In a blizzard of conflicting information, rumor and innuendo, sometimes one needs to think about human nature and political tradition. Philbrick at Mustard Street makes a good point on that score.
In short, knowing what we all know about Eric Massa, the way he has used his history as a cancer survivor, and his instinct for the dramatic, wouldn't you expect a Lou Gehrig moment if he were resigning because of a serious health issue? Do you really think that he'd exit stage right after a hasty press conference?
Comments
I will be the first one to say it, at least on the first the on on the Fighting 29th. Congressman Massa is not a bad man, however, whether the veracity of the allegations are proven, he is a man who has clearly made his decision after much thought and deliberation. I do not believe that health reasons alone guided his decision. This is not to say that he sexually assaulted a staff member.
It is to say, that us liberals are immune from such scrutiny. For example, if Massa was a republican, then this would be front page news. However, liberals are far above any transcendent standard set by a god that may or MAY NOT exist. And, us liberals control the media, except for the ugly step-child (Fox-News). If you want to win the race in the 29th, then you come out as a TRUE DEMOCRAT, in the vein of Zel Miller and JFK. You align your self with Bart and make it clear that you are both pro-life and pro-worker. An individual who does this will surely take the 29th District. They could single handed defect from the republican party while destroying any big names that may choose to run. This is what I would do.
I haven't seen too many liberals who think the media is liberal, especially not in the last few years. But you can call yourself whatever you want.
"If Massa was a republican, then this would be front page news". This story is just starting to break, and it was front-page news yesterday. The result of the House Ethics Committee investigation will be front-page news. This will not be buried, and you can thank the Democratic House leadership in part for that.
And nobody needs to be pro-life to win as a Democrat. Public sentiment is majority pro-choice, and a good number of pro-lifers are not single-issue voters.
Perhaps but consider this -
You lead all your life. You are essentially "the guy," be it the officer in charge of something or ultimately the Congressman - then it is over - immediately and suddenly it is over. Do you want to answer questions? Hey Peyton, How does it feel toss that interception. Hey, Ryan Miller too bad you let that OT goal slip by - what would have happened if you didn't?
The difference of course is those games unfold in front of our eyes. In Massa's case it didn't, so would he want to answer questions on something that he can't confirm (the ethics thing) becasue that was going to be the story at a press conference - not the health situation. It might be better in this case to do what he did.
Pure speculation on my part but I think the health thing is real and took him out of the game - a place that the Congressman is unfamiliar with. The ethics charges are a body blow to how Massa defines himself. For example, being in control of a situation, the leader, and so on. I think the ethics charge (s) simply advanced the time table from a formal conference to a hasty one.
I'm sure there are different views but those are my hurriedly typed ones.
All that said, I appreciate the brisk candor Massa has brought to my corner of the political world. I'd like more folks who bring this level of candor - trouble is there ultimate is a cost to the individual.