Three years have passed since Rep. Joe Wilson (R-2) went from being a fairly anonymous Congressman, to a name known in political circles from coast-to-coast. While Pres. Barack Obama was talking about his then-proposed health care bill before both chambers of Congress, Wilson had the type of spontaneous reaction that is rarely seen in contemporary politics. By now, everyone knows what Wilson said and that he apologized to the President afterwards.
What Wilson could not have known, is that he would become an in-demand speaker for his fellow house members. Wilson received millions in donations in the immediate aftermath of the incident by those who supported his view, if not necessarily the way he presented it.
But Wilson has proved to have staying power far beyond a single moment in time, and his schedule reflects that. With election day nearing, he is traveling the country in support of fellow Republicans and the military issues that were his calling card before he became the You Lie Guy.
Just in the last week Wilson visited the Austal Shipyards in Mobile, Ala. for the Christening of the USNS Choctaw County Joint High Speed Vessel. The ship contains engines made by MTU, which has a plant in Aiken.
He was in Missouri with Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler in Wasrrensburg, MO for her “Defending Our Defenders” Event.
And on Saturday, Wilson will be in Michigan with Congressman Tim Walberg for a Tea Party rally entitled, “Liberty or Tyranny? The Election of a Lifetime.”
Wilson's office provided Patch with a statement in advance of tomorrow's trip:
"I always enjoy helping my fellow colleagues on the campaign trail. It has been an honor and a privilege to visit many of my fellow House Members' districts over the past few weeks. I look forward to several other trips scheduled in the coming weeks as we carry on the Republican cause."
As for Dr. John, your defense of Rep. Wilson is admirable, but you then commit the very sin you are preaching against with your remark about our President. -SD
100 rounds of golf by June 2012 http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/06/18/155279361/obamas-played-100-rounds-of-golf-which-presidents-beat-that From Wasington Post 150 fund raisers again reported in June 2012 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/president-obama-fundraiser-in-chief/2012/06/12/gJQAVAQ8XV_blog.html Please start explaining.
Not finished. Why do you take a condescending attitude in defending a simple point of contention? This would have been an opportunity for you to investigate and digest knowledge that is an opposing viewpoint to yours, and bring some thoughtful insight. It is too bad you feel like you are above this task. This reminds me again of the school yard mentality that people resort to when they run out of persuasive ideas yet still need to get the last word for the sake of a slowly deflating ego.
Implicit in your "facts" are that Pres. Obama does not take his job seriously, or seriously enough to your liking, an idea that is simply preposterous and not worthy of discussion.
I enjoy your use of "quotations" when the "facts" are too stubborn for you to argue against. I am sure Obama takes his job seriously, just not seriously enough to play less than 100 rounds of golf or attend more than 150 fundraisers. Just the 100 rounds of golf are equal to 500 hours, nearly one quarter of a standard work year (2080 hours per year) for most americans. The 150 fundraisers are easily another 500 hours (being generous here). So that is another one quarter of a standard work year. Are we to believe that spending 1/2 of one work year for the average american over a three year period by playing golf and raising money is now presidential? Should this be the new norm for future presidents? It has not been the norm in the past, just ask David Axelrod about his comments regarding Bush playing golf (24 rounds in 8 years). Don't you think there would be some productive work to be done (attending national security meetings for example, meeting with world leaders at the UN conference). Also, why do you think NPR and The Washington Post ran stories on these two topics if they were not news worthy? When did taking your job seriously and performing a good job become equal? Should you or I be judged in our professions on the criteria that we take our jobs seriously or that we perform good work? The fact that you deem that this is "not worthy of discussion" means you are unable to discuss it and do not have a reasonable arugment. You are not worthy.