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

Friday, January 20, 2006

Wetterling out

It's official: Patty Wetterling has dropped out of the race for the Senate and endorsed Amy Klobuchar. She does not have any immediate plans, although she could run for Congress in the Sixth district; she has also been mentioned as a possible candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

Why did she drop out? Money and no chance of winning. She's a very nice person, but you have to be more than a nice person to deal with the crap that comes with a high-profile campaign.

What kind of crap? MDE has Mark Kennedy's statement: "I'm surprised at Mrs. Wetterling's withdrawal from the U.S. Senate race. Although all three Democrats are from the liberal wing of their party, Mrs. Wetterling's campaign seemed to be setting the agenda on the DFL side..." Gee, "liberal wing" of the Democratic Party. Ouch, Mark. That's a real stinger there. Careful, you know that saying the "L"-word can get you censored from major TV networks, it's so vile.

You know what I've noticed? There are two wings of the Republican Party these days. One is the corrupt wing, all of those elected officials on the Abramoff/DeLay/Hastert/Ney/Cunningham axis, who think it is their prerogative to loot the government and reward their contributors, all while screwing over responsible, average folk. The other wing is the powerless wing, who seem to do nothing but stand by as their colleagues debase themselves and make "integrity" a dirty word.

Which wing of the Republican Party are you a member of, Mark?

2 Comments:

At 7:40 PM, January 20, 2006, Anonymous chris said...

He's a member of whichever group is winning at the moment. If he got in too deep with the corrupt group when it was in power, and the image sticks, then he's a sleazo-con. If that group starts becoming unpopular, then he switches sides before people can draw associations, and voila! Mark the Reformer! Kennedy strikes me as the kind of guy with no real loyalties.

In any case, the fight going on in D.C. right now is between the corrupt DeLay wing of the party and the corrupt Gingrich wing of the party, which has been slightly diminished the last seven years. If there's much in the way of substantive difference in these groups, I don't know about it. It's just a matter of who stood with whom when Newt and Tom's egos bounced off each other in the late '90s.

Since Kennedy didn't arrive in D.C. until 2001, I'm betting he latched onto the DeLay wing.

 
At 7:10 PM, January 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, Chris. What insight!!! The Democrats aren't really paid shills for the trial/litigation behemoth in America or the NEA and its failed policies for educating our children (i.e. expanding it's on power) or any other interest group. Wake up fools, the Dems have no lock on a lack of corruption. What a joke.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home