Zack Space on “Courage”

  • Posted by Eric
  • May 1, 2008

Caught this in a WaPo article about how Obama has tied Hilary among Congressional supers:

Rep. Zack Space (D-Ohio), who remains neutral, marveled that Hill — who lost his seat in 2004 to Republican Michael E. Sodrel, won it back in 2006 and is likely to face a rematch with Sodrel in November — came out for Obama. But he said he was even more amazed by Tuesday’s endorsement of Obama by Rep. Ben Chandler (D-Ky.), whose district is likely to vote overwhelmingly for Clinton in the Kentucky Democratic primary May 20.

“That’s courageous,” he said.

Yeah, Zack. Courageous. Unlike some in Ohio. I guess staying neutral is a way to have it both ways - not endorse Hillary when you really want to endorse Obama and not endorse Obama in order to save your seat.

You should give Tim Ryan a call to get all the calculus. He’s got it figured out. Right Tim?

Courage is standing in the face of fire and doing what you know is right - whether or not you get burned.

Now, there is something to be said for calculation as it relates to retaining seats so the good guys have a strong Congressional majority - especially when this nomination now appears inevitable. I won’t argue that. If that’s what’s going on, then so be it. But I’d still like to stand and applaud courageousness when I see it. I think Zack just did as well.

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
May 1st, 2008
2 Responses
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories
Plunderbund

Other Posts
Happy Anniversary
Redstate.com Now Wants Nuance and Context!


Say Something!

Because we value your thoughtful opinions, you are encouraged to add a comment to this post. Don't be offended if your comment is edited for clarity or to keep out questionable material. Comments may even be deleted at the discretion of the Plundercrew. You signal your agreement to this by clicking 'Submit Comment' below. Everyone who comments here is responsible for them.

Plunderchat:

Comment Number:
1
Written by:
Modern Esquire
Posted on:
May 1, 2008 at 10:10 am

So it’s courageous when a superdelegate ignores the will of his own constituents to support Obama, proper when they say they’re supporting Obama (like Lewis did) because of the will of his constitutents, cowardly if one does the same rationale to support Clinton, and it’s holy rapture if one does so to support the will of his constituents over the voters of Iowa?

Comment Number:
2
Written by:
Eric
Posted on:
May 1, 2008 at 12:05 pm

I believe Zack Space spoke to what is courageous.

Funny you don’t use the “will of the people” argument with STJ.

I’ll stipulate that supers can use whatever rationale they want. I just think it’s more courageous to do what you know is right rather than fold to political calculations. I believe that is what Representative Space is saying.

The distinction here is that Lewis wanted to support Obama and had a constituency that supported that. Great. But what of those who go against both their constituents and their gut? What of those who want to support something counter to their constituents?

I just find it more courageous to take a stand on something you know to be right. Even if they were truly on the fence before, supers have to realize they need to make a choice and at this point it makes more sense to go with the person leading and sure to lead after all is said and done.