National Review – Targeting Chet Edwards

Chet Edwards (D-TX17) endorsing Barack Obama, Feb. 18, 2008. Photo from the Barack Obama Flickr site.

National Review, the premier conservative magazine, has posted an article by Andrew Stiles – Targeting Chet Edwards. Although the article is more Beltway than District 17, the fact is that Chet Edwards will have no one to blame but himself if he fails to be re-elected.

Many agree that if this is the year Chet Edwards finally goes down, he will have mostly himself to blame — he has failed to represent constituents’ concerns about spending, taxes, and the deficit, especially in recent years.

Whatever claims Edwards might have to “independent” status were likely squandered during the 2008 presidential campaign when he attempted to sell Barack Obama to the state of Texas as a man of “sound judgment.”

The most telling quote is from Edwards himself.

“I’m used to being a target,” Edwards told the Associated Press. “This year, there’s clearly an anti-Washington environment, and I share those frustrations. I’m sickened by the hyper-partisanship. But I’m working hard at the grassroots level, letting my independent voting record speak for itself.”

It’s like Mad Magazine’s Spy vs. Spy in this Edwards vs. Edwards money quote as he puts on his hyperpartisan Washington persona. He uses a Lakoff spin machine of popularly polled terms like “grassroots level,” “anti-Washington environment,”  and “sharing our frustrations” in an effort to make us believe his concerns are our concerns.

It’s good to read about District 17 on a national website. Read the entire article here.

Comments

  1. I thought this was an important point:
    “Edwards doesn’t always vote like the average Democrat, though that should hardly come as a surprise. He voted against key party initiatives including health-care reform, cap-and-trade, and financial reform. ‘By any measure you use, he’s a moderate conservative.'”

  2. To Teddy and those that think like him: Chet is Pelosi’s lap dog. He did zero campaigning against the measures to help them fail, he voted for them to be brought to a vote, and he waited until the votes were in for a victory before casting his. He votes with Pelosi 96% of the time. How can that be a “moderate conservative”? I saw Chet last year in Hood County talking to realtors when Cap & Trade passed the House. Chet told them that he was not against the bill – just the timing.

  3. Yep, that kind of Beltway lingo tries to blur reality, but it takes a fast car, baby, to lead a double-life… as the song goes. There is nothing moderately conservative about Chet-Big-Gov’t/Big-Labor-Edwards, unless you believe being pro-killing babies in the womb is a “moderate” characteristic.

    I’ve got my printed-at-taxpayer-expense Chet brochure explaining how ObamaCare is going to be just great. Edwards puts a new spin on the Kerry explanation by being for legislation after he voted against it.

    Beltway lingo may dupe the media types in D.C., but it’s getting no traction here in District 17 where the people Edwards supposedly [Card Check] represents live and vote and where Highway 6 runs both ways…. fast car or not.

Speak Your Mind

*