Replies

RE:”Levin will argue both sides of an issue from time to time, but usually it changes based on which party is in the White House at the time, rather than contradicting himself a few chapters later in the same book.”

That is something I noticed after Obama got elected, Levin swapping ‘principles’ when the WH or congress changes parties
I loved posting them here.

Like in 2006 with GWB and a GOP congress and Levin claiming that the Senate filibuster was ‘un constitutional’
Heck, its in one of his books too.

Fast forward to 2009 and Levin is calling for that ‘unconstitutional’ action on almost EVERY bill.
Fast forward to this year, GOP takes the Senate, calling for end to filibuster again.

Nothing wrong with partisanship but then he should spare us the 'I am above it all with the Founders' silliness.

To be fair, a lot of people are in the same boat and adjust their "principles" depending on the election cycle.

For example, the pro-Oberweis crowd in Illinois spent a decade (2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010) screaming "we've had enough professional politicians in Illinois. How's that workin' out for Illinois? It's time we run a BUSINESSMAN for office!" Then there hero Oberweis FINALLY got elected to a local state senate seat in 2012, and ran again for the U.S. Senate in 2014 -- this time facing a private sector guy. They immediately flip-flopped on their "principles" and screamed that we MUST nominate Oberweis because we need someone with "experience" in office to face off against Dick Durbin, and we're DOOOOOOOOOOOMED if we nominate a private sector guy with no political experience.

And don't get started on their "Bill Brady MUST drop out and endorse Oberweis. We must ALL vote for the HIGHEST POLLING CONSERVATIVE in the primary, or we'll split the vote and a RINO will get in!!" lecture in the 2006 Governor's race, followed by their die-hard support for Adam Andrejewski in the 2010 Governor's race... when he was steadfastly polling in 5th and had no chance of winning the nomination. Not a single one of the former Oberweis fanboys demanded Adam drop out and endorse Brady when the shoe was on the other foot.

But what's really amusing is when they contradict themselves in the SAME election cycle. Again, Perry's book arguing both for and against amending the constitution so a formerly appointed office will be up for re-election by voters. And my favorite, the Gingrich people taking a page from the Oberweis people and rant & raving that we MUST vote for the highest polling conservative in the presidential primary, only to flip-flop mere weeks later and hail Newt for staying in the race when was polling a distant 3rd or 4th place and had only won a single state.