Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Walberg and Cheney
Some thoughtful insight, promoted from the comments:
I got an email invite to the VP visit. It came from Walberg's campaign. It says the event is "Honoring" Walberg. Makes no mention it any other candidates are going to be there. It goes on to claim the fundraiser is to benefit the "Michigan Congressional Victory Committee '06" which is describes as "a joint fundraising committee established on behalf of Tim Walberg for Congress and the Michigan Republican Party."Hm.
UPDATE: Out of fairness, another promoted comment...
Walberg was the only candidate on the stage with Vice President Cheney. Walberg introduced the Vice President and was the only candidate to whom the Vice President offered his endorsement. This event was exclusively about Tim Walberg. Now, who is lying?I, of course, was not at the event. Part of it is that I do not support Tim Walberg or Vice President Cheney, and part of it is that I, frankly, can't afford a $250 lunch ($5 or less is my preference).
It could be that the previous commenter was wrong in his assertions, and shouldn't have been labeled "thoughtful insights". That said, there's still no answer to Sharon Marie Renier's question:
"Why are they bringing in Cheney against some little chicken farmer?" asked Renier, referring to herself. "Are they worried?"
UPDATE II: Should have mentioned this earlier, really... the Jackson Citizen-Patriot, as well as others, has coverage of the fundraiser.
One slightly disturbing quote:
Huh. With all due respect, I've always thought it was about the voters, and not God. Of all the many problems and crises around the world in which He hasn't intervened, I'd be really surprised if He chose to decide the outcome of a Congressional District in southern Michigan.
And I'd be really, really surprised if he decided in favor of Tim Walberg. But then, that's me.
Walberg was the only candidate on the stage with Vice President Cheney. Walberg introduced the Vice President and was the only candidate to whom the Vice President offered his endorsement. This event was exclusively about Tim Walberg. Now, who is lying?
"Cheney praised Walberg for running a "principled and energetic campaign" that he and President Bush are "proud to support."
"Tim will be a congressman who leads with common sense and solid values," he said."
This is from the Lansing State Journal. Obviously, Cheney is still taking advice from the same intelligence people who couldn't get it right on Iraq.
Just goes to show how out of touch this administration is with the real world if they think Walberg is a person of principle!
To the first comment, "Now, who is lying?"
There were two options in the post. To recap, one theory was Walberg concocted a white lie about “security reasons” as the impetus for holding a fundraiser with the VP outside of his district. I still maintain they could have used an airport in the district for the VP’s 18 minute stop. (Unless Walberg cannot raise money within the district, a claim the Schwarz campaign made repeatedly in the primary and evidently still the case.) There is lie number one. The 7th district contains a MILITARY BASE in the largest population center in his district, BATTLE CREEK. The VP landed there as recently as 2005. So, I don’t buy the excuse of “security reasons.” This quote was directly attributed to Mr. Walberg, not a staffer, and it is bull.
Now, the second option was actually a way out for Walberg. If the VP was coming to stump for several candidates, then it made sense it might not take place in the 7th district. My reason for offering this “out” to justify Mr. Walberg’s lie came from the story which ran in the Free Press on October 4th. It claimed the VP was coming “to headline a fund-raiser for congressional candidates…to help Republicans raise money for the Michigan Congressional Victory Committee '06.”
Additionally, if Walberg was the only candidate it proves two important things. Voters were unwilling to write Walberg a check and needed to see the VP in order to pony up and they still will only write a check to a fund set up for “Congressional Victory” in ’06. And, in the midst of hot races for governor, US senate, and both chambers of the legislature, the state party is forced to devote resources to a WEAK candidate for congress in what was, according to Walberg, one of the SAFEST republican seats in the COUNTRY.
There are no lies here, only theories. They paint a picture. They draw a few lines between a few facts which all point to the simple truth. Mr. Walberg dangerously lacks a steady relationship with the truth. He is vulnerable. The democrats have an opportunity right now to increase on the 36% Renier garnered in 2004. That’s right, with 2,000 dollars, she got 36% of the vote against Joe Schwarz. Imagine what she could do with a little more money against a vulnerable, fringe opponent.
My guess is that Walberg begged the GOP to help him out. I think Cheney's visit was incidental to Walberg's plight and he just begged to be included in the party and they had too, becasuse he's a "Republican."Post a Comment
As far as security goes, Air Force One and Two have landed in Battle Creek many times, so security is not a valid reason. Walberg needs to figure out where Battle Creek is and how important it is to this district. So far he's not had any contact with top military and civilian leaders in Battle Creek. He had better figure out soon that Battle Creek is a key player in the district.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008