DeLay’s successor has a short time to make her mark
She isn’t going through the typical new members’ orientation. The staff answering the phone on Capitol Hill doesn’t seem quite sure how to pronounce her name. She loses her job after 51 days in office — and she might have to move out of her office a month before that.
Rep. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, R-Texas, who was sworn in by Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., Monday night, is among the strangest of Capitol Hill species: a lame-duck-only member.
Voters in Texas’ 22nd District elected Sekula-Gibbs to fill the remaining term of former Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who resigned earlier this year as he became implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal. But on the same day, those same voters elected a Democrat, former Rep. Nick Lampson, to fill the seat in January, when the 110th Congress convenes.
Thanks to a quirk in Texas election law, the doctor and former Houston City Council member had no trouble getting her name on the ballot for the special election. But because DeLay resigned after the Republican primary, officials ruled that the party couldn’t replace his name on the ballot in the election for the next Congress, leaving her to run as a write-in candidate.
Even an inventive ad blitz that implored voters to “vote twice for Shelley” couldn’t overcome the logistical hurdles of being a write-in, she said Tuesday, just before casting a vote to recognize the importance of the Christmas tree industry to the national economy.
“Perhaps I should have said, ‘Vote thrice for Shelley’ ” she quipped.
Of her time here so far, she said, “Everything has been short — short campaign, short orientation, short term. But I’m trying to save the taxpayers money while I’m here.”
As for another run, she said, “My plans are to work really hard and do a good job while I’m here and after that look to 2008.”
For his part, Lampson says, “We’ve had very cordial conversations. She seems like a nice lady.”
But that doesn’t mean he’s getting her office in the Cannon Building. “It has a good view and a good size [but] it’s already picked,” he lamented.
O’Malley and guard: Two of a perfect pair
Journalists in this town aren’t impressed by much. But the women of WJLA Channel 7 were plenty impressed with Maryland’s easy-on-the-eyes governor-elect, Martin O’Malley, when he and his guard came to their studio on Friday.
O’Malley dropped by the Rosslyn studio to tape two shows — “Capital Sunday” on Channel 7 and a segment for News Channel 8 that aired on Monday.
This was apparently a lot for the station’s women to handle. “The minute when they found out he was in the newsroom, all the females were like, ‘Oh my God, it’s O’Malley,’ ” said a source at the station.
Producers and other employees began frantically fixing their hair and primping for his arrival.
When the Baltimore mayor finally arrived with his bodyguard in tow, one of the newsroom gals couldn’t resist blurting out, “It’s Governor McDreamy.”
And when another got a look at the plainclothes, still-to-be-named officer, she added, “And behind him is Officer McSteamy.”
Heart rates rose again on Monday when some gals in the office saw the taped broadcast feed on Channel 8. “They got excited all over again because they thought he was back,” said our source.
Dress like you’re in the majority
Half the trick in being successful is looking successful. So Democrats, take note: If you wanna stay in power longer than two years, listen to some of the Grooming Lounge’s tips for dressing the part.
The Lounge declares that, with Democrats back in power, “Washingtonians can expect some sweeping style updates.” Among them?
“Longer, Looser & More-Textured Hair Styles”: Do they really mean “hippy-ish?” No. “Democrats have long been associated with textured hair styles that move with the wind and show some extra personality,” sayeth the Lounge. “After several years of super-short, ultra-coiffed styles, many men will be glad to embrace a more relaxed look.”
“Slimmer Suits”: Are they calling Republicans fat? “These slimmer-cut suits seem to be more prevalent among the Democrats, so we expect to see more around here.” Leave Speaker Hastert alone, we say. Hasn’t he endured enough already?
“Don’t Go Too Far —This Is Still D.C.”: Follow trends in moderation or risk not being taken seriously.” Well, if politics imitates fashion, Democrats may want to take this advice to heart and, you know, maybe slow down on that whole Iraq withdrawal thing.
Dems’ win more than razor-thin
Quin Hillyer wears a lot of hats. He’s a senior editor at The American Spectator and a managing director at Qorvis Communications. Heck, he’s even a columnist for this very paper. But one thing he won’t be wearing anymore is a beard.
Twelve years ago, Hillyer stopped shaving as a “good luck” gesture back when he was campaigning for then-Rep. Bob Livingston, R-La. When Livingston won — during the 1994 Republican Revolution — Livingston forbade Hillyer from shaving his beard so long as the Republicans kept the House.
Well, we all know what happened on Nov. 8. So Hillyer — now freed from his promise to Livingston — showed up to work this week beard-free.
Smart move, we think. After all, hairy situations cost the GOP the election anyway.



Local


SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Comments
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
"When will the public finally rise up and DEMANDING an honest media that represents the views of the country?!"
She was honest. The media is not supposed to represent the views of the country. That would be "state" media. Then again, you probably would have preferred that the media had continued to support the racist segregation of blacks given that most of the country, at that time, supported it.
The media is supposed to report the news. If the news puts the United States in a poor light, then so be it. The truth is what matters. Not the viewpoint of the public.
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
"it took me 15 minutes on the internet using google and ebay to determin that an IBM Selectric II could produce the leaked document"
It took less time to determine the Yellowcake documents were fake considering that the were "signed" by a leader who had not been in power for quite some time. Yet, the administration went with them anyway.
If you are this confident that the rather documents are forgeries, than you should encourage an investigation, not discourage it.
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
"mad moon man seems to be a little weak on the whole history and constitution thing"
If you are going to try to throw something like this out there, how about rebutting with facts? I assure you that I know the "whole history and constitution thing," how about you showing me where I am wrong? Otherwise, you simply show yourself to be one of the many simple minded fools, unable to back up your ignorant statements.
I also assume that you believe that Bruce Fein, conservative constitutional scholar is truly a liberal? I assume that, in your mind, the CATO institute is a bastion of liberal thought? You have no idea what is liberal and what is conservative. You only believe that anyone who rejects Bush's philosophy is a liberal.
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
I long for the days when we had a president with honor and integrity. One who respected the Constitution that he swore to uphold. One who went after the enemy instead of what he believed was a convenient target. One who lived up to his words and go after those nations who harbor terrorists, such as Pakistan, who provides safe haven for bin Laden. One who would acknowledge that nearly all of the hijackers who attacked us on 9/11 were Saudi, and over 50% of the foreign insurgents in Iraq are Saudi -- and actually go after the Saudi's instead of embracing them as allies and friends. George Bush is an embarrassment to this nation. He will go down in history as the most incompetent and corrupt leader our country has ever had.
The blind love an loyalty to this president is sickening. The neo-cons seem more like those who embraced the British crown while the Framers sought to bring real liberty to our nation. All it took was fear to rollback all that they worked for.
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate