Tuesday’s column: They’re blasting Rep. Morgan Griffith’s survey
Every now and then a columnist touches a nerve. Sometimes that nerve already has been plucked by a congressman. Such was the case with Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem.
Shortly after his victorious re-election bid, the former freshman sent out a 7-question survey to his 9th Congressional District constituents.
Most of the questions were so overly simplistic and leading that they seemed insulting. So I had a little fun with them in a Jan. 8 column.
The response from readers was swift and severe. Most of it was aimed at Griffith.
Michael Bentley of Salem didn’t get the survey, but he responded to Griffith anyway:
“The wording of the survey that others received was . . .biased to produce responses that aligned with the views of right-wing extremists,” Bentley wrote. “Perhaps you need to hire a reputable pollster to supervise your next survey.”
Retired professor Carol Burger of Blacksburg was next. She has constructed and conducted surveys, and she found Griffith’s horribly lacking.
“Even the most skilled survey writer has to do a lot of editing before a survey is ready to collect the data that would be most helpful,” Burger wrote.
“My question is, ‘How does [Griffith] get away with this stuff?’ The only thing I can come up with is that if you repeat a lie enough times, people start to believe it.”
READ THE REST OF THIS COLUMN HERE.
February 5, 2013 - 6:00 AM
Gee…what is the third time you have used your forum to blast Griffith over his survey. One survey…three attacks. Are you running out of Republican ideas or people to attack?
Griffith deserves to be attacked for the manner in which he ignores the needs of his constituents in order to kiss the boots of Big Coal and his tea party backers. Repeatedly.
Dan has to stirrup something, he has to keep fire burning in the belly of the lefties.
“Dan has to stirrup something…”
Dan, I thought you rode bikes.
“Not all of readers appreciated the column. In a letter to the editor, Nancy McMahon of Salem praised Griffith for seeking out his constituents’ advice. Never before has a politician requested her opinion, she wrote. In that respect, Griffith is “one of a kind.”" RT
Griffith is a piece of work “in that respect”.
I have worked closely with politicians my entire adult life. Without question, Morgan Griffith is the most honest and honorable one I have ever worked with.
I vividly remember Morgan fighting for one state issue (Dan knows which one) where there was a huge corporate political and financial backlash against him and virtually no political gain, but he thought it was right and fair so he fought. He stuck up for the little guy.
Dan disagrees with Morgan so he does his best to lampoon him and shred his credibility. Morgan has thick skin so I am sure he just chuckles and skakes his head when he reads this stuff. He knows that the people in Salem who know him best love him, respect him, and appreciate the sacrifices he makes to represent them.
Another attack on a Republican by the Democratic Party controlled Roanoke Times. Big deal.
How about a column on Obama’s missing budget? Irresponsible, corrupt and
out of control government by liberals. Does the biascat have your pen Dan?
Why the big “much ado about nothing”? Has anyone ever seen or received a survey by phone or mail from any politician or from either party that is completely unbiased? Not me.
In a short space and to encourage responses, I thought the survey was a good idea. However, as has been pointed out, you can’t get to the complexity of the issues with such a short survey.
As for “insulting intelligence”, get real. That should have made it easy for “intelligent” people who disagree with Congressman Griffith to vote for the other point of view.
@6 Very powerful post, Terps.
I am sorry a great man is subject to this kind of treatment just because of pure partisanship. But that is the M.O of today’s leftwing. it is certainly not of God.
Wow, Terps’ account of Griffith sure doesn’t speak highly of the other politicians he’s worked with! I have contacted Rep. Griffith a few times via e-mail about various topics. Most of these contacts resulted in him sending me snarky letters (he’s quite condescending if you disagree with him) at taxpayer expense. Apparently he only listens to the constituents who tell him what he wants to hear–just like the answers on his “survey!”
Tell us which state issue, terps. Seriously. I’m interested.
One thing he should have been more honest about was the state’s need to better fund its infrastructure. He knew we were headed down the toilet on this important issue and yet he refused to do anything about it (that I know of), I assume because it might hurt future political aspirations.
Seriously terps, do you believe you do Griffith any favors by assuring us he believes the crap he says and see what he does as righteous? Really?
Henry, you and your right winger friends, let us know when you are forced to participate here. Otherwise, stop whining.
“Why the big “much ado about nothing”? Has anyone ever seen or received a survey by phone or mail from any politician or from either party that is completely unbiased? Not me.”
–Comment by Bert Hubbard
Bert, welcome to the blog!
The issue isn’t about “a survey by phone or mail from any politician or from either party that is completely unbiased.”
Rather, it’s about a survey that is almost completely biased, and reduces complexities to absurdities.
Griffith’s survey was a textbook example of how to bias a survey to get the answers you want, a selection of loaded, leading questions presented as a request for feedback.
That’s deceitful and dishonest. Dan is simply doing his job as a journalist by calling him out on it. Too bad for you if you have a problem with that.
How about a column on Obama’s missing budget? Irresponsible, corrupt and
out of control government by liberals. Does the biascat have your pen Dan?
Comment by Leon — February 5, 2013 @ 10:37 am
Leon, I imagine Dan’s answer to your question would be that he is a Metro writer and MG lives in and represents our “Metro.” And, he would be correct.
That being said, as a journalist, it would be refreshing to see an occasional blog comment by Dan lamenting the complete and pathetic job the national media do(outside of Ed Henry) in regards to holding Obama accountable. As a journalist Dan, you must realize that is the primary function of the White House press corp…..sadly, Obama gets a pass on all big issues.
Do you folks EVER call in to Limbaugh and ask him to be less “biased” in his POV? EVER called FOX and asked for a little less “sensationalism”? Ever asked the right wing media in any form, to be more balanced and fair to the other side? What is with you people? You like bias just fine, it is the bias that does not carry your tune that you cannot abide. Don’t like Dan’s perspective? Move on.
Another Chuck is correct: My editors might look dimly on any proposal by me to write about Obama’s failure to submit fiscal 2014 spending plan by the deadline.
Unless, that is, Obama gave a speech here in Roanoke in which he said, “You didn’t budget that!”
EVEN WORSE, it would undoubtedly incur the wrath of BobH. His hobby, as everyone here knows, is judging the “metro-ness” of my columns.
I don’t want to give Bob H a heart attack or anything, n’ecst pas? (I know, Bob H, that ain’t “metro” language).
But because AC is a nice guy, and because he spends a lot of time paying attention to me, and because he asked nicely, on this occasion I will do a blog comment on the “the complete and pathetic job the national media do in regards to holding Obama accountable” vis a vis the 2014 budget. So here goes.
No national media anywhere have written about President Obama’s failure to submit a budget. This is an utter disgrace. The national media are shirking their jobs. Why, they have kept it such a secret that I can’t understand how the Obama haters have figured this out. They must be smarter than I give them credit for.
Bad, bad national media? Why won’t you do your jobs?
AC, does that work for you?
Do you folks EVER call in to Limbaugh and ask him to be less “biased” in his POV? EVER called FOX and asked for a little less “sensationalism”? Ever asked the right wing media in any form, to be more balanced and fair to the other side? What is with you people? You like bias just fine, it is the bias that does not carry your tune that you cannot abide. Don’t like Dan’s perspective? Move on.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 5, 2013 @ 12:07 pm
But you forget Sandi. . .Rush is Right. Dan isn’t.
Another Chuck is correct: My editors might look dimly on any proposal by me to write about Obama’s failure to submit fiscal 2014 spending plan by the deadline.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 5, 2013 @ 12:08 pm
This is complete BS Dan. . .you opine on National issues all the time.
Rush pays no attention to his listeners unless they’re groveling at his feet. Or adding cash to his bank account.
Typical Leon. Sadly, I know you believe that lie.
Yes Dan, typical media, ignoring the right wing memes…
Rush is Right(wing)…but that’s about as far as he gets.
HaHa! Thanks you, Dan. That’s better!
Leon, I don’t write columns on national issues all the time. Here is the archive of all my columns. This is your opportunity to prove me wrong. Peruse it, come back here, and in a comment list the links to 10 that are national issues bereft of a Roanoke-region or Virginia perspective. This should be easy because there are more than 500 columns!
We’re waiting. . .tick tock.
@Leon,
Rush is right? This is the nut job you’d follow off a cliff? RW lemmings…
http://dailycurrant.com/2013/01/31/rush-limbaugh-denied-service-mexican-restauruant/
The worst part of this is that yet another example of Morgan Griffith’s refusal to work FOR his constituents, instead of groveling at the feet of his Big Coal & Tea Party masters, will go unnoticed. His knee jerk lemming supporters will vote him back into office for the next two decades minimum. All the while, they’ll fall further and further behind the rest of the Commonwealth and the nation, all because they prefer his false rhetoric to the truth that would advance their economic lives.
We’re waiting. . .tick tock.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 5, 2013 @ 12:58 pm
If there are 10. . .then your comment about your editorial board would be
a ____ ?
GDAD
If I ever meet you I’d be glad to tell you the story, but I don’t feel comfortable getting into details on the blog. But I think even Dan would tell you, that in this circumstance, Morgan did the right thing when all the incentive was to do the wrong thing.
Hey Dan, back me up here.
I’m willing to wager that half the people complaining about it, do not live in the district. And if they do, they have never put forth the effort to contact him directly via email, mail, telephone call.
Page view journalism at its best: Casey writes to piss off Roanoke’s mostly conservative population, posts it on facebook, and the hits start rolling in.
Part of me thinks that Casey is thankful to have Griffith, because nobody would read a hit-piece about Rick Boucher.
Scott A…the Daily Currant is satire, like The Onion.
Scott A, you realize this isn’t real, don’t you?
“If I ever meet you I’d be glad to tell you the story, but I don’t feel comfortable getting into details on the blog. But I think even Dan would tell you, that in this circumstance, Morgan did the right thing when all the incentive was to do the wrong thing.
Hey Dan, back me up here.”
–Comment by terps
You could say, Morgan’s actions (and some by some others as well) saved certain western Virginians a lot of money, both individually but especially in the aggregate — and helped terps make a pile of it at the same time.
In defense of Scott A, I would note that the problem with a satire of Rush Limbaugh is that given all the garbage he’s spewed over the years as “an entertainer” (ahem!) it’s hard to know where the line is. It’s a funny article that’s played as straight as could be until you get to the Limbaugh quotes.
OJ and gdad, Yes I realize it’s satire. Point is, it’s not too far off from what I’d expect from Rush or his faithful followers. I can picture that spewing during a Rush rant.
“You could say, Morgan’s actions (and some by some others as well) saved certain western Virginians a lot of money, both individually but especially in the aggregate — and helped terps make a pile of it at the same time.”
But the point is Morgan’s actions on that bill cost him dearly from a political standpoint with no discernable gain.
Sure,I eventually ended up making money …but I’m not a politician or Mother Theresa. I’m a businessman who now employs 30 people with high paying jobs in Morgan’s district because he put the district’s best interest above his own. Those jobs would not exist right now without Morgan’s direct help.
Would we all prefer that those 30 people attend OWS rallys looking for handouts?
Terps,
First, I have no problem with you making a pile of money — in fact, I think it’s pretty damn cool that you actually did it while saving certain consumers money at the same time. Second (because I don’t recall the exact time frame/events) was Morgan Majority Leader when it happened? If not, he rose to ML afterward — so what was the cost? If he was already ML, he remained in that post — and then he later stepped up to Congress, by beating an entrenched incumbent.
All of that is to say, either way he advanced. I think it’s a little much to suggest he fell on his sword for the greater good.
What “cost” is this you keep referring to? Griffith has been a right wing golden child for well over a decade. Irregardless of what you “made”, what did it “cost” him? Seriously.
Morgan was a 2nd term back bencher delegate at this time. He was the last delegate/senator I approached. ALL of the area representatives gave me a firm NO at first.They were quite frank about stating that the political cost were too high…and Dan knows what I mean.
I had never donated a nickel to Morgan and he had never heard of me. But, he was able to see through the fog of corruption and do what he thought was right.
Sure, Morgan went on to succeed in politics….because others began to see in him what I saw; an honest, smart and hardworking guy who understands that sometimes you have to sacrifice for others. Those who personally attack Morgan simply just do not know him. It is impossible not to like him.
Disagreeing politically is a different matter. He is a conservative and he understands that his views will invite wrath from Dan and other in the liberal media.
