National media starts to wake up to Griffith
Politico has a good article about the cool reception Parker Griffith is getting in north Alabama:
Six weeks after Rep. Parker Griffith rocked the political landscape by switching parties, his reelection is in jeopardy, amid strong resistance from local Republicans who refuse to embrace the former Democrat.
GOP leaders across the northern Alabama congressional district tell POLITICO that their most active members remain deeply skeptical about Griffith’s conversion to the GOP and that most do not plan to vote for him. Some insist he will not have enough support to win the June primary against several other challengers who have pointedly declined to drop out of the race.
Read the rest for yourself.
Like I’ve said all along, the party switch was good nationally. It was a thumb in the eye of Pelosi. But it is anything but a victory for local Republicans.
Griffith’s media flak said they are going to make every Republican aware of his “conservative voting record.” Good. I hope that includes his votes as a state senator. I’m guessing they won’t mention his previous emphatic support for universal health care, though.
Speaking of Parker Griffith, he just got his first committee assignment – to the Energy and Commerce Committee. Oh Goodie! Bless his heart, he tried to put a good spin on it, but the fact remains that he voluntarily removed himself from committees that were much more relevant to the needs of the district when he switched parties. Roll Call deemed it a “plum post” and I’m sure it would be for many congressmen. I think The Huntsville Times characterized the committee’s work nicely:
In the last few weeks, the committee has held a variety of hearings on crib safety, a cable company merger, an oil company merger, childhood obesity, coal waste and deceptive funeral home practices.
Griffith on a committee regulating funeral homes! Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. I’m sure nervous NASA workers will take comfort that Griffith will be handling matters critical matters like crib safety and childhood obesity.
Others have taken notice of Griffith’s minimal utility as a congressman. The city of Huntsville hired former representative Bud Cramer to lobby for Marshall in D.C. When asked by WVNN host Dale Jackson about how the city is coping with having a congressman who dropped out of the committee that oversees NASA he responded that they asked Cramer to “lead” the efforts to protect NASA funding. He also said they are working “with others who are effective” like Sen. Shelby. As for Griffith, Battle said that he can do “a little bit less than most freshmen congressmen.” Ouch.
Energy and Commerce is an important committee but parker is at the bottom of its totem pole. Every republican on it knows he’s made himself look like a fool here in the district and also by his own new republican leadership in the house. which subcommittees he gets is important. He’s succeeding an oregon republican, Greg Walden, but that doesnt mean he automatically gets walden’s subctee assignments. as the lowest ranked guy, any republican above him can switch to walden’s spots. Walden, incidentally, was not on the health subctte, so it doesnt look like parker’s dim light will even have a chance to flicker there. we’ll see where he ends up, but can anyone envision parker having some great influence — any influence actually, on Eenergy and Commerce? the old expression –”like a lost ball in the high weeds” comes to mind.
If Griffith had only gone independent instead of Republican he wouldn’t have all these problems. His own position, that he and the Dems had gone different ways, makes being an independent the only logical choice.
We’d have loved him if only he’d have said “I’m not voting Democrat, and I’m not voting Republican. I’m voting my values and I’m voting to represent the people of Alabama.”
Regardless of his political policies, I don’t want to be represented by someone so stupid that he thinks changing parties will work. How little respect he must have for the voters of Alabama to think we’ll believe he’s magically become a Republican.
Bl1Y,
Griffith going Republican instead of independent has some advantages that going independent does not have.
1) The GOP is not putting any money into this race.
2) He meets his challengers earlier (less money raising time) and with their supporters splitting the conservative vote.
3) There will not be a unanimous conservative for long enough for that conservative to get the donations that one would get between the primary and general election.
problems are two. first, parker aint smart enough to comprehend what you explained. he thinks because he was good at business conniving he’s smart enough to be in congress. no parallel. also, as an independent, he would have to caucus with either party to get committee assignments, which are done through party. so to switch he would have had to have the sense to go to the republicans and work a deal as an independent who caucused with them. parker’s pomposity is no substitute for what he needed — political perspicacity.
