Here’s our “honorable” congressthing explaining why he voted against the Mass. delegation and with the Republicans on the vote to “stay the course” in mid-June:
The congressman traveled to Iraq five times since the US invasion. He said his most recent visit last April convinced him that the original mission, “to get rid of Hussein, ” has gone “very far afield. ” It is now a low-level civil war,” said Lynch. Asked if he faults Bush for the shifting mission, he answered, “I do. They’ve had the same approach, this stay-the-course approach.”
Lynch’s answer makes his June 16 vote all the more curious. Why, then, did he support a GOP-backed stay-the-course resolution? To that, Lynch replied that since it was a nonbinding resolution, “It didn’t mean a hell of a lot to me. If it passes, it meant nothing; if it doesn’t pass, it meant nothing.”
Excuse me? Lynch has been riding the Iraq war wagon since it began back in 2003 with his vote to let Bush go in and whack that hornet’s nest. Like many chicken hawks, he likes to hang around with the military, perhaps hoping that some of their courage will rub off on him. Unfortunately, he doesn’t even have enough courage to publicly defend his “curious” vote or his “curiouser” vote to permit federal interference into the Schiavo family’s private medical decision.
Lynch is a piece of work who has been scuttling beneath rocks for far too long. Thank you, Ms. Vennochi, for catching a few words from him between rocks.
The whole column here.