Decisions, decisions ... Part III
If Johnson would have picked his choice already you would be bitching that he got paid by someone. Now that he hasn't picked you bitch about that. What ever he does this blog will spins it.That's a fair question. TJW is no fan of any of the three candidates, so I agree that, in this case, there is no course of action Johnson could take that TJW would approve (save, perhaps, taking a public stand that the Republicans need a fourth option, like Chris Shays (R-CT), who is committed to genuine reform). In other words, I agree that in isolation Johnson's failure to pick a candidate doesn't matter much.
However, in the context of Johnson's overall record, TJW believes that Johnson's failure to pick sides in this contest is revealing of his overall mous operandi -- which is to avoid whenever possible taking a position on controversial issues, especially when doing so might annoy someone in the leadership. There may be no "right" position on who should be Majority Leader, but there surely was a right position on Tom DeLay's proposal to change House ethics rules so that he could remain Majority Leader even if indicted, yet Johnson ducked the vote. There surely was a right position on President Bush's proposal to gut Social Security, yet Johnson avoided taking any position in the hope (correct, it turned out) that Bush's plan would go away for lack of support. There surely was a right position on Bush's decision to cut wages for construction workers working on Katrina reconstruction, but his office would not respond to my inquiry concerning his position on the issue. There surely is a right position on whether Bush should make public records of his dealings with convicted GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, but Johnson avoided constituent questions on that issue as well.
The stated purpose of this blog is that Johnson's "constituents should know what he's doing". How he is conducting himself in the GOP leadership contest is part of the mosaic of information that his constituents should have.