Funny, you thought he was a man of fine qualities when he ran for Congress in 2008. Now I can certainly understand your being peeved with him for switching sides, but have his intelligence, character, and political skills really changed with his change of parties? Or do you just base all of your opinions on such things on the letter that follows his name?
I think someone who consistently states and advocates their beliefs, regardless of party, deserves a manner of respect. A principle-less party swapper who believes in nothing however deserves nothing but criticism. Sure, I would like to see his seat blue, but it isn’t as if that is something that garners automatic respect.
I think what you meant to say was: “Parker’s pomposity in place of political perspicacity will probably poison the poor putz’s performance at the polls.”
BL1Y – that is brilliant!
BL1Y said it as well as it can be said. in other words — parker’s poisonous political party pirouette perished him politically.
No, no, no… it’s Paranoid Parker picked a peck of pickled peppers, a peck of pickled peppers paranoid Parker picked; If paranoid Parker picked a peck of pickled peppers, Where’s the peck of pickled peppers paranoid Parker picked?
Unless the media was there with him, we will never know…
Is it National Alliteration Day or something?
clarification to ben — you’re right in that i supported griffith because he was the democratic nominee. i’m a party man — i think party is important in politics. i wish we had party registration in alabama. should people who aren’t democrats decide who the democratic nominee is? same for republicans. (Fritz Steiner, occasional very conservative letter writer to the Huntsville Times and very critical of my positions, is for party registration, praise be bestowed upon him for that). when i campaign for a nominee i do what i think i can to help the nominee. as i say, i believe party is important in politics — elect the candidate of your party first, then worry about votes. i don’t know how many letters to the ed i wrote trying to help bud cramer when he was attacked, even though bud voted the way i thought he ought to probably 60 percent of the time. one point Ben is wrong on — i’m not “peeved” that parker swithched parties — i’m gratified and relieved. I think it’s pretty clear that unless the democratic candidate is a crook, if he or she is the nominee, it’s that democrat gets my vote. so what was i supposed to do if parker remained a democrat and got the nomination? i am relieved of that choice, i am truly glad to say. His “intelligence, character and political skills” Ben asks about, haven’t changed. all three are in serious short supply now and were when he ran. But he was my party’s nominee.
ivan,
I have to disagree. I see parties as a way of getting what I want, not the other way around.
Political parties were necessary evils in the 1700 & 1800s when information transfer was slow and expensive. Parties were needed to spread information about candidates. Today parties are unnecessary and cause split loyalties in politicians. I want politicians to vote based on what they think is right – not because they owe something to a party, a PAC or any other organization.
Coalition building, and thus “parties”, are a natural evolution of a democratic political system. You could outlaw parties literally, and there would still be de facto “parties”. Any idea to the contrary represents some type of Moreian Utopia.
ivan – I agree with you on party registration. Political parties provide a framework and structure for candidates and officials. Building and maintaining the party are important – not everyone is a political junkie – the party ID gives some idea of how to vote.
reactionary has pretty much answered edward on party registration and strong political parties. i, also, and i feel sure reactionary does also, agree that a representative should vote what they think is the right way for the betterment of the local government unit, state, nation, even it means deviating from a party position. when i see in a paper a candidate “is running as” it makes we want to change it to say the candidate “is” a democrat or “is” a republican. The idea of independence when it comes to voting in congress or state legislatures is crucial. we’ve all seen representatives we respect and support knuckle under to pressure from power — ALFA, AEA, NRA, AFL-CIO, Chamber of Commerces, both sides of abortion issue — and vote against the real interests of the people. I’m trying to think of the congressman’s name — Charles Weltner? — in Georgia who left the Republican ticket rather than run with axe handle racist fried chicken man lester maddox.
I have charles weltner’s party wrong. he was a democrat and left the democratic ticket — gave up his congressional seat — rather than run with segregationist lester maddox.
ivan – I read your Letter to the Editor in Saturday’s Huntsville Times, in which you tout Steve Raby as your hoped-for candidate for AL05 Congress.
