January 27, 2006

Laffey Endorses Shadegg in House Leadership Race

Carroll Andrew Morse

OK, I was wrong. Rhode Island Republicans do have a voice in the upcoming Republican leadership election in the House of Representatives. In today's National Review Online, Republican Senatorial Candidate Steve Laffey has endorsed Congressman John Shadegg of Arizona in the race for House Majority Leader ...

All three contestants have issued numerous promises to fight the special interests, but promises are not enough. John Shadegg has the clearest record of standing up to the corrupt practices and the outrageous pork spending that has become so prevalent in recent years. For example, Representative Shadegg cosponsored a bill to reform the earmark process last spring, long before it became the "in" thing to do, and he was one of only eight Representatives to vote against the pork-heavy Transportation bill.
Laffey then plugs his own campaign, and offers some criticism of his challenger...
John Shadegg and I have something in common: We are both appalled by the spending gluttony in Washington, and we have dedicated our careers to saving taxpayers’ money. That is why I am running for the United States Senate in Rhode Island. The incumbent Republican senator, Lincoln Chafee, has not demonstrated the desire or the ability to stand up to the Washington political bosses and fight for the Republican values of fiscal responsibility and restraint. His career has been marked by timidity and an affinity for the status quo, and that is not good enough.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Once again, Laffey demonstrates the qualities of leadership and focus on issues that have made him such an effective Mayor in Cranston. Does Chafee ever offer up opinions on issues like this??

Laffey endorses Shadegg not for political gain but because he genuinely believes in the issue of triming pork from federal spending. Laffey has been talking about this issue for years. Only recently has reducing earmarks become "en vogue" on the national scene.

Posted by: Leon Berg at January 27, 2006 1:09 PM

I'll admit that I hadn't heard much about Rep. Shadagg before this week, which is probably as good as any reason to vote for him. From just reading around about him, he definitely sounds like exactly what the Republicans in Congress need right now.

Posted by: Will at January 27, 2006 5:19 PM

Geez, Laffey endorses Shadegg not for political gain but for reducing pork. Give me a break. Message to Laffey, Shadegg is looking to become majority leader in the HOUSE, not the Senate. Remember, that's the seat for which you're running?

Laffey endorsed Shadegg to get more Club for Growth money. Nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by: Anthony at January 28, 2006 9:46 PM

I don't think there is any quid pro quo, as in "CFG to Laffey: back Shadegg and we'll send over more cash." I suspect that the real answer is much simpler.

Having read the NRO article, I believe that Laffey knows a winner when he sees one, and wants the positive association that backing a clear break from the House leadership's current troubles would bring to him. Laffey is still looking to make a name for himself nationally. Laffey has more to gain by backing Rep. Shadegg, than the reciprocal. It also shows national folks what kind of Republican that Laffey is (meaning, one worth backing).

While we certainly are talking about different legislative chambers, they are all in one Republican-led Congress. In other words, different decks on the same ship. Laffey wants the Republican ship to stay afloat, not sink.

Posted by: Will at January 29, 2006 12:57 AM

Anthony has some real personal issues, one is lack of logic. By the same logic laffey should not comment one kelo decision, since he is only a mayor.

It seems to me like a well written op ed that gives him a lot of publicity in the nro.

Laffey is a good writer and wants to get his message out. So he writes stuff and sends it out.

Posted by: joe l at January 29, 2006 10:35 AM

Anthony, it is exactly your emotional reactions and your dillusionment that give you away as a Chafee staffer. No clear thinker with a good balance of intellectual and emotial intelligence could support Chafee (unless he/she were a Democrat, Socialist or Hollywood actor). What I get from Laffey's endorsement of Shadegg is that Shadegg stands for what Laffey is fighting for - limited government, no pork, lower taxes! These are the things that Chafee, the dems, the Hollyweird elites (and unfortunately too many entenched Republicans in congress) cherish.

Posted by: Stretch Cunningham at January 29, 2006 10:07 PM

Sorry, lost a sentence in there...

What Chafee and comrades cherish is Taxes, Pork and BIG Government

Posted by: Stretch Cunningham at January 29, 2006 10:11 PM

You are right Stretch. Anthony has some serious problems. As Joe L has pointed out he is not a serious, deep thinker on these issues. Good for Laffey to keep getting his message out. He is a worker, that is for sure.

Posted by: sam trio at January 30, 2006 7:28 AM

Can we all please quit accusing the other guy of being "staffers" for either side. It takes away from the debate and sets a much too personal and divisive tone.

I mean, there are what, 8 republicans in the state? we cannot afford to resent the other side come November.

How about throwing some attacks towards the Dems in some of these posts?

Posted by: john b at January 30, 2006 8:01 AM

Here's a newsflash for you: it is because of logic like yours (i.e., because I'm not planning on voting for Steve Laffey, I must work for Chafee) that will cause Laffey to lose the primary.

You can believe that I'm a Chafee staffer. You're 100% wrong and you exhibit your close-mindedness, but hey, people are entitled to believe the world is flat if they want to do so.

I guess I don't have the logic of the pro-Laffey supporters here who blindly follow a candidate who hasn't been vetted, is opposed by every major elected Republican official, has not shown that he is electable and may cost the GOP the Senate majority. With logic like that, I guess I'm proud to be illogical!

Memo to TV Land Outcasts: if you went back and traced my very first post on this blog, you would see that it happened shortly after the Providence Journal mentioned it in the paper. Up until that point I had not even heard of this blog, much less worked for one of the candidates.

I will say this, though. My interactions on this blog have made me realize something. I should get more involved. So by the next time I post on this blog, you can accuse me of being a Chafee campaign contributor and you will be correct!

I'm also going to write a letter to the Chamber of Commerce as a member thanking them for supporting Chafee and urging them to become more actively involved on Chafee's behalf!

Posted by: Anthony at January 30, 2006 10:59 AM