Hat tip to tparty at MLN.
Hartford Courant, September 14 (Lightman):
If they do not give him significant backing “I’m absolutely not going to run,” said Shays, who said he is giving no one any deadlines.
…
Even if he runs and wins, and somehow gets denied the top Republican spot anyway in 2009, “I will resign,” Shays said.
…
“I’m 61 years old. I’ve been in Congress 20 years. If I have to fight to become chairman of a committee, given the job I’ve done, I need to move on,” Shays said in an interview this morning.
Norwalk Hour, September 17 (paid subscription only, if you don’t have one, click here or here instead):
Though Shays, R-4, told The Hartford Courant he would not continue to serve as a Congressman if he was not named top Republican or chairman of the Government Oversight Committee, his Chief of Staff Betsy Hawkings said this does not indicate a lack of commitment to the district.
“He’s not planning to retire, he’s not threatening to retire, he’s just being honest with leaders with what he can do,” Hawkings said, adding that Shays is next in line for a top spot on the committee with which he has logged 20 years of service.
He’s not threatening to retire when he says, “I’m absolutely not going to run” or “I will resign”? Or maybe David Lightman made it up:
His statement, Hawkings said, was “twisted” in some newspaper articles, and Shays meant that he needs to focus primarily on the “difficult” race against Democratic challenger Jim Himes, and not worry about earning a party position for which he is “next in line.”
That seems like the exact opposite of what Lightman reported, no? And he used quotes and everything!
It is up to the voters to interpret the meaning of Shays’ statement, which Gary Rose, chairman of the Government and Politics Department and Politics Department at Sacred Heart University, said would add “a little fuel” to Himes’ fire.
Good luck 4th CD voters, because I have no idea – those two statements seems completely contradictory to me.
All emphasis mine. Really, it was tparty’s emphasis, but I stole it. Sue me.
17 responses so far ↓
Shays is backing off of what he said earlier. Good idea.
I love the headline!
Sounds like the GOP leadership didn’t take to kindly to being threatened publicly.
You mean he realized that saying that his personal power in the House was his most important consideration might hurt him with his constituents? Amazing!
They may very well have informed him of the possibility of the door hitting his ass on the way out, and encouraged him to avoid such an occurrence.
No, it was me. Yesterday I asked him not to retire.
He turned my way, started to smile, (geez he must have thought, someone actually cares..)
Then he saw it was me, and I started smiling.
“Please don’t retire Mr. Shays. We want to go through you, not around you!”
Sorry. I should have more respect for Rep. Shays. It’s just hard to stomach someone who gained conscientious observer status to avoid Vietnam, (basically he chose not to fight for our country), who now makes excuses to delay an end to the failed Iraq experiment, resulting in more dead soldiers.
And oh yeah. He blames Bush for the fiasco, quickly forgetting how hard he sold this elective war in CT, with plenty of talk about Saddam and nuclear weapons.
Blood on your hands Mr, C.O. Shays. And you’re worse than Lieberman who at least owns his war.
My brain hurts.
Big whoop, y’all. So, Shays will take on some lib while Giuliani runs against some “General Betray Us” Dem. Shays should be sooooooo concerned …
Petraeus did betray us. A good and loyal soldier, but history will not be kind to him. Bush has the midas touch in reverse. Anyone who gets close to him ends up mired in shit.
>>Bush has the midas touch in reverse. Anyone who gets close to him ends up mired in shit.
Maybe it’s you.
I’ve been to New Haven and Wash DC; DC seems much nicer to me.
New Haven OTOH should bulldozed into the sea. (That would be a large union job, employing lots and lots of people; you should be in favor it.)
C’mon ACR, where is the report on Chris Healy’s fabulous 50th birthday bash.
No mention of it anywhere. Not even on the CT GOP blog. Does that mean almost no one showed up?
Again, I predict the recidivist criminal doesn’t last beyond March of next year….
[quote comment="19412"]Petraeus did betray us. A good and loyal soldier, but history will not be kind to him. Bush has the midas touch in reverse. Anyone who gets close to him ends up mired in shit.[/quote]
One Dem to another,…….cut the crap. Sometimes I wonder if you can see the broader picture of proper debate (ie: winning) or do you just want to play the role of the cartoon leftist that AM radio feeds off of. All Democrats should back away from that stupid bumpersticker bullshit ad ASAP. Just as you yourself have advocated on this site for “statesmenship” when local Reps visit you should also recognize the respect that a 4 star General deserves. Treason is a hefty charge and with no, absolute zero eveidence of it, you sound silly and childish.
Please watch and share.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD0Ec_6F0TM
[quote comment="19387"]Sorry. I should have more respect for Rep. Shays. It’s just hard to stomach someone who gained conscientious observer status to avoid Vietnam, (basically he chose not to fight for our country), who now makes excuses to delay an end to the failed Iraq experiment, resulting in more dead soldiers.
And oh yeah. He blames Bush for the fiasco, quickly forgetting how hard he sold this elective war in CT, with plenty of talk about Saddam and nuclear weapons.
Blood on your hands Mr, C.O. Shays. And you’re worse than Lieberman who at least owns his war.[/quote]
TrueBlue, you’re an embarrassment.
For Reals–
Check out the Pentagon quarterly report, issued today, and see if it jibes with what Petraeus tried to sell us. If the MoveOn ad was factually wrong, I’d be the first to apologize. But I won’t apologize for valid criticisms of last week’s 9/11 dog and pony show. As Americans we should all be ashamed of how low Bush has taken our country.
Plus no one has accused Petraeus of treason. He’s just sugar-coating/cherry-picking facts on the ground as he tries to complete mission impossible.
Dobb–
What is embarassing is the fact that none of you ‘wingers are over there fighting in this most important conflict. If “winning” was so important, and we are so short of troops, one would think a patriot like yourself would be the first to enlist. What’s the problem? A medical condition? Or do you just not think Bush’s Iraq experiment is worth dying for?
TrueBlue, I’ve told you this before — I’m a veteran and I’ve already served in operations that remain classified to this day. What have you done for this country? Peddling cheap real estate and zipping around Connecticut with CT Keith in support of losing causes do not count.
If you’re so against this war, why don’t you support a candidate who will stop it?
[quote comment="19418"]“What is embarassing is the fact that none of you ‘wingers are over there fighting in this most important conflict. “[/quote]
Do you have any factual, verifiable data that suggests that “wingers” aren’t over in Iraq fighting? I’m not saying that they are or aren’t, but I’ve not yet seen any firm data that suggest that “wingers” are either more or less representative of our honorable military forces fighting and making sacrifices in Iraq.
If you could please point me to some independent, truly non-partisan, factual statistical data, I would (honestly, not in a snarky way) appreciate it. I’m not looking for an argument or for spin, I just want facts on this upon which I can draw my own conlusions.
You must log in to post a comment.