Pull String for Talking Points
A short while ago, Congressman Langevin, speaking to Dan Yorke, did me the favor of reminding me why I’ve ceased to listen to politicians’ public performances. I think I could just about hear the sound a ballpoint pen makes against yellow legal-pad paper as he checked off each item on his talking-points list (multiple times). The implicit dishonesty of it all is mind numbing.
For instance, paraphrasing: “The American people are tired of the failure of the administration and this Congress [meaning the pre–’06 election, Republican Congress, of course] to address the issues that it cares about — healthcare, the environment, education, yadda yadda.” Among the items that are finally being addressed, now that the Democrats run the Congress, according to Mr. Langevin, is — get this — renewing the No Child Left Behind Act. Yes, the very act that the administration backed to its shame (for many reasons). If I were Yorke, I’d have asked why Congress’s approval ratings continue to drop, well below the President’s, if Americans are so impressed by the Democrats.
Another for instance: Yorke had Langevin on the show to challenge the congressman’s line in a news report stating that his constituents had sent him a clear message of disapproval of AG Gonzalez (but not as clear as their message in support of presidential impeachment, mind you). Mid-interview, a caller informed Yorke that he had attended one of the town meetings from which Langevin was drawing these messages and that the main topic of conversation was their anger at the failure to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. Thereafter, Langevin included immigration on the repeated list of topics that Rhode Islanders “care about.”
Presumably, since he’s so concerned about the “clear messages” that his constituents send him, our congressman will spearhead legislation to combat sanctuary cities, the hiring of illegals, and the porous nature of our borders.
When it comes to whoring himself to the plutocracy, James Langevin proves he is quite handicapable.
i heard him too. he is totally pathetic….he makes me sick. he represents everything wrong with congress. no substaqnce, just fighting and rhetoric that helps him get reelected.
dan yorke was really weak….why didnt he ask,”whats this difference between how clinton fired ag’s and bush”
and how about asking why he voted for the war??? why didnt he investigate it like linc chaffee and then vote against it.
“why didnt he ask,”whats this difference between how clinton fired ag’s and bush””
… um, yeah, seeing that Clinton fired ten times as many US Attorneys as Bush.
Let’s see . . . in 1993 our U.S. Atty was Linc Almond. He had served in that job off and on for over 15 years, I think, having prosecuted numerous corruption cases.
Democrat Clinton becomes President and replaces the experienced Almond with . . . Sheldon Whitehouse.
Why? Whitehouse’s extensive prosecutorial experience?
No, because Democrats Claiborne Pell and Bruce Sundlun were pushing Sheldon as a potential future candidate for Gov. or Sen. And, of course, Sheldon did in fact run for A.G., Governor, and Senate.
So, given all we know about Sheldon, I guess it’s not all that shocking that Sheldon is one of the loudest critics of the Bush Administration’s removal and replacement of U.S. Attys for “political” reasons.
What a hypocrite.