1. Publius says:

    If your chief campaign strategy is to run against a candidate 3,000 miles outside your district…well…here’s your sign.

        • ByteMe says:

          At least one teenager got close to McBerry, so we’re pretty sure we can extrapolate the outcome there of future “closeness”.

          What’s your comparison point to Pelosi? DeLay? Hastert? Newt? Or is this just the latest meme from the right to distract from the disastrous job they did when they controlled Washington?

          • Doug Deal says:

            Newt is just unliked by you Dems because he was an effective Republican in his prime. He had his flaws, but they were far from fatal.

            Delay was never Speaker, so your comparison isn’t relevant. Congress is better for not having him around.

            Hastert was a pawn and not very effective. Comparing him to Pelosi shows that you are under strong influence of blue colored glasses.

            The fact is, the GOP did a great Job from 1994 until W and Rove came on the scene. Perhaps power sharing, with a GOP Congress is the way to go, instead of disasterous one party rule.

            • ByteMe says:

              Sigh. It is you, Doug, who is too influenced by Party and not by reality. I hate the Parties but can respect the ones who accomplish what I want to see done.

              I actually liked Newt A LOT when he got started as speaker, but he tried to overstep his abilities (he was brilliant when he wasn’t in charge, but marketing isn’t enough when you are) and then got caught with his pants down, which just seemed more tawdry than anything, but he lost his effectiveness and his Party said he had to go.

              Hastert was indeed ineffective and left most of the real power to DeLay, who was slime and you know that as well, so DeLay might as well have been Speaker.

              The fact is that the GOP and Clinton did a great job in a giddy economy, which is like saying the Yankees swept a series against the Nationals. It’s when the economy is tough and the choices are harder to make that you want the teams to play nice and figure things out, but that’s not to be… on either side at this point.

              And demonizing someone on the other side might (or might not) be effective politics, but it’s still demonizing a real person for your own political/personal gain.

    • Henry Waxman says:

      Excuse the very nerdy reference, but isn’t that like the Empire saying, “You guys aren’t stupid enough to think that a proton torpedo in the reactor vent shaft would actually destroy the Death Star, are you”?

  2. Henry Waxman says:

    The best video to use against Rep. Marshall is the video of him voting for Pelosi as Speaker. At the start of every Congress they do a “Call of the Roll” vote for Speaker of the House where the name of every Member is called out by the Clerk, the Member stands up and says who they are voting for as Speaker, and the Clerk announces their vote again (e.g., “Mr. Marshall votes Pelosi.”). This is all on tape at the C-SPAN archives.

    If I had the editing software to pull this off, I would have already done it.

  3. B Balz says:

    1.) Rep. Marshall is not my Rep, not in my District,
    2.) I have met the man, one on one, spoke for over an hour, and have no ties to him whatsoever.

    My take from our meeting is the world is fully topsy-turvy when a sitting Dem Rep. speaks like a truly fiscally conservative GOP and not a Dem Rep.

    I know the politics of flipping a Dem seat to a GOP seat are enticing. If the worst Doug can gen-up is that a Dem voted for a Dem (egregious as Ms. Pelosi may be to some, how could he vote against her and be effective to his Constituents?), then Rep. Marshall has no worries in November.

    Doug, is the candidate that we propose to replace Rep. Marshall as smart? Rep. Marshall has a keen, Ivy League intellect and yet is down to earth.

    Has a potential candidate shed blood for our Country? Rep. Marshall is an Army Ranger ‘Hall of Fame’ inductee.

    I would rather watch sausage being made, than see pol ops cleverly kanoodling facts.

    “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

      • B Balz says:

        Really makes me angry to see Party over principle, Byte. I am continually amazed that people who have never met a Rep. dog ’em like the devil.

    • Doug Deal says:

      Yeah, he is a conservative on about one issue, any well publicized vote. In everything else he votes straight party. His votes match extreme liberal Barney Frank 88% of the time, and he matches Westmoreland about 40% of the time.

      What part of that is Conservative? That word means a lot more than symbolic final votes on abortion bills.

      • B Balz says:

        Here’s the deal, Doug. Using stats like ‘vote matching’ is an ineffective and specious yardstick to evaluate any Reps positions.

        Simply put, if you vote YEA, you may ‘agree’ on a relatively meaningless resolution. In other words, you have agreed to nothing.

        Try again, this time, with feeling!

      • DMZDave says:

        OK, a couple points. I think this ad is clever and even pretty funny. It ties Marshall to Pelosi and he certainly does deserve to take his shots for voting for her to be Speaker given that she could not be further out of step with his constituents. But Jim Marshall, the son of an Army general, dropped out of Princeton at the age of 18 to enlist and then volunteered to go to Vietnam where he led troops in combat for a full year of hard corps infantry duty in the jungle. I suspect few posting on this site have the experience to understand the courage that took and the real dangers he faced. One thing we Republicans should all agree on is that we ought not to use terms like coward or question a person’s courage about a politician who has so demonstrably proven he has great personal courage. Let’s agree that we can call Marshall a lot of things for voting for Nancy Pelosi to be Speaker but coward certainly isn’t one of them.

        • GOPGeorgia says:

          I agree that no one should be called coward unless it can be proven that they have done something cowardly.

          • Doug Deal says:

            Backing down against the interests of your district because you are afraid of retlation IS cowardly. This is what enables the scoundrels in Washington, the fact that people who are representing us are willing to stick their necks out for us. Step aside, Jim, I’m sure there are people lined up around the block ready to do it.

    • GOPGeorgia says:

      It is broken and it needs fixing…Marshal is something we can work on. His support of a Speaker who says that congress has to pass something before they can tell you what is in it is unacceptable. His choice for leadership is one of his most important votes and he can’t run from it.

  4. kyleinatl says:

    Sorry Tyler, if I had to choose between Marshall and a political lightweight who thinks tort-reform is the only answer to solving healthcare in America…I’ll take Marshall any second of the day. That, and who the heck needs another pro-lifer wasting time on a dead issue? *buh-dum-bump*

        • B Balz says:

          I dunno Byte, every Rep I have met exhibit leadership skills, some more than others, but all of them have it.

      • B Balz says:

        I am sure Rep. Jim Marshall would be intrigued with your strategic vision regarding leadership and cowardice. Perhaps you might contact his office and discuss this to the man’s
        face, Doug. I bet you have never met the man.

        Rep. Marshall might educate you about the political realities of
        voting with the Party you are in -though I suspect you already know this to be true.

        Folks around here think that they can influence political decisions — Perhaps they can, but I think that is overblown hubris.

        • Doug Deal says:

          So now the excuse is fear of party retaliation. Maybe it’s time to resign or change parties when they are forcing you to compromise principles.

          It’s is hilarious to be lectured by someone using a childish nickname about standing up to someone, when I am using my real name.

          If Marshall could grab a Teddy bear, suck his thumb or otherwise muster the courage to stand up to Pelosi, I would stand with you in support of him.

          Let me know what decade that happens.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            If I lived in his District, I’d confront him. I sat down with my congressman in 1993 and told him that if he voted conservatively , we would be welcome in the GOP. Congressman Deal switched parties about a year later.

            • Icarus says:

              Yet you refused to ask your own Congressman twice in one week when you saw him in person as to whether or not a certain ethics report existed.

              • GOPGeorgia says:


                I have seen him ONCE since he resigned and I think it was the next day. I haven’t seen him since, But I’ll see him Saturday. I’ve read the report and have no problems with it. Considering I was at a Walker County Chamber of Commerce lunch and sitting with the County Commissioner, Congressman Deal, the head of the Chamber, and a representative for Johnny Isakson, I thought proper decorum might be for me not launch a conversation that others might consider a baseless attack.

                Now that the report is out, I consider people like you who refer to it as evidence that he did something wrong as a baseless attack. Tell us on what page of the report that the conclusion that says the report is final and that he is guilty of anything.

                Is there an outstanding question of facts that need to be discussed? (Other than you think I saw him twice in a week?)

                If you would like to attack him, he will be in Gordon County on Saturday.

                • Icarus says:


                  O.K, one conversation was with Deal, one was with his Political Director, (with the intention stated to have the second conversation) but you didn’t want to “confront” him or Harris and cause potential embarassment in front of fellow Republicans, but you had not problem “confront(ing)” Deal when he was a Democrat.

                  I think we see where the priorities are Doug.

                  • GOPGeorgia says:

                    Yes, I talked with Kevin once that same day and lost the call. Had we stayed on the call, I would have asked him about it. Even though he’s my friend, Kevin occasionally takes a week or more to get back to me if I want to talk to him about something.

                    That post was made on March 24. On March 29, 5 days later the report came out.

                    Now Mr. spin, how long do you think it took me to get a meeting with my Democrat Congressman in DC with him knowing I was a die hard activist Republican?

                    It’s not like I could walk in and catch him without an appointment. YOUR priority is to try to make Congressman Deal look bad, and I guess you are trying to make me look bad, even though it looks like you got THREE facts wrong in one sentence.

                    • GOPGeorgia says:


                      Your silence is very loud IMO. Just for kicks, what if I didn’t lose the call with Kevin? Had he told me it would be out in a week and the campaign would have a statement a few days after it came out, would that have changed anything?

                    • Icarus says:

                      What answer were you looking for?

                      You don’t have the balls to ask a Republican elected official something critical that could tip a general election now, and you’re saying I’m being silent?

                      Genius. Pure Genius.

                      Keep up the good work. You’ll have us back in the minority in no time.

                    • GOPGeorgia says:

                      I’m saying you cast a lot of stones, just because I didn’t do something that YOU wanted to do. Your agenda is transparent. You are out to make other people look bad, regardless of if they deserve it our not. Every post you make concerning Congressman Deal is just another piece of mud. There are legitimate things that you could criticize him for, but you are out to use whatever you think is the most politically damaging, and it doesn’t matter to you if you have facts to back it up or not. That makes you look fairly petty.

                      As a Chairman, my job is to bring the GOP back together in my area after the primary (and special) and that means not taking sides. If you don’t understand that, you aren’t as smart as you think you are.

                      Even if I asked the question you wanted, I would have received the answer I predicted, and it wouldn’t have tipped anything. You just wanted to refer to private parts and think it makes you look witty.

                      You are obviously out to assassinate character (s), apparently, including my own. By the way, you are still getting your facts wrong. Congressman Deal wasn’t an elected Republican official at the time.

              • GOPGeorgia says:

                And technically, he was no longer my congressman. One sentence from Icarus, two facts wrong. Keep trying.

          • B Balz says:

            Doug I thought you were a bit more politically savvy than this, my mistake. Won’t happen again.

              • B Balz says:


                DMZDave was able to articulate my sentiments in his comments above. I met, and listened to the man, there is no way to ‘spin’ the ensuing discussion.

          • Romegaguy says:

            threat of party retaliation… resign or change parties… So are you recommending to Preston Smith he becomes a Democrat?

            • GOPGeorgia says:

              There was not a threat involved in the case I am talking about. I simply told him he would be welcome as long as he stood on his principles and voted with the GOP when his principles didn’t tell him otherwise. I don’t know what Newt and others may have told him.

              I think Preston is fine where he is. I’m still waiting on more facts to arise before I decide how I feel about his speech.

  5. slyram says:

    Another move would be asking Rep. Marshall if he voted for McCain or Obama. With that answer, Obama supporters would take a deeper look at him in November. They won’t stay home but they might skip that contest on the ballot—none of the above.

    I will say here publicly that my crystal ball must be broken. After the 2008 election, I wrongfully assumed that the GOP would create a smoother subdivision (think Isakson and Rubio) to attract the center and take congress. As we know, that party actually moved farther right and grew very vocal; basically saying “we dare anyone to think about anything that remotely resembles cooperation between parties.” Newsflash: the Blue Dogs and GOP members in the GA delegation work together on the Farm Bill, support for our military and bases etc.

    I generally think in terms of relative. Marshall’s legislative actions are bold in THAT district. My friends and I laugh that the Tea Party Movement is so correct in stating that the Blue Dogs don’t vote the will of the people in their districts—they often ignore the real liberals in the urban areas. Liberals who views are similar to L.A. and NYC Democrats. Those liberals see Blue Dogs as a necessary nuisance but the Tea Party are making them appreciate caucus members who can add some fiscal soundness to the debate.

    This is what I don’t get: if the GOP candidates against Blue Dogs are going to get 90% of the conservative vote walking in the door, why not finesse the situation and become appealing to moderates and centrists. How can they do that: seem cool and level headed while everyone else is angry.

    And if a Blue Dog is picked off, the new GOP member will see the Obama wave of voters coming in 2012—who knows what will happen with the presidential election but that will be the time to wish you built a better relationship with a diverse cross selection of voters—the way Marshall and the Blue Dogs have. If you want to beat them, steal their playbook.

Comments are closed.