Oops! Missed a Spot.

In a fairly decent editorial, the Commercial Appeal's Washington bureau chief James Brosnan compares Lamar! Alexander and Ed Bryant, even coming up with a rather unique standard for comparison.

Brosnan writes:

Former Tennessee governor Lamar Alexander and
U.S. Rep. Ed Bryant (R-Tenn.) offer voters in
Thursday's Republican primary a contrast in choices
for the U.S. Senate, although it's been obscured by
their campaigns.

You know substance is taking a back seat to
symbolism when campaigns argue over shirt colors,
and duel with endorsements from country singers,
race car drivers and failed National Football League
quarterbacks.

Fortunately, we've missed some of that here in Memphis, but it's a good point. Brosnan then speaks of politicians who are initiators and reactors, giving examples. Looking at Alexander and Bryant, he notes that "...the real difference is the way they approach their jobs." He observes:

Alexander takes the initiative...Bryant probably would follow a very predictable path in the
Senate, dictated to a large extent by his committee assignments.
He probably would introduce fewer bills and stir less controversy.

Bryant would be more inclined to choose between competing
options, Alexander to come up with one of his own invention.

This is actually quite a good observation! Unfortunately, it is marred by one simple statement by Alexander:

“I wanted to be president,” Lamar said. “The Senate will have to do.”

And that makes all the difference.

Until next time, that is all.
Your Working Boy