Congressman Mike Turner’s Failure To Explain His “No” Vote Is More Evidence Our Democracy Is In Deep Trouble

According to Congressman Mike Turner’s press secretary, Congressman Turner has not made any official comment about his recent “No” on the big stimulus plan just passed by the House of Representative. And, the press secretary is uncertain if any comment about the “No” vote will be forthcoming.

And, as usual, the content of Turner’s web-site is completely worthless in explaining Turner’s vote or the rationale for his vote on this important legislation. I telephoned Turner’s Washington DC office to find an answer to my question about Turner’s “No” vote.

Turner, our Republican representative, voted in unison with every other Republican in the House. This unanimity of group think and group action must make the Republican House leader, John Boehner, swell with partisan pride.

This Republican unanimity in their “No” vote is impressive. It is a clear signal of aggressive and organized partisanship. I shouldn’t be, I guess, but, I am surprised.

You would think that in this time of national crisis that Turner and his Republican buddies might fear the political consequences for partisan obstruction. But, evidently, Republicans are making a political calculation that through partisanship they will gain politically.

If Turner would venture a press release explaining his “No” vote, he would probably simply repeat the party line. Boehner laid the line out the other day on Meet the Press when he said, “Somebody has to be looking out for the taxpayers. And I’m going to tell you what, Republicans are going to be there to look out for American taxpayer.”

I had to laugh out loud. Considering the Republican record of outrageous profligacy under George W. Bush — spending bushels of money, borrowing oceans of money, sinking the country into $4 trillion more debt — Boehner’s tears for the American taxpayer are a hoot. As a Republican leader who empowered Bush’s every incompetent act, Boehner has no credibility. It’s obvious, he is simply a partisan, and in his thinking and actions, his motivation is simply to gain partisan advantage.

It is hardly surprising, I guess, that Congressman Turner would join in with the Republican partisan song. As they say, elections have consequences. The citizens of Ohio’s Third District just gave Turner a ringing endorsement in his recent reelection — a free pass to continue his partisan ways. I urged Turner’s defeat — Mike Turner Is A Bum, For Our Democracy’s Sake, Let’s Throw The Bum Out — on the premise that, if our democracy has any backbone, all representatives who empowered the many disasters caused George W. Bush were bums and deserved to be thrown out.

Our democracy has no backbone. I think it is safe to say that our democracy, in fact, is in deep trouble. So, I guess that it is hardly surprising that our congressman, Mike Turner, fails to explain himself. Why should he?

This entry was posted in M Bock, Opinion and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Congressman Mike Turner’s Failure To Explain His “No” Vote Is More Evidence Our Democracy Is In Deep Trouble

  1. Greg Hunter says:

    Mr. Turner never looks out for the Taxpayer, he would never criticize his true employer and their bloated budget. He is a lapdog of the The Military Industrial Complex and claims to be a Christian. OY. I support the military but the unquestioning of the programs and policies by the Military is reminiscent of the unquestioning about the housing bubble.

    With the US Army suicide rate at all time high he piles onto commanders with his sexual assault bill. OY, third world thinking equals third world leadership.

  2. Rick says:

    Greg, since women entered the military in large numbers, sexual assault has been a serious problem. The military has taken great strides to change its culture that looked the other way. Education, disciplinary actions and the like have improved the situation. While I do not know the particulars of this proposed bill, one thing I do know is that more can be done. In addition, I am sure this bill is not the result of his “lapdog” approach to the military-industrial complex. Protecting military members from sexual assault is not third world thinking.

  3. Greg Hunter says:

    I have no problem with the bill, but is this his claim to fame as a Congressman. OY and I thought Tony Hall and his feed the world as lapdog of Monsanto was bad. My bitch is that what about the effing 3rd District?

    I am also pointing out that the Military needs to fight and win wars and the introduction of distractions, such as women always increases the problems. Why not check the rates of increased pregnancies during deployment so they can get out their deployment and have US take care of the issue. Then think about how an upcoming deployment and sexual assault could be blurred and the Commanders have to make the call. Why stay in the Military, when some shmuck, I mean Honorable Mike Turner, puts one more straw in the camels back?

    The most common reason for a woman to be evacuated out of theater was pregnancy. (see PDF for quote)

    So the question becomes more difficult to determine and just another military readiness issue, especially with the ground pounders and jar heads. Here is more for you
    Women’s ability to avoid deployment by becoming pregnant is a constant source of resentment among men. Intentionally injuring oneself to avoid deployment is a court-martial offense; intentionally becoming pregnant to avoid deployment brings no penalty at all, nor does becoming pregnant to avoid deployment, missing the deployment, and then aborting the pregnancy – a pattern that creates even intensified resentment. This latter phenomenon is almost certainly something that the military does not track, so it is hard to know how widespread it is, but while I was researching my book, several people (all Navy officers) spontaneously mentioned it to me.

    When I did work for the Navy, I asked the questions, as the pregnant non comms got assigned Security detail. I also wonder how many failed marriages state side are a result of fraternizing in the field.

    Do you think Mike actually considers things as good ideas to be implemented or good politics?

  4. Stan Hirtle says:

    Good lord.
    Certainly a culture of abusing women, ours and theirs, has long been part of military life. Maybe that’s what you get when you separate young men from a normal life and put them in an environment where they are trained to kill other people. Kind of like what Michael Vick did with dogs. And military separations have never been good for marriages and other relationships with people back home.
    As women became more part of the general American culture, including the military, we got things like the Tailhook Scandal where Air Force pilots groped their fellow officers.
    Not surprisingly, a lot of sex happens when people in the military get a chance. Are women getting pregnant to get out of the theater, the equivalent of shooting yourself in the foot? Probably happens some, but I would hesitate to speculate how much. It is as likely that tensions over gender roles are showing themselves, as other tensions of the society have.
    We ask a lot of the people we send to fight. The big question is what ware we accomplishing for their sacrifices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *