Clear
58°
Clear
Hi 74° | Lo 49°

Letter: Show horse or work horse?

In the June 14 issue of the Monitor, Fox News host Chris Wallace responded to the findings of the New York Times regarding the number of TV appearances made by different political figures. Between 2010 and June 2013, U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte had appeared 11 times while U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen had never appeared.

Wallace stated, “What makes a good guest is someone who makes news. To make news you have to be at the center of the news.”

Really? New Hampshire voters might want to ask themselves, “What makes a good senator?” Is it a show horse or a work horse? Do we want someone who spends a lot of time prepping for interviews or someone who spends their time examining the issues and working with others to address them?

As Aesop wrote, “After all is said and done, more is said than done.”

BEVERLY GRENERT

Contoocook

LOL!! The Senator who voted for the ObamaKare bill without knowing what was in is a Work Horse??? Is being a mindless rubber stamp now being called a Work Horse in the new 1984 style Obama speak? There are several reasons Senator Kelly Ayotte makes more frequent appearances on TV talk shows while Jeanne Shaheen had little to no appearances and they are : Senator Kelly Ayotte is articulate, attractive, quick on her feet and answers the questions directly while Jeanne Shaheen has none of those attributes. It is likely the democrat party would prefer that Shaheen would stay away from TV talk shows in order to avoid embarrassment.

Van, you repeat misinformation, in your never-ending efforts to make highly partisan points. The claim that the ACA was voted on without anyone knowing what was in it is, like the claim of 'death panels', false. But that doesn't stop blindly partisan opponents on the right from repeating both claims every chance they get. It's the "Big Lie" technique the right seems to specialize in: tell an untruth often enough, and the gullible, the poorly-informed, and the ideologically blind will believe it. Which category(s) are you in?

One of the chief architects of Obamacare, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, has launched a scathing attack on the program, arguing that it is too complex and that program managers could imperil the program’s future. “I believe the Affordable Care Act is probably the most complex piece of legislation ever passed by the United States Congress,” the retiring West Virginia Democrat said on Tuesday. “Tax reform obviously has been huge too, but up to this point it is just beyond comprehension”....Too complex, beyond comprehension...yet voted into law. No one understands Obamacare and all its implications, no one. That would make Vans claim true.

I will have to say that I can't argue with the basics of your point, at least up to the point you used the "V" word. One of the biggest problems we face with complex legislation is that Congress is not populated with subject matter experts that have a firm grasp on the issues. I don't want to pick on Sen Ayotte but she is a good example, one I happen to like by the way. What in her background makes her competent to rule on healthcare reform any more so than you or I?? She was a lawyer appointed as Attorney General. It is not possible to have a simple law these days. The entire Bill of Rights can be typed on a single letter size piece of paper, how many trees gave their lives for the ACA? We have entire industries that pour over laws looking for loopholes, no wonder things get complex. A new tax law comes out and immediately people try to find a way to skirt it. More to the point, we now live in a society where it is the letter of the law that is the rule - not the intent of the law. But back to the main point - do we want our elected representatives to be TV personalities or law makers, last time I checked attractive was not one of the job requirements. Or in layman's terms - do you want a Meteorologist or a weather girl supplying you with accurate weather reports. I like CNN's Ginger Zee, but I doubt she qualifies as a meteorologist. Get the priorities straight Van.

Rockefeller's remarks were NOT "a scathing attack on the program". Nor does your claim--even if it were true--and it isn't, make Van's different (and false) claim true. Instead, Rockefeller's remarks were aimed at what he regards as a lack of preparation by managers prior to the ACA's roll-out in the states: "Spokeswoman Abigail McDonough cautioned that Rockefeller remains an ardent supporter of Obamacare. She said, 'Senator Rockefeller was a key author of the landmark health reform law and he is a very strong believer in the good that this law will do for so many millions of Americans. When the law is fully implemented in 2014, it will be the first time that such a sweeping health reform law goes into effect and there will undoubtedly be some challenges. But the Senator's point during Tuesday's hearing was to encourage the administration to get ahead of as many of those challenges as it can so that implementation goes as smoothly as possible.'"

Bruce I wouldn't use the word misinformation where you did, that is a disservice to the word information. At some point in recent history innuendo, falsehoods and outright lies have replaced true information. As for your ending question - I think the answer is clear.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.