< .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Massachusetts Liberal

Observations on politics, the media and life in Massachusetts and beyond from the left side of the road.

Saturday, May 22, 2010

Tea stains

While the Massachusetts Republican Committee Talking Points Tabloid makes a poorly defined case for Barack Obama's toxicity, there appears to be trouble brewing in the GOP's love affair with the Tea Party movement.

Ron Kaufman -- who's been spinning for the state GOP since brother-in-law Andy Card was an up-and-comer and who prefers amber-colored liquids of a different type -- offers up the loss of multiple-turncoat Arlen Specter as the latest example of Obama's "toxicity" on the campaign trail. Of course, his prime example is Obama's fruitless support for the clueless Martha Coakley over Scott Brown.

Closer to home, there's only Steve Lynch, already in trouble with progressives for walking away from Obama on health care, as the only Massachusetts example the Herald can offer of a skittish Democrat uninviting the president.

But wait. The truck-drivin' hero himself has chips in his tea set over his multiple flip-flops on the financial reform bill -- and the movement itself is in danger of boiling over with the chronic foot-in-mouth affliction of Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul.

A day after dissing the Civil Rights Act and the Americans for Disability Act (and wisely reneging on a Meet the Press interview), Rand Paul has stood proud with BP (you know, British Petroleum) as a victim of the Obama administration's "un-American" approach to business.
“What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, ‘I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,’ ” Mr. Paul said, referring to a remark by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar about the oil company. “I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I’ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it’s part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it’s always got to be someone’s fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.”
Tea Partiers are not part of the blame-game society Dr. Paul?

I think we all need a refreshing, relaxing chamomile and a chance to adequately survey the constantly changing political landscape and cool the rhetoric.

Labels: , , , , ,


Blogger rlogan109 said...

Yes, Hillary Chabot's "analysis" (GOP spin) in the Herald is completely bogus. Her three examples are Martha Coakley, Arlen Specter, and Steve Lynch.

Martha Coakley didn't lose because Obama campaigned for her. She lost because she didn't campaign for herself. (e.g. "As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?") In fact, one of the main criticisms of her (non)campaign was that she didn't ask POTUS to come sooner. She ran the worst campaign I have seen in my 40+ years of political involvement. JFK couldn’t have saved it for her.

Arlen Specter didn’t lose because Obama campaigned for him. Specter lost because PA Dems still considered him a Republican, and because he ran a lousy campaign. Moreover, the support from the White House was not all that much once Sestak started to pick up steam. Obama and Biden didn’t come in and campaign for him at the end as would have been expected if they were really committed to him. Sestak is going to be a stronger candidate in the general that Specter would have been, and I’m sure the WH is perfectly happy with that.

Steve Lynch? Isn’t he a Republican anyway? Besides, after stiffing the President on Health Care Reform, why would Obama be all that eager to campaign for him to begin with? There were 219 Democratic Members of Congress who voted YES! They are all up for reelection this year and I would think that would make Steve Lynch #220 on the President’s priority list at best.

May 22, 2010 2:44 PM  
Blogger Outraged Liberal said...

Well said.

May 23, 2010 9:38 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home