2. Any candidate must maintain a "C" average or above.
3. No candidate will be allowed to register for an office after April 15th at 3:05 P.M. Campaigns officially begin Monday, April 26 at 8:30 A.M. The election is Friday, April 30.
3. Campaign posters may be placed: (1) One per candidate in the concession area; (2) Two per candidate in the lunchroom, one regular size and one not more than six feet long; (3) President and Vice President candidates are allowed a qualification poster in the D.E. display window. If picture is used, it must be a recent one.
4. Posters found elsewhere will be taken down.
5. Good judgment should be used in making posters.
6. Speeches: (1) All speeches must be approved by Mrs. Dawkins and the Student Body President; (2) Candidates will be allowed five minutes for speeches.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Privette's Private Life
The more rigid, the more tightly wrapped a person is on the outside, the more inner chaos they seek to control-that's my theory, anyway, and it is one repeatedly supported when moral activists (think Foley) are caught doing the very things they claim to abhor. Today, on Ethics Daily, there is a story about Rev. Coy Privette, a NC minister, county commissioner and former state legislator who today pleaded guilty to six counts of aiding and abetting prostitution. Turns out that the evidence against him included photographs taken by one of the women, hotel registrations where he used his own name and video footage of him with the women on the security cameras of the hotel. His penalty? Beyond the public humiliation, if he completes forty-eight hours of community service and a year of probation, under a first offender program, his record will be wiped clean.
Prior to his arrest, Privette served on the executive committee for the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina and for fifteen years was the executive director of The Christian Action League, a moral concerns group.
Anyone can make mistakes-even really bad mistakes. This is getting printed here because of the hypocrisy involved.
Monday, May 07, 2007
God's Only Party?
Please let me introduce you to Dr. Robert Parham, someone I met over the phone last week. Dr. Parham is the executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics, and they are doing some amazing work. Their website is Ethics Daily and well worth your attention. Here's a brief introduction:
Posts
