Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Who is in more trouble?

Your options: Texas Rep. Joe Barton or Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

The evidence that it is Barton comes from Politico.com:

'Rep. Joe Barton's fate hangs in the balance as Republicans gather back in Washington Tuesday - and so, too, do GOP hopes of regaining their political message on the Gulf oil spill.

'One rank-and-file Republican told POLITICO that the Texas Republican's apology to BP last week was 'so harmful and so damaging to the cause and so out of touch with the rest of the planet' that it was cause for his removal. Republicans are undecided on whether to oust Barton from his top Energy and Commerce Committee slot, but some Republicans still want a vote of the critical Steering Committee, which determines committee assignments. 'If the Steering Committee [were to meet] this week, he would not hold on,' the rank-and-file Republican said.

You'll recall Barton got in an (oily?) mess after he apologized to BP officials for the "shakedown" the U.S. government was making on the oil corporation due to the explosion in the Gulf of Mexico.

But perhaps it is McChrystal. Consider this from Politico.com:

The top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has been summoned to the White House to explain remarks he made to a freelance writer that portrays a series of unflattering remarks McChrystal made about President Obama and other top administration officials. The face-to-face comes as pundits are already calling for McChrystal to resign.

For a more complete report on what has McChrystal in trouble, click here.

I'm voting for McChyrstal. If Barton gets sacked as a committee chair, he still retains his job. If McChrystal gets sacked, he loses a lot more. But the moral of this story is that words and actions have consequences, no matter how important a person you might think you are.

No comments: