Praise for Griffith, raps for Casey
Wikimedia Commons
Your daily Letter to the Editor — Jan. 17, 2015
I read with displeasure Dan Casey’s column regarding Rep. Morgan Griffith (“Griffith’s ‘survey’ ignores issues’ complexities,” Jan. 8).
I am 46 years old, and have voted since I was allowed to do so. Never once has anyone sent me an email or (in previous days) a petition asking for my opinion. Griffith is one of a kind in allowing members of the public to voice their preferences so that he may act on our behalf.
Griffith even asked for any additional comments he could address, so I believe it is Casey who is trying to sway public opinion by his column, not Griffith.
Nancy McMahon
SALEM
January 17, 2013 - 1:30 PM
Gues what, Nancy. No one’s asked your opinion still.
That’s not the issue Nancy… here’s another question written in Griffithspeak: Dear Voter: Everyone knows men and women are different, so are women inferior to men, or are men superior to women?
Dave Gresham, that’s funny. Here’s another question I’d like Griffith to pose in his NEXT survey:
“Do you support or opposethe following minor textual change to the Second Amendment:
‘A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear marijuana shall not be infringed.’”
Nancy, is Morgan Griffith a great congressman, or the greatest? Please put any additional remarks in the space between these lines. We value your opinion.
Comment by Dan Casey — January 17, 2013 @ 2:18 pm
Hey, hey, hey! You leave Mary Jane out of this. She’s over there minding her own business and not bothering anyone.
It’s interesting Nancy has never received any mailers previously. For years, I received quarterly flyers from Rick Boucher, many of which requested feedback, some asking direct questions. Of course, that only occurred over the span of nearly the entire last decade of Boucher’s term in Congress.
As for Griffith requesting feedback, sure, he sought feedback to his overly stilted and biased questions. He asked for yes/no answers, disallowing any context to the very complex topics. The supposed ‘space’ he allowed at the end of the survey was so minimal as to not adequately any discussion about even a single question of his.
But, hey – the point isn’t reality. With Griffith, the point is always about perception. Distorted perception. Thus, Nancy’s comments show just how strongly she supports Griffith in a very effective manner.
It should be decriminalized Dan, but I’ve never seen anyone who’s intelligence and performance wasn’t diminished while under its influence, similar to how drinking impairs finer abilities. I prefer sobriety.
A GOP congressman of limited intellectual reach whose political career has been based almost entirely on being an obstructionist and an objectionist sends his constiuents a RNC/RCC C canned survey that reads like a cheap push poll.Sole purpose to expand the mailing list for future solicitations. Not very unusual or newsworthy.
Crooked speaks the truth, Boucher regularly informed and solicited his constituency. Boucher also made a true attempt to represent as many of his constituents as he could, striking a moderate pose that ticked off the extremes in both parties, but was effective in doing his job in representing Southwest Va. Griffith is a minor league idealogue who will never do the job as well as Boucher. His questionaire is as bogus as his qualifications and comittment to represent ALL of his constituents. While I have recently moved on, and while I disagreed with Rick upon occasion, I never questioned his ability to serve the diverse make-up of the region he represents, now that he actually lives there.
Insert “like I do Griffith’s” between represents, and now that he actually lives there. in message above, sorry.
@ #3
Dan, lay off the bottle.
I think that the mailer was appropiate. It is much better than what alot of politicians seem to be doing today which is to further their cause, and the citizenship be damned. I guess its no different than Congressman Griffith having a town hall meeting to gain insight as to his constituents thoughts. I can`t understand why it is thought of as `silly`. Would it be `silly` if the same type mailer were sent by a Democrat to their base ? Of course not.
In a “fair and balanced” world of course they don’t notice the horrible, slanted idiocy of the questionnaire.