[BIGLOOK]

In Pennsylvania, Murtha may be popular and respectable since he's in DC and you're at home, a respectable distance away. Though I agreed with your thread, I find it impossible to agree with your vote for Murtha. Diana Irey's campaign was clearly in an opposite direction from Murtha's position and should have succeeded on merits of her support of the troops and their mission in Iraq and elsewhere. Just because you're content with a pork provider isn't sufficient reason to ignore Murtha's overall subversive performance in Congress regarding the troops and our present conflicts.

Rethink your vote.

[george76]

[Teófilo]

In Pennsylvania, Murtha may be popular and respectable since he's in DC and you're at home, a respectable distance away. Though I agreed with your thread, I find it impossible to agree with your vote for Murtha. Diana Irey's campaign was clearly in an opposite direction from Murtha's position and should have succeeded on merits of her support of the troops and their mission in Iraq and elsewhere. Just because you're content with a pork provider isn't sufficient reason to ignore Murtha's overall subversive performance in Congress regarding the troops and our present conflicts.

Rethink your vote.

Thank you for your kind reply. I understand your disagreement. I think my reasons were valid. I explained them in detail, and I am mystified that no one has done a proper post mortem of Irey's campaign. The GOP simply made an economic calculus, decided that Murtha was unbeatable, and invested elsewhere--where, we don't know. The GOP left Irey to hang when they could've nationalize the issue here and help Irey widen her appeal. Nothing like that happened.

George W. Bush was the first Republican President to win reelection in Cambria County, PA, where Murtha's base is located. Two years later, the same electorate voted overwhelmingly for Jack Murtha. Even the local GOP boss lauded him before he was made to backtrack.

I, as an opinion maker, saw all that, and decided to remain locally relevant by becoming a friendlier critic of Jack Murtha. I took a calculated risk. You, and others, with different degrees of vehemence, may disagree, and that's fine by me.

I will continue my criticism of Jack Murtha as before. I am part of that big mass of Bush voters that voted for him. If the GOP want to win over Jack Murtha, they have to come up with something better than calling him names. In the end, this is what happened, and it was pathetic, and terribly shortsighted.

Ladies and gentlemen, I stand by this column, and the previous column on my vote to Jack Murtha for the reasons I explained in that column and the reasons I explained here. I take full responsibility for my ideas, opinions, and their written expression. I am sorry if my opinions shrink me before you. I cannot do anything to change that, because that's not really my problem. I remain consistent and coherent to my own principles and that's my problem--if it is a problem--not yours. That's enough for me.

My guiding purpose as an opinion maker is rather simple: to move people to action. Although I want to persuade people to my point of view, if my opinion pieces move you to act in ways diametrically opposed to my viewpoint, that's fine by me to. Either way, I moved you to act.

"Biglook," thank you kindly for your considerate riposte, and to those of you who have been less considerate, I thank you too. I'll stick to the high road, if you don't mind, thank you very much.

And I will continue writing.

-Theo