Rep. Shadegg Sure Loves to Exploit Other People's Kids!!
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
November 19, 2009 3:20pm CST
You may remember Republican Representative John Shadegg's shameless using of "Baby Maddie" as a prop on the floor of the House during the health care debate a few weeks ago. Well, he's at it again, this time while speaking about New York Mayor Blommberg's comments about not being afraid of hosting a "terror trial" in his city. Below is some of what he said:
"I saw the Mayor of New York said today, "We're tough. We can do it." Well, Mayor, how are you going to feel when it's your daughter that's kidnapped at school by a terrorist? How are you going to feel when it's some clerk -- some innocent clerk of the court -- whose daughter or son is kidnapped? Or the jailer's little brother or little sister? This is political correctness run amok."
At least THIS time he did apologize...sort of:
"I apologize for the insensitivity of my remarks with respect to the mayor or his family, however I think it is important to note that this decision involves potential risk to innocent people," Shadegg said in a statement.
Read more and watch it here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1109/Shadegg_Bloombergs_daughter_might_be_kidnapped_by_terrorists.html
Any thoughts?
Annie
3 people like this
6 responses
@jerzgirl (9384)
• United States
19 Nov 09
It's a typical far right wing move of fear-mongering to gain the upper hand. The Bush regime used it to get what they wanted and now it's being used to try to regain control. As Roosevelt said, "we have nothing to fear but fear itself". In other words, it is fear that paralyzes us, fear that makes us roll over and give up and fear that gives the enemy control over us. The terrorists use it and, unfortunately, so did the GOP. I know that not all members of the GOP would do this, but those who do are like school-house bullies who, without strength of character, use strength of words and fear to get what they want.
2 people like this
@Rollo1 (16676)
• Boston, Massachusetts
20 Nov 09
Yes, FDR encouraged people not to fear, then imprisoned millions of American citizens and others because they were of Japanese descent. The most heinous misuse of power and the most unconstitutional act by any president of the 20th century... I can't find myself admiring him or using him as a model for courage.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
19 Nov 09
I've already stated my opinions on using a baby as a prop Annie, but this is completely different. What he's doing is trying to personalize the issue. Too many people just look at 9-11 as a bad thing, but can't really wrap their heads around what it is like to watch thousands of people die just like that. Some people almost have 9-11 amnesia.
There's a big difference between hearing about it, watching it on TV, and actually watching those buildings come crumbling down with your loved ones inside.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
21 Nov 09
I think it was a he11 of pi$$ poor way to try to personalize it and I really get the impress Shadegg's nothing but a showboat who really doesn't care much about anyone. I'd say HE'S probably one of them who really cares little about 9/11 other than when he can use it as a political issue. He went on another one of his tirades yesterday about what he'd do if HE were a terrorist. What an a$$!!
Annie
@Rollo1 (16676)
• Boston, Massachusetts
19 Nov 09
Read this and then tell me if you think we should house these particular prisoners in a prison facility in the US.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,575133,00.html
I honestly don't think it helps anyone's argument to bring someone else's family or kids into it. I don't think it's right for the congressman to personalize these concerns with projections about things happening to any one named person. I think that it's sufficient to discuss the concerns without bringing personalities into it.
That said, I agree with his concerns. This is a foolhardy and dangerous move and I cannot support it in any way - security-wise, legality-wise or any other -wise. People who do support it are doing so to support the White House because there can be no advantage to bringing these terrorists to trial in NY.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
20 Nov 09
You wrote, "I honestly don't think it helps anyone's argument to bring someone else's family or kids into it. I don't think it's right for the congressman to personalize these concerns with projections about things happening to any one named person. I think that it's sufficient to discuss the concerns without bringing personalities into it."
Those three sentences addressed the topic of this discussion. I really didn't intend this to be a discussion about whether this is a good or bad idea since I already know how you and many others that post in this interest feel about it. Let's just say I agree with the Rudy Guiliani that now disagrees with...Rudy Guiliani! Are you aware there were over 100 terrorists tried in our court system during the previous Administration? I apologize for not knowing the exact number right now but actually I think it was several hundred.
I read the article you linked to and I have this to say - by this reasoning no dangerous prisoners should be housed ANYWHERE in the U.S. since there have been many unfortunate and tragic injuries suffered by guards through the years. However, this sort of thing is still very rare.
Annie
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
19 Nov 09
I was reading about that the other day, I wonder what this guy was thinking. I didn't realize that he was the baby mind reader guy LOL
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
21 Nov 09
Have you noticed how once these idiots get a taste for making fools of themselves they just keep doing it again and again...lol? We've got Shadegg, then there's Michele Bachmann, Virginia Foxx and there are some others whose names are escaping me at the moment since it's 3 AM!
Annie
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
19 Nov 09
Well I have to agree with him on this one. Having the trial in New York does open them up to more threats. Terrorist may seek "revenge" on the area that put their "brother" on trial and punished him. But if the state wants to do it than I say let them....I just hope they up their security in the process.
I am glad I don't live in that state.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
21 Nov 09
I'm sure they'll have as much security as they'll need. Anyway, I really wasn't posting about whether it was a good or bad idea to have the trial in New York but what you thought about Shadegg's "speech" where he brought up Bloomberg's daughter.
Annie
