Posted on 05/12/2006 8:58:59 PM PDT by EGGOP
The Thin Skinned Congressman
By E. Goldstein
(North Carolina) – It seems that Georgia Congressman Jim Marshall is a little peeved at me for publishing an excerpt from an editorial he wrote for the Atlanta Journal Constitution. When Robert Novak picked up on his quote he correctly reported that Marshall supports investigating the President at some time in the future.
Novak made the mistake of reporting that Marshall had issued a statement to that effect, he had not. Marshall had just included the comments in a November editorial which can be read on his own congressional website. In his editorial Marshall wrote, “Putting off for now the legitimate issues raised by Pelosi is frustrating at best, particularly for those who have consistently questioned the administration's rationale for and conduct of this war. But delaying further investigation and debate on these issues is the right strategic choice at this stage of the conflict.”
As an 83 year-old man who has spent far too many years surrounded by Capitol Hill chameleons like Rep. Marshall, I feel well equipped to interpret Marshall’s “frustration” and claim that his was a “strategic choice” not to support Pelosi’s call for an investigation of the President at this time. In short he was pandering to the electorate rather than following the will of his masters.
Jim Marshall is now faced with running in a new congressional district which is heavily dominated by Republican voters. He is also forced to run against a well financed and popular conservative former congressman named Mac Collins. Short of a miracle, Marshall has no chance of beating Collins in Georgia’s heavily conservative 8th district.
This means that Marshall needs to vote with the Republicans any time Pelosi lets him. This is an old trick for Democrats in conservative districts, they simple don’t vote until it is clear that the Republicans have won the vote and then he ask Ms. Pelosi’s permission to vote against the wishes of the Democratic Whip. Marshall's behavior is a bit of a joke among members in both parties. He is what I call a midnight voter.
When calling the race in Marshall’s newly drawn district I can only conclude that if his reputation doesn’t sink him then his voting habits will. He has already been forced to vote along with Pelosi against building new oil refineries and drilling in ANWAR. He voted against repealing the Death Tax; despite, representing small farmers and businessmen who are negatively affected by this arcane legislation. He also supported almost every funding bill for an unpopular and ineffective United Nations. Including the scandal plagued United Nation’s Population Fund which has been tied to China’s One Child Program of forced abortions and sterilizations. Frankly enough said. Come Election Day Marshall will be taking a midnight train back to Georgia.
I thought that was Patrick Kennedy.
"particularly for those who have consistently questioned the administration's rationale for and conduct of this war"
This whole exercise of defending Bush on Iraq is wearing me out. I am not a Bush fan, but grew to agree with many of his positions, and his decision to take out Iraq. Problem is, according to the fragile nature of today's American psyche, 3000 deaths are too much to handle. Give me an f-ing break. At the height of WWII, 600 a day died. Bottom line is people want results, and victories. Don't go to war, unless you are going to go to war. Bush started out fine and should have crushed Iraqi insurgency early on, including Al Sadr. But slowly slid into "..well if we do this, they will do this." Ask Bremer. He did it too. This isn't poker, backgammon, or Jenga. Energy expended to re-direct energy is expensive, and must occur momentarily and effectively. Occupation is like friction: wasteful and without suitable purpose. We cannot change the world. The world must want to change. It just needs an opportunity and the middle east was giving that by Bush. To you liberals,...take the WMD and shove it up your *ss.
And that's somehow not "issuing a statement?" Whatever.
What kind of loser tries to make a stink over something like that?
A cornered Rat loser.
As far as insurrgencies go the one in Iraq is piddly. Take a look at Nepal or Darfur, far more people have died in those places then in Iraq. Furthermore our troops have considerably reduced the terrorists ranks. Remember Fallujah? The only reason that their is any perception of failure in Iraq is because the leftists in the news media hate Bush.
Yes, but if he is for enforcing the border, he could win the support of "real conservatives."
Thanks to Mac Collins Johnny Isakson is our Jr. Senator and not Herman Cain. But that's for another thread, lol. ;-)
Jim Marshall is a joke. When I had a Rally for the Troops 2 weeks prior to the start of the Iraq battle, I invited him to come and speak, I already had dems and republicans speaking or their statements. Anyway, he never returned my call, and when I spoke with a staffer again, she told me he was previously engaged or some such crap. It was obviously a brush-off.
Within a week, he was touting his own rally, using some of the same phrasing I did (mine was covered by the newspapers and radio and TV). I can't remember the phrase, but he used THE EXACT SAME PHRASE. My husband and I were flabbergasted!
He wasn't doing it for the troops, he was doing it for Jim Marshall. What a weasel.
He's got an uphill fight now. Good on him!
A "public servant" who is fearful the voters are about to pull the public teat from his greedy little mouth....
Semper Fi
Correction it is the other way around. If Herman Cain had stayed out we'd have Mac as our Senator. I like Herman but he had not voting record to stand on and would have been killed in the General Election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.