Scott A, you have a point. Actually, I do know a couple folks who sound sorta like that. I happen to be related to one, unfortunately…and am friends with a couple folks who have parents with similar opinions.
I am sorry, but there was no cost he paid that I can tell and you can articulate so it seems to me he did you a favor when no one else would and it cost him nothing and gained him a real champion. I do not see any downside and you cannot point to any.
I was so mad when I saw that survey. It helps to know there are others out there that were equally insulted. I actually scribbled all over it and gave real answers which I am sure no one will bother to read but I just could not put it in the trashcan without making some statement. That one survey did more to change my opinion about Griffith than any of the negative adds run during the campaign. It’s what we used to call “shooting yourself in your own foot”!
terps, I’m sure I would understand better if I knew the whole story, but this thing has gotten bizarre. From the point of view of those of us in the dark, what you seem to be saying is that Morgan somehow singlehandedly (or nearly so) against the wishes of all other politicians in the state did something that saved some unidentified people some money and also ended up creating a business opportunity that made you rich (that alone would be reason enough for you to like the guy).
You say this somehow cost Griffith dearly politically but all the rest of us can see is that after he performed this mystery miracle, he became the GA House leader and then won a seat in Congress. Are you saying that he might have been a senator or president by now if he hadn’t been so brave? Yes, there’s a little sarcasm in that comment, but, seriously, for most of us it’s pretty hard to see any downside for Griffith from what you’ve said.
You also say that you’re uncomfortable going into detail on the blog, but it sounds to me like Griffith did something legal on a public bill in full view of voters, so why the shyness about it?
And then, terps, there’s this: “Would we all prefer that those 30 people attend OWS rallys looking for handouts?”
So you seem to be saying that without you, your 30 employees would be so devoid of smarts, opportunity, and ambition that they’d all be living on the dole and doing god knows what in Elmwood Park? That without you, they would all be jobless? Really? You’re that much of a miracle worker?
BTW, terps, I’ve had just one brief encounter with Griffith (although I HAVE had others tell me that in real life — outside of the political arena — he’s a nice guy) and to me it was a quick, small example of how he didn’t want to do the hard things because it might hamper his political ambitions. When we chatted for a moment more than three years ago during his last GA campaign, he wanted to know what I was thinking about the upcoming GA session. I told him that I thought that one thing legislators needed to do was suck it up and do something about investing more in transportation and infrastructure. He agreed and assured me the GA was “headed in the right direction.” This was when Bobby McD was telling us that tolls and tariffs on drilling that wouldn’t happen for at least 10 years were the answers to all our prayers.
During the subsequent session, of course, absolutely zero was done. Just like in all the sessions under Griffith’s leadership. And, IMO, that was because Griffith was too afraid to do what needed — and still needs — to be done.
One of the nicest, straightest shooting politicians I’ve ever known was Dave Nutter. But the Repubs essentially kicked him to the curb because he worked with Dems to get a badly needed increase in revenues to replace the huge hole created by Gilmore’s car tax debacle. BTW, he told me years ago about how the whole transportation funding model was in trouble, and he also predicted that the GA would sit on it hands.
I think what terps meant was not that what Griffith did cost him dearly, politically, but that it was politically risky. I would agree with that. And gdad, I don’t believe it made terps “rich” — he was already doing quite well, and “rich” is a very relative term anyway. But it made him a pile of money.
–dan
When it pays off, it is not a risk. The market rewards that as smart. So does politics to a point. Just think folks, if this whatever had gone badly, we would have terps to thank for ending Griffith’s career.
Thanks, Dan, I amend my comment to “made you a pile of money” (which I have no objection to).
So, am I getting that terps is dependent on the government for his success? Who built that, then.
GDAD
It was a public matter but I would prefer to keep my identity private and that it is why I don’t divulge the details. I understand it is confusing without the details. It is a great story that maybe some day I’ll have the chance to tell you.
Kristen
As Dan can attest, this was a circumstance where the government would not get out of the way. All I was asking from the government was the freedom to raise the quality and lower the prices for my customers. But I will admit, as Dan will also attest to, that the government is good to me and helps me make a good living. I don’t hate the government. I just don’t want unbridled government dictating my every move in life.
So when can we expect to see the results of the survey?