If people trusted MPP’s take on last night’s speech, they’d think that Chip Cravaack’s missing President Obama’s campaign speech address to a joint session of Congress was an act of treason. Thankfully, people aren’t stupid enough to think that missing last night’s rehash of this administration’s failed policies was a big deal.

President Barack Obama addressed a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday evening, presenting his plan for job creation and economic growth. Members from both sides of the aisle eagerly gathered to hear the details of the American Jobs Act. All it seems except the Darling of the Tea Party, Michele Bachmann (MN06) and her protégée Chip Cravaack (MN08/NH).

Bachmann claims transportation issues kept her from arriving in time for the Presidential address. But Cravaack, who was in the District, was instead “huddled with staffers” according to his office.

Let me get this straight: a United States congressman representing an area with higher than average unemployment blows off a Joint Session of Congress convened to hear an important job creation and economic development policy initiative from the President of the United States, choosing instead to “huddle” with a staffer?


That the former naval officer so blatantly thumbed his nose at his Commander in Chief and refused to attend a mission-essential meeting is indeed shocking. I wonder how this behavior would be viewed in the military? Insubordination and dereliction of duty come to mind.

The first thing that jumps to mind is that KeewatinRose needs some valium because she’s obviously hyperventillating and delirious. The next thing that leaps to mind is that KR is overstating the military charges in an attempt to make it sound like missing last night’s speech was essential to representing Chip’s district. The other thing it tells me is that KR worships at the altar of President Obama’s failed economic policies.

The first question people should ask is whether KR understands that a sitting member of Congress isn’t a member of the military anymore. The next question people should ask is whether KR understands that a president’s commander-in-chief authority only extends to military matters.

With far left lefties, it isn’t certain whether they’re just playing a drama queen or if they’re that clueless about the military. If I had to bet, I’d bet that KR isn’t that ignorant, that she’s just trying to make a big stink about a nothing incident.

Chip was more productive huddling with his staffers than he would’ve been listening to President Obama relitigate the failed policies of the past 32 months.

Rather than criticizing Chip for supposedly missing the economic speech of the century, people should praise Chip for having the common sense to avoid having his mind polluted by a president whose only understanding of capitalism is that of crony capitalism.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

10 Responses to “MPP’s hissy fit”

  • Alec says:

    Republican economist Mark Zandi said the plan would create 2 million jobs.

    Also, in the last paragraph you use the word “relitigate” in a way that makes no sense. You most likely meant “regurgitate”. For someone criticizing the written form, your grasp of the English language is tenuous at best. Obama was not contesting a law or instigating a lawsuit.

  • Alec says:

    Also, could you please clarify your own military experience from which you speak with such authority? It would really help the readers understand how you sepak on military matters with such certitude.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Alec, If Mark Zandi is predicting 2,000,000 jobs will be created by Son of Stimulus, then he’s a blithering idiot. I’m skeptical that it’ll create 200,000 jobs.

    Next, relitigate is the word I wanted. In President Obama’s mind, he thinks he can win that argument. Thursday night’s speech was more a statement that he thinks the original stimulus worked.

    Finally, it’s laughable to think people need to serve in the military to know what the Constitution says.

  • walter hanson says:


    I think I would’ve attacked a couple of things else instead of what you did.

    One, did the president actually present a plan. To the best of knowledge there is no formal especially since part of this plan was to have the gang of 12 create the spending cuts for him.

    Two, Chip apparently spent his time better that day then Obama. Chip was working with the folks who he represented and then sat down and listened to the speech and immediately talked to his staff about the proposal. Um isn’t that what a Congressman is suppose to do?

    Three, how does sitting in the House of Representatives listening to the speech make it any better than I as an American would’ve done. Of course I didn’t listen to the speech at all because it was just a speech and not a plan.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • walter hanson says:


    I wonder if that’s the same economist that told us if we passed the stimulus bill instead of doing nothing unemployment woudn’t break 8%.

    If you didn’t notice Gary they did a prediction what will happen if we did nothing and we’re worse off than the nothing.

    So when Obama said this will create jobs he’s lying. I know it! More important you know it!! So quit lying when you post.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Tony says:

    You complain about KR throwing a “hissy fit” and then immediately launch into an ad hominem tirade during which you argue that KR “needs some valium.” This Ad hominem attack seems a rather weak form of argumentation.

    Also, if you are interested in the specific details of the jobs plan, you can find them here:


  • Gary Gross says:

    That’s ad hominem? It was a way to mock her post.

    Next, there isn’t a jobs plan. There’s a jobs outline but I haven’t seen a