N.H. legislator resigns over Palin remark

Politico ^ | August 12, 2010 | Ben Smith

[jazusamo]

A New Hampshire Democrat who joked about Sarah Palin's death has resigned from the state's House of Representatives and ended his campaign for reelection, he announced today in a public letter to the House Speaker apologizing for bringing "this House into disrepute."

Rep. Timothy Horrigan had speculated yesterday on Facebook that a slain Palin would become a martyr.

"I don't wish Sarah Palin dead ... but not merely for compassionate reasons. I also want her to live because a living Sarah Palin is less dangerous than a dead one."a dead Palin is more dangerous than a live one," he wrote.

(Horrigan is not to be confused with the other New Hampshire Democratic activist who was rebuked yesterday for expressing the wish that Palin and Levi Johnston had been on the downed airplane carrying Ted Stevens.)

Horrigan wrote before resigning that he "would like to offer a specific apology for making comments about Sarah Palin which could be --- and were --- misconstrued. She is, as far as I know, not a bad person at all --- and certainly she deserves to live a long and happy life."

In his letter to Speak Terie Norelli he wrote, "I apologize for thoughtless remarks I made which have brought this House into disrepute."

An eccentric liberal Democrat from the Durham area, Horrigan's causes had included repealing New Hampshire's 200-year-old ban on adultery.

[Egon]

I honestly don’t think I ever saw a death wish for Obama expressed here.

I'm not talking about a wish for someone's demise. I'm talking about people discussing the ramifications of someone's death-- specifically, how their death would be worse for their enemies than their continued existence.

Quite frankly, I don't think speculation like that rises to the level of something that needs to be apologized for, let alone resigned over. Personally, I try to avoid that kind of thought direction-- but I'm not instantly mortified or offended by it.

[Egon]

An ELECTED MEMBER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY utters this comment. He is a public office holder (not a private citizen).

He didn't wish Palin dead-- quite the opposite. For purely political reasons, he was pointing out that her death would not be in the Left's best interests. This is not radical thinking-- it's quite reasoned.

Heck, we spend a good deal of our time on this forum lamenting the fact that we have to parse everything politicians (from both sides) say. This one came out and actually said something that has been espoused here too.

I just don't think it requires an apology or a resignation, either by a private citizen, or public official.

This society is just too damned apology-centric. We should just get it over with, bump all the Bill of Rights amendments down by one, and insert the "Right Not To Be Offended" right at the top.

[Past Your Eyes]

I’ll be voting for Kelly. Also Jennifer Horn. Not sure on governor. Leaning toward Kimball.
I hope Jennifer beats that pipsqueak dumBass. We don’t need him back in there. He was part of the problem.

[OCCASparky]

Thanks for the correction, Bill. I still like the odds.

[OCCASparky]

or maybe New Hampshire doesn’t pay enough to its legislators or give them enough opportunity for graft for them to cling to their positions like barnacles on an old boat.

$100 a year, plus mileage to and from Concord. It's good in that sense, but bad in that the only people who can commit that kind of time are the independently wealthy, retired, or housewives/househusbands who depend upon someone or something else for their income.

[Little Bill]

The purpose of a large General Court is to bring Government, Reps, as close to the people as possible, you can get at them and they can't hide. I can walk a Quarter Mile down the Street and yell at Carol Vita, my Rep and if she isn't there I can yell at Frank, her husband.

I think the NH has what the Founders envisioned as citizen representation. Accessibility and no money involved.

[OCCASparky]

I certainly can’t argue with the accessibility aspect. But the lack of compensation versus time commitment leaves people like me out. Too bad Che-Pelosi forgot what it meant to be responsive to her constituents—not that she ever really was.

[Little Bill]

I lived in Mass when they had 280 Reps and a part time General Court, got paid $260 a session, it was a much better place to live then. Though you may not be able to serve you have much more ability to influence those that do serve because they need every vote. The further that Reps get away from the people the worse they serve you and the better they serve themselves.

Remember that the US House of Representative's is limited by a House Rule instituted in 1913.