“unless the democratic candidate is a crook, if he or she is the nominee, it’s that democrat gets my vote”
What do you think about Steve Raby facilitating the ‘hijacking’ of a Republican primary by running a false flag candidate? That’s pretty crooked. Then you claim Raby is not an “ideologue” – his subversion of the electoral process disproves your statement. Unless, of course, he did it for the money – in which case we’re back to ‘crook’.
How could you vote for Raby? Would he have to be convicted first, or would an indictment do? Why aren’t his ethical transgressions enough to disqualify him?
Ivan,
I believe parties are important, too, and no one who knows anything about how politics works could say it’s an irrelevant issue.
But that said, you basically admit that you will flat out lie about someone based on the letter after their name. If they call themselves a Democrat, they’re great folks with wonderful ideas. If they call themselves a Republican, they’re scum looking to squash the “little guy.” And as soon as a formerly brave and patriotic Democrat changes parties, he instantly transforms into a scumsucker in your view.
Sorry, but I just can’t be that crass.
For instance, given a choice between voting for whatever designated victim the Dems have nominated this year and Richard Shelby, I’ll vote for Shelby because, on the whole, I think he will represent my beliefs more than a Democrat will. But that does not keep me from saying that Shelby is a pork-addicted whore and an egotist of the first order who seems driven to ensure there is a building in every city, campus, and trailer park in this state with his name on it.
If you want to support a crook like Raby, go for it. But why must you resort to shameless, say-anything falsehoods to support your party’s candidates? Do you not have any personal ethics at all?
There are so many “hitman” pieces on Parker Griffith here we ought to just merge with the Attack Machine. While I have my doubts about him it is obvious that the negative attacks are rampant here and they start to sound like a victim of something my old boss told me. “If you never accomplish anything nobody can criticize you” . We are beating him up for everything he ever did and I am waiting for all the write-ups on the accomplishments of the others and they pale in comparison. I guess tearing down someone is a lot harder than building someone up. I am not a Parker Griffith support (not yet anyway) but all this blood in the water shark attack from within the Republican party makes me wonder if I have placed my allegiance in the right place locally. Smacks somewhere between “good old boy” and spoiled children IMHO.
I look at politics and campaigning a bit differently from others who have commented above, and i also ought to point out that a lot of good questions are asked and good points made. I’ve been driven to a little self-analysis. I was a political reporter for some years a long, long time ago — second string on the Post-Herald, then political reporter on the Bham News, and subsequently political reporter in Louisville and then the Louisville papers’ (there were two then) Washington correspondent. As a reporter i busted my butt to be accurate. I’m not saying that because I’m claiming some super high degree of ethicicity (did I coin a word?). I didn’t like to get anything wrong. As a political reporter, in opinion pieces, i gave opinion, and i just didn’t want my opinion diminished by erroneous reporting.
Then I became a political operator, a campaign worker, either as part of congressional staff or full-time in a campaign. The analogy comparing sausage making to legislating goes double for campaigns. Louie Nunn, a republican gov of kentucky, told me his first political “job” as a young boy was helping make sure bought votes stayed bought in a chain paper ballot system.
We talks about the 1860 election being stolen for Kennedy in Chicago. How many votes for Nixon were stolen in Republican areas of Illinois? None? We all know what went on election day in Florida to slow and block minority voters for Gore. It’s accurate and it’s history. Also strategic location of voting machines — lots in country clubs and few on college campuses, in ohio, in that election. Rigged computers? books have been written about that, but the guy who knew the most about it — a republican apparatchik who was spilling the beans, was killed when the plane he was flying crashed.
So, politics and the struggle to elect Democrats is a bit different for me and to me than it may be to most others.
Anybody else commenting ever walked around with an envelope full of thousands of dollars in cash in his jacket pocket to be used as “walking around money” on election day, waiting for someone to pick it up for delivery to street campaign workers?
Does anyone commenting really believe that Bush honestly beat Gore?
That Don siegelman and Sue Schmitz weren’t indicted for political reasons?
I completely understand Ben’s comments about Shelby, and why he will vote for him. the logic is unassailable.
Steve Raby? Surely steve would be the most competent person now in the running to be congressman from this district. think for a minute about either Raby or someone screaming socialism representing you. Being part of a “false flag” campaign? The only problem i see is that it didn’t work. whoever was involved ought to get a kick in the ass for not doing a better job of it. but that doesn’t disqualify you as a congressman.
Well Ivan irrespective of your “credentials” I don’t think that you or anyone else really knows who won the Bush/Gore election because it was so close and so corrupt depending on where you look (not just in Florida).
Also Brian I DO indeed think that Don Siegelman was pursued and indicted for political reasons, does not mean he was totally innocent just means they went after him in a partisan manner and Carl Rove had a hand in it. Sue I think was just a political knave with little sense of what she could/could not get away with, again not really innocent just not any kind of major political corruption, more like political stupidity.
Our political process is in danger of losing the faith of the people and when that happens we are on the road to violent upheaval. If people had any sense they would make sure elections where honest above ANYTHING else because that is the basic glue of our society. Once we do not believe that our leaders were truly elected then a significant part of our society starts to think that any means to bring them down is acceptable (and you can follow the logic from there).
We better hope that most of the next several elections nationally are somewhat lopsided because if not then we keep edging closer to that precipice.
Nobody actually thinks Bush beat Gore in Florida, and therefore the electoral college, so they? My problem is I don’t get why Raby has anything to do with Tweed-style American democracy. All I see is a litany of illegal campaign practices and then blah. It just isn’t coherent. In other words, I don’t get your point.
Ivan,
You were doing fine until you started spouting nonsense conspiracy crap from the Democratic grassy knoll. When you start sounding like a raving lunatic, maybe it’s time to reassess your beliefs. As it is, you sound like a liberal John Bircher.
A couple of points…
There is nothing inherently illegal about running a “false flag” candidate. The candidate in this case is Smithwick and he was indicted for financial disclosure discrepancies related to his failed campaign. Furthermore, I don’t know of any pending criminal charges against Raby for his role in funneling money to Smithwick.
I don’t mind parties, but I do wish we had more to choose from than two. I think it would help (slightly) the level of discourse in politics. I do think political parties contribute to lazy voting.
Ivan, I actually do believe Bush beat Gore and Siegelman/Schmitz were rightly convicted. Don’s supporters try to frame his case as though he merely accepted a contribution and was convicted of putting Scrushy on the CON board in return. They conveniently omit how he tried to hide the two $250k “contributions” and other supporting evidence. I think Schmitz got caught up in a system corrupted by decades of single party power. She looked around and saw everyone else getting special favors and accommodations and decided she was entitled to a specially created no-work position funded by taxpayers. She should have known better and probably did at one point.
Meant to add a point I’ve made before…
Maybe Siegelman and Schmitz were selected for prosecution for political reasons. That is a tough claim to prove, but an easy one to make. Regardless of why they were prosecuted the fact remains that there was enough evidence against them for a jury of their peers to convict them beyond a reasonable doubt. The most likely scenario is that political adversaries noticed a lot of smoke coming from their direction and didn’t act with the same regrettable reticence they might have had if the smoke was coming from someone on the “same team.” At the end of the day it turned out that there was some fire making all that smoke.
Our system of government only supports two major parties, and such will always be the case. The only way a multi-party system is viable is in a parliamentary democracy, but that system has significant downsides, too (more downsides than ours, in my opinion).
Personally, I don’t think being stuck with two major parties is a big deal. The upshot is that both parties are constantly facing internal tugs of war over philosphy and direction, and each party has changed course significantly over time. And given the various internal factions (e.g., Blue Dogs, Republican “moderates”, etc.) we have a de facto multi-party system, albeit one that is highly regionalized.