By: Chuck Muth
Citizen Outreach

FIGHTIN’ WORDS

The headline in today’s Las Vegas Review-Journal story is indeed troubling: “Ex-bank executive aims to challenge Titus: Republican Guedry says he is a moderate.”

Yikes!

That story has elicited some blistering emails from some conservative activists this morning, including this from our friend Joe Tatner:

“I had high hopes recently when I met Mrs. Guedry at the Townhall Meeting and when I heard Mr. Guedry speak earlier. I am terribly disappointed. This is what the primaries are for: to shake the tree and see what rotten apples fall. Now is the time to get rid of these people so we aren’t forced to vote for the lesser of two evils — AGAIN! I now make it a personal mission to see that John Guedry’s campaign ends before it begins.”

Whoa, whoa, WHOA!

People, people, people. Let us not rush to judgment and hang this guy in effigy without (a) first getting all the facts, and (b) allowing the accused an opportunity to tell his side of the story in his own words.

Here’s the most relevant part of the RJ story in this brouhaha:

“During an interview Tuesday, Guedry, who has never held political office, described himself as a moderate who supports modest health care reform and won’t strictly hew to America’s most strident conservative leaders such as radio host Rush Limbaugh. ‘We have an extreme left and an extreme right agenda and the people in the middle aren’t talking,’ Guedry said. ‘I’ve seen us move further and further away from a common-sense approach.’”

1.) Consider the fact that Mr. Guedry is new to politics, and many folks have a different definition of “conservative” and “moderate.” The devil is in the details. After all, some people consider ME a “moderate.” Not many. But some. OK, six.

2.) Note, for the record, that it was the reporter who said Guedry identified himself as a “moderate,” without specifically defining Guedry’s definition of the term, not Guedry himself. I’m not saying Guedry didn’t claim to be a moderate, but we don’t know that for a fact. It’s possible the reporter is simply using that word based on his interpretation of the nature of the conversation.

3.) Guedry didn’t “dis” Limbaugh; he simply said, according to the reporter, that he wouldn’t “strictly hew” to the agenda of conservative leaders such as Limbaugh. Which can be absolutely fine depending on the issue. Hey, even Limbaugh admits to only being right 93 percent of the time, and my own batting average is slightly less than that. :)

4.) We do, in fact, have an extreme left and an extreme right agenda out there. But those terms, just like “conservative” and “moderate” require context and further explanation. If by “extreme right” Guedry means murdering abortion doctors, he’s right. But if by “extreme right” he means opposition to any and all efforts to increase taxes, well, those WOULD be fightin’ words!

5.) If Mr. Guedry is seeking a “common sense” approach, we all know, by definition, that means a conservative approach. I mean, come on. Common sense dictates that the left is wrong, right?

The main thing here is that John Guedry is a solid, competitive challenger to far-left Democrat Rep. Dina Titus in a swing district. He deserves the benefit of the doubt and an opportunity to ‘splain himself in HIS OWN WORDS before we all go off half-cocked and call him a Raggio Republican.

And believe me, if John Guedry turns out to be another middle-of-the-road, go-along-to-get-along, tax-hiking, big-government “compassionate” conservative, I’ll be the first to whack that piñata with a stick.

Now, about Brian Sandoval?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Faves
  • Live
  • MySpace
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine
  • SphereIt
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Wikio
  • YahooMyWeb