Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Politics McWherter Calls Haslam Cowardly
Posted by Jeff Woods on Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:12 PM
In a cowardly move, the Haslam campaign is backing out on joint appearances across the state, limiting the opportunity for Tennessee voters to compare the candidates side-by-side. Rather than discussing the issues, the Haslam campaign is muzzling its candidate by sending notifications to organizations across the state expressing their disinterest in having one-on-one discussions with the Democratic nominee. These groups range from universities to civic organizations to advocates for the elderly.“No one group is more important than the other and now is not the time for any candidate to avoid debating the issues one-on-one in front of interested Tennesseans.” said Mike McWherter. “Tennessee voters want and deserve to see their candidates in these neutral venues so they can make an informed decision about who should be the next Governor. If he is not willing to stand up to me, how can Tennesseans trust him to stand up for their best interests?”
Comments (8)
Showing 1-8 of 8
I'm surprised Haslam isn't meeting Ned Ray's boy anytime and anywhere since he'll surely hand him his head every time.
like
dislike
Small "d" democrat calls McWherter -- (sm)all hat, no cattle.
If Haslam won't debate Big Daddy Junior, I would be happy to. He can represent (whatever does he represent other than the sacrificial lamb-chops he is?) and I'll represent the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.
Small "d"'s can't get past the pulpits, classrooms, and local news noise in Tennessee. It would be great as an intellectual excercise, but futile (and probably counterproductive) in terms of election results.
Tom,
Assuming that you are commenting on my comment here (and elsewhere at Pith), could you be more specific since I am clueless what you mean. Like some other commenters here (I presume), I pick other venues to attempt to accomplish meaningful efforts to save our democracy. An on-line forum is seldom that place. My comments here are in response to the stories covered here, and they are meant for comic relief (at least my own), as are many of the stories covered here (sick-humored (or just plain sad) though they may be).
In truth, with the loss of our legislature as a likely consequence of unverifiable voting machines (whose continued use demonstrates their value to the party in power, despite the fact that they are slower, more expensive and less secure than the option mandated by the Voter Confidence Act), we are also running out of meaningful venues on Capitol Hill. Believe me, I know, since my time and (dwindling) fortune has been mainly wasted there. I don't know if I've ever met you in the six years I've spent trying to insure that all votes get counted as cast here in Tennessee (yes, ALL votes, regardless of whether they mirror my own). If so, refresh my memory.
From my perspective, this country was inspired and founded by small "d"s. Just wish it could once again be inspired and protected by them. Instead, we have faux political contests and a continued downward spiral into tyranny, public disinterest and historical irrelevance.
BTW, like many middle Tennesseans, I used to call myself a "yellow dog" Democrat. Unfortunately the TNDP was unable to find a yellow dog that was willing to stay in the gubernatorial race this year. Instead, the large D's are running an anti-gay, anti-tax, inexperienced, clueless creationist as their standard-bearer. That is no "intellectual excercise (sic)", that is a damned shame.
So, again, please enlighten me on what you meant to say above. (Consider it a worthwhile intellectual exercise.) In the meantime, you might ponder what one of our country's greatest small "d"s once said:
"The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by which other rights are protected. To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery. For slavery consists in being subject to the will of another. And he that has not a vote in the election of representatives is in this case." Tom Paine, First Principles of Government, 1795
(Tom also said: "It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country from its government." Here's hopng we can find some more Toms (including you) who are willing to do that.)
If not, hide and watch.
Ole' Chadwell just likes to see himself named as a top commentater. Doesn't matter his blather is nothing more than translucent fog. It keeps him on the list.
i hear that term "tyranny" bandied about by both sides, small d. what would your definition be....as opposed to say, an afghani woman living under taliban rule or a resident of the wars in and around the congo?!
In this context, tyranny would be the opposite of democracy. Tyranny would be ignoring or subverting the consent of the governed.
You know, I could say "it is hot as all get out outside today" and I would be correct. The fact that it is hotter in Death Valley does not make my statement inaccurate.
Along that same line, it might be hard for our Founding Fathers to defend our own American Revolution against British tyranny (their word) in comparison with present-day Afghanistan or the Congo. But I'm glad that did not deter them from throwing of the yoke of tyranny they faced. How about you?
Other than that, did you have another point regarding my rather long post, or is it just that one word that concerned you?
Haslam's not going to debate McWherter because he figures he's got the election sewed up, and giving McWherter any more attention will just give him more votes. Meanwhile, McWherter is, as "Small d" says, an "anti-gay, anti-tax, inexperienced, clueless creationist." My advice to "small d" and all others who are disgusted with this choice, is to send the big D dems a message and vote for Howard Switzer, the Green Party candidate. He's the only genuine progressive in the race.
