Republicans go after Markey for remarks concerning Citizens United

[Mass]

Apparently, the GOP has decided that they needed to be racially sensitive... When it comes to Representative Markey, at least.

Going after Citizens United, he said yesterday: (video here)

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/rep_ed_markey_under_fire_for_c.html

"I want to go to the United States Senate in order to fight for a constitutional amendment to repeal Citizens United," Markey said to thunderous applause. "The whole idea that the Koch brothers, that Karl Rove can say we're coming to Massachusetts, we're coming to any state of the union with undisclosed amounts of money is a pollution that must be changed. And the Constitution must be amended. The Dred Scott decision had to be repealed - we have to repeal Citizens United."

Which provoked the GOP's following answer

"Agree or disagree with federal campaign finance law, it's ridiculous and offensive to compare it to the horror of slavery. Out-of-touch statements like these simply reinforce the fact that Ed Markey has been hibernating in Washington back rooms since Carlton Fisk was behind the plate for the Red Sox and disco ruled the world," said Brad Dayspring, communication director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. "If Ed Markey really believes this to be the modern equivalent to slavery, he'll quickly return the millions that he's raised from PACs over his career."

Whoa! Who would have known that the GOP was so racially sensitive.

I am sure this guy was all over these GOP candidates!

[Mass]

1. Thanksfully, some people are starting to answer.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/no_buzzfeed_no_one_seriously_compared_anything_to_slavery/singleton

No, BuzzFeed, no one seriously compared anything to slavery
Ed Markey brought the case up, but he's not the one constantly "equating" stuff with Dred Scott/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/02/21/can_ed_markey_ever_recover_from_a_gaffe_that_democrats_actually_agree_with.html

I'll buy that it's a dumb analogy, but why is it harmful to Markey? He's trying to win a Democratic primary. None of his opponents in the primary or general are credibly offended by the comparison; as Elspeth Reeve points out, Markey is hardly the first politician to make it. More importantly, for him, Democrats really, truly despise Citizens United -- or at least they despise what they think it stands for. One year ago, Democracy Corps tested a number of questions about corporate/big money and politics and found voters, led by Democrats, easily spun on its badness. Sixty-two percent of all voters said they opposed Citizens United. Sixty-three percent said they
wanted to limit money in politics; among Democrats the number rose to 69 percent. Conservatives don't blanche when their politicians compare Roe v. Wade to Dredd Scott. Liberals show no signs of blanching at Markey.

Who is blanching? Why, reporters who are looking for a "Markey in disarray" narrative -- he's out of touch, he's another Coakley! -- and Republicans who'd like Markey to lose the primary. His closest rival is Rep. Steve Lynch, one of the last pro-life Democrats, and one of the few still in the House who voted against the Affordable Care Act. If Lynch wins the primary, he creates a puzzle for Democrats who have no real use for a pro-life vote in a safe blue seat. (It's the logic that let conservatives beat more moderate Republicans in Utah and Kentucky primaries in 2010. It's sound logic!) Lynch is a weaker candidate in the special election, and if elected he'd draw a primary challenge in 2014.

There may be reasons to doubt Markey's acumen, but this is a stupid, pack-journalism search for a scandal that simply isn't there.

An be sure quite a few Dems will follow the narrative, rather than trying to help a progressive Democrat running against a "more moderate Democrat" and some Republicans.