On Thursday, there was a “debate” in Nevada. I have to put that in quotes because one of the debaters failed to show up in person, thereby saving himself the embarrassment of having to answer questions.
His name is Harry Reid. He was there—on video. That allowed him to say what he wanted without any real give-and-take with people who might ask hard questions. When his video ran, the audience largely allowed him his say; there were no unseemly outbreaks of hostility.
Harry, though, was represented at the event. He bused in a lot of union supporters whose primary job, it seems, was to heckle Sharron Angle, his opponent in the Senate race.
Angle had to answer questions directly from a moderator. Often, according to accounts of the evening, she was rudely interrupted, jeered, and generally ridiculed.
Then, as the debate ended, Reid supporters in the audience started arguments with Angle supporters. A mini-brawl broke out, which is not unusual when union thugs are brought in to “handle” an event.
Why wasn’t Reid there? Well, perhaps he was taking care of serious business at the Capitol.
A really serious Judiciary subcommittee hearing was held yesterday morning to discuss the plight of immigrant farm workers. The chair of the committee, Democrat Zoe Lofgren, invited comedian Stephen Colbert to be one of the witnesses. By all accounts—other than Nancy Pelosi’s—this appearance was a travesty. Colbert hammed it up, in character, rather than speaking as himself. The Democrats on the subcommittee were embarrassed—as they should have been.
I guess this is what passes for taking care of the nation’s business.
Meanwhile, the Republicans, as I remarked in yesterday’s post, made a serious attempt to deal with the many problems tearing us apart. Their Pledge to America offered a principled opposition to current policies and charted a course correction. The infusion of Tea Party activism was responsible for much of the nature of this document.
I realize some conservatives are disgruntled with the effort. As I noted previously, action must follow words. However, there are some people who are constitutionally disgruntled; they will never be pleased with anything but perfection, as they perceive it. I don’t want to be one of them. I will give credit where it is due, and for now, the Pledge is an effort that deserves praise.
In a most unserious political environment under Democratic leadership, it’s gratifying to witness a serious foray into sound political philosophy and policies that flow from that philosophy.