Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 4:00 PM ET, 01/ 7/2011

Friday question

By Jennifer Rubin

It was an eventful week as the Republican House majority took charge and battles over the debt limit and ObamaCare heated up. Which elected official had the best week, and why?

Answers must be in by 6:00 p.m. ET on Sunday.

By Jennifer Rubin  | January 7, 2011; 4:00 PM ET
Categories:  Friday question  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Czar legislation
Next: Morning Bits


Peter King was my first thought, but I think Paul Ryan has had the best week. He has continued to impress Conservatives with his easy grasp of complex ideas and his fortitude to do what has to be done to keep this nation solvent, even getting democrats to agree to a 5% cut (not much but certainly a step in the right direction).

BTW, We love you Jennifer and we are so glad you are finding an ever expanding audience!

Posted by: scsiegel | January 7, 2011 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul had the best week. As the new Chairman of the House Monetary committee,he is the first politician since we left the Gold system in 1971,to offer argumentation that maybe we should reconsider the issue. Also,he is the first politician in memory to bring Austrian economic theory(Hayek/von Mises)to the debate about our monetary policy.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 7, 2011 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who made the most of the positive publicity associated with his well-deserved "FI$CY" award.

Ok, Daniels did not get an invitation from the Daily Show, but I saw part of an interview somewhere, and I thought he might be the 21st century Calvin Coolidge, although I have no idea if the Daniels family has a dog who is a white collie named Rob Roy.

Posted by: K2K2 | January 7, 2011 7:52 PM | Report abuse

How about Michele Bachmann? She believes herself triumphant enough in the new Congress that this week she floated a trial balloon on running for the Presidency.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 7, 2011 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Paul Ryan seems to be the smartest person in the Congress. As Chairman of the House Budget Committee, he will be the point man on repealing ObamaCare and on demanding spending cuts in exchange for increasing the national debt. He easily brushed aside the Dems' sophistry that repealing ObamaCare would INCREASE the deficit. If Republicans are to win the public debates with Obama and the leftwing media, Ryan will be the indispensable man.

Posted by: eoniii | January 7, 2011 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Bill Daley had the best week...he's got a new, plum assignment as O's Chief of Staff.

Posted by: DrBerkeley | January 8, 2011 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Obviously Nancy Pelosi. She was dignified and right on in her comments, while Boehner was typically hypocritical.

Posted by: frb2749 | January 8, 2011 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Sorry DrBerkeley. Ms. Rubin gets to decide which folks we can consider for a Gold Star of the Week and she has, for reasons unspecified, limited it to elected officials.

C'mon Ms. Rubin. Another 'who had the best week' question? How about something a bit fresher and, perhaps, a bit more relevant? Examples:
--What will be the key components to the alluded-to GOP health care initiative?
--What should the GOP priorities be for trimming $50 billion from the budget in the next 50 days? [insert your own numbers as you see fit]
--Since each major party controls a legislative chamber, a certain amount of compromise and negotiation is going to be necessary. Who will emerge as the key architects for getting bills passed through both chambers and why?

Posted by: MsJS | January 8, 2011 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Here are the reasons that Mr Paul,although he is a prominent tea partier will never be discussed on this site.

"For whatever reason – perhaps out of fear or power lust – neocons have abandoned conservative skepticism of government in favor of a blind ideology of American exceptionalism. Beck, Hannity, and Giuliani have jumped on Dr. Paul relentlessly because they are beginning to realize that many conservative voters are dissatisfied with the spendthrift, Wilsonian mainstream of the Republican Party. As the base shrinks and moderates start voting Democratic, they know and fear that true conservatives who believe in the ideals of the Old Right might wake up from their post-9/11 slumber and leave the neocons as well. In their attempt to hold their floundering movement together, they have resorted to shouting down and ostracizing the "crazed dope" Ron Paul, hoping to push him "way out" of the presidential race. Dr. Paul and his supporters must be doing something right to raise such fear and ire from the neocons; let us keep it up."

Posted by: rcaruth | January 8, 2011 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Vice President Joe Biden because he is so senile he still doesn't know that the republicans took control of the house of representatives. Lucky for him he was still thinking of FDR giving his speech on t.v. in 1929

Posted by: eddiehaskall | January 8, 2011 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich. Because he's still married to his hot wife Elizabeth - who is half his age.

Posted by: RitchieEmmons | January 8, 2011 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Let's pause a moment for the dead, including Judge John Roll, and the wounded, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who were shot at a Tucson supermarket today.

Posted by: MsJS | January 8, 2011 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Until today--Saturday--plausible answers might include Paul Ryan from the Republican side or Bill Daley, on the other side of the political divide. But then some mad gunman decided to spray bullets at the outdoor meeting mounted for her constituents by Arizona's Gabrielle Giffords. That event disrupted the normal partisan battles and changed our focus. Now, Americans are not thinking primarily of a largely symbolic vote against health care or devising a policy stance that actually grows the economy and creates jobs. We are and should be worried about whether or not we will be able to maintain the kind of open access to officials that strengthens our democracy and produces the kinds of policies we need and want. Since 9/11, we have had to struggle to sustain our liberties and openness from terrorism. Now, it seems we will also have to guard against an anger and emotional imbalance that can wreak havoc with our political system and its values.

Posted by: drdivine1 | January 8, 2011 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Ron Paul: U.S. Government Must Admit Bankruptcy and Stop Cheating People with Devalued Money

Posted by: rcaruth | January 8, 2011 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Well, definitely not Gabrielle Giffords.

Posted by: ralterb | January 8, 2011 9:41 PM | Report abuse

What's the matter? No quick, cutsie thoughts on how it's the Liberals fault 6 people are dead in Arizona?

Posted by: frb2749 | January 8, 2011 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Fox News is pretty disgusting.

Look what they managed to get into two paragraphs of the lead story on the shooting death of 6 people and the wounding of the Representative and 11 others:

"Giffords, known as a fiscally conservative Democrat and gun rights advocate, underwent surgery at the University of Arizona Medical Center."

Then later on, same story:

"Giffords, a gun rights advocate, was first elected to Congress in 2006, when she rode a wave of Democratic victories. However, she separated herself from most in her caucus when she criticized President Obama last summer for not sending more National Guard members to the U.S.-Mexico border."

Why don't they just write:

"Giffords, who would have strongly favored gun ownership by the man who shot her."

Posted by: 54465446 | January 8, 2011 10:00 PM | Report abuse

From what you have quoted, it sounds to me like FOX is merely countering an anticipated (or already emergent?) leftist narrative of Giffords's shooting, which would "profile" the Tea Party, Palin, etc. It's an odd way to think about the news--as always already processed through these narratives--but hardly unique to FOX, and hardly disgusting.

Posted by: adam62 | January 8, 2011 10:39 PM | Report abuse


Without using my crystal ball, I feel pretty confident in betting that they were the only news outlet in the country to call her a gun rights advocate in the lead story about her shooting.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 8, 2011 11:09 PM | Report abuse


Maybe I should add that I'm not blaming anyone in the media or any political organization for contributing to the shooting, but only that I'm disgusted by the Fox coverage of it.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 8, 2011 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Robert Gibbs had the best week. By resigning, he avoids two more years of being a national embarrassment, vastly improves the Obama Administration, and gives Jake Tapper a chance to get an adult answer to a serious question.

On the Arizona shooting, of COURSE the elite media is going to blame it on the tea party. The only way they would have been mystified about the motive would have been if the shooter was named Mohammed Hussein bin-Kaboom.

Posted by: Larry3435 | January 9, 2011 8:34 AM | Report abuse

"Without using my crystal ball, I feel pretty confident in betting that they were the only news outlet in the country to call her a gun rights advocate in the lead story about her shooting."

But what makes this disgusting? They are simply anticipating that the Left media will turn this shooting into a another event to hang their anti-gun polemics on, and they want to neutralize that.

Posted by: adam62 | January 9, 2011 9:12 AM | Report abuse


I find the lead story about the shooting death of 6 people, including a 9 year old girl an appalling place to make a political point about gun ownership by a major news organization.

If you don't then, we just have a fundamental irreconcilable difference.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 9, 2011 10:44 AM | Report abuse

"I find the lead story about the shooting death of 6 people, including a 9 year old girl an appalling place to make a political point about gun ownership by a major news organization.

If you don't then, we just have a fundamental irreconcilable difference."

If it were overtly and primarily about promoting gun ownership, I would agree with you--but it's "about" gun ownership on an implicit level, albeit clumsily
introduced--it's not didactic or polemical--all it does is repeat "guns rights advocate." Indeed, it may be no more than a reflex, or editorial rules requiring mention of the politician's position on some issue that may be relevant to the story.

Anyway, I hope you will also be disgusted when the NY Times, Washington Post or some other liberal media outlet uses this or a similar story to inveigh, much more openly, I would imagine, against the NRA.

Posted by: adam62 | January 9, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse


I'm actually opposed to more gun legislation because we're not serious about the ones we already have. For instance the kid in Omaha who killed the school principal. His parents should go to jail for having a gun that he had access to and killed with. You know that won't happen.

No idea about the gun in the current case, but it will probably have been bought legally, since his parents didn't have him involuntarily committed as he certainly needed to be.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 9, 2011 3:46 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company