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.
He thinks he has to sound intelligent when speaking in public. Comes across as a horse’s-ass.
<
p>
Great quotes he gave Vennochi. Not much going on up there.
where’s Lynch’s chicken? Or perhaps more appropriately, how about a chickenhawk. g
<
p>
I hope he gets Lieberman’d
Maybe a chicken for Lynch and a chicken for Deb Goldberg too (although she may have a legitimate reason for not appearing at another debate- it just sounds suspicious).
She’s debated numerous times. Lynch and Galvin haven’t debated once.
David is right. Missing one debate is forgiveable when the candidate has participated in a bunch of others – we can see that it’s not a general rejection of debates, just something that happened on a particular date. That’s very different from a candidate who generally just doesn’t want to go to any candidate forums or debates with their opponents.
It just seems odd that her campaign said she can not make it to the Democratic State Party debate because she has a “scheduling conflict.” Maybe she is dropping out of the race. The Brookline Tab endorsement for Andrea Silbert has to hurt.
… that will get his butt kicked out of office.
<
p>
What an arrogant man.
That’s not just his vote, that’s my vote.
He’s my representative in Congress.
And my vote means whole hell of a lot to me!
<
p>
I hope this spreads fast.
… that failing to debate your challenger is absolute catnip to the blog crowd. We really frickin’ hate you for it.
<
p>
Grr!
Any readers here from Lynch’s district? Call him up! Ask him the question – while you’re at it, call up Dunkelbarger’s campaign office and ask the same question. We can guess what they may say, but let’s ask them directly. Comment here with the answer (or non-answer) you get.