Yesterday a story went viral concerning Congressman Paul Kanjorski's statement made during a joint House-Senate conference committee session where he contrasted minorities with "good American people". He immediately came under fire and sparked an uproar for the his antithesis position.
Despite those who rushed to his rescue it was fair for the opposition to ask Kanjo to explain himself. After all this lapse in judgement isn't the first time for the seasoned Congressman. It's funny how its fair game for the media to quickly seize on comments made by VP Joe Biden or former VP Dan Quayle, yet Kanjorski's corner wants a hands off rule. Here's what a hypothetical interview would sound like over Kanjo's ridiculous statements that border on irrational.
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant by "defective" people?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you said "But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts...and people ate it up."?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain in these economic times what you meant when you said "We are helluva alot better off as a country and as an economy than we have ever been in the history of mankind"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant by
"Financially, I don't have to be a democrat. I've got enough economics that I'm not going to suffer, but I'm telling you I don't like to live around extreme poverty"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you said "I don't apologize to anyone" when asked if you would apologize to the troops for your statement over the war in Iraq
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you stated that our federal tax dollars are "free money"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
If the opposition is so wrong could Lou Barletta have that much influence to see that a headline like this one from the Los Angeles Times Rep. Paul Kanjorski says his plan helps 'good American people,' not 'minorities' or 'defective' people makes it to print? Why did the Los Angeles Times question his other statement later in that diatribe?
In his pitch, Kanjorski tells Capitol Hill legislative colleagues that expanding his state's mortgage aid program nationally would only cost "3 lousy billion dollars." After all threee lousy billion dollars is only free money.
One would think by now that the Democratic party would cut its loses and let Kanjo ride off into the retirement sunset. Attacking conservative sterotypes by validating liberal sterotypes isn't something one can fix. It is a fatal flaw and won't win elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment