Compare and contrast. And as you complete your assignment, keep in mind that this is about tone and theme, not content.

Tennessee House Caucus Chair Mike Turner (D-Old Hickory):

“We’ve got a lot of bills on states’ rights here, state sovereignty and all that,” he added. “We went through that fight once before. All of a sudden, we have a black man elected president and everybody wants to start acting like something’s wrong with our country. I didn’t agree with a lot of things George Bush did, but I wasn’t ready to secede from the union.”

Fake but beloved U.S. President Josiah “Jed” Bartlet (D-Hollywood) to fake and not-so-beloved GOP opponent Governor Ritchie of Florida (R-Hollywood):

“Well, first of all, let’s clear up a couple of things. “Unfunded mandate” is two words, not one big word. There are times when we’re fifty states and there are times when we’re one country, and have national needs. And the way I know this is that Florida didn’t fight Germany in World War II or establish civil rights. You think states should do the governing wall-to-wall. That’s a perfectly valid opinion. But your state of Florida got $12.6 billion in federal money last year – from Nebraskans, and Virginians, and New Yorkers, and Alaskans, with their Eskimo poetry. 12.6 out of a state budget of $50 billion. I’m supposed to be using this time for a question, so here it is: Can we have it back, please?”

T/F/B: City Paper by way of Speak to Power.

  • Share/Bookmark
Tagged with:

3 Responses to “Mike Turner, the Jed Bartlet of Tennessee Politics?”

  1. [...] cool kids on Twitter have been talking about The West Wing.  I‘ve written about political idealism vs. political reality before in regards to this [...]

  2. [...] all over the news yesterday, but calling BS on the motivation behind this bill has brought him some blogger love. Time to crack the [...]

  3. Dean says:

    One thing needs answering: say a state somehow wins at least a temporary ruling, and there’s no requirement to buy health insurance. Does that mean the outlawing of pre-existinging conditions doesn’t apply to people who live in that state?

    I ask because Republicans are going to look pretty bad if they’re fighting to take away health insurance from those who have had cancer or multiple heart attacks. They won’t see it that way (they’ll see it as a fight against federal tyranny), but that’s what it will become.

    That’s also what makes the prospect of repealing the reform bill almost nil. It’ll be kind of fun to see Republicans try, I guess.

Leave a Reply

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

Visit our friends!

A few highly recommended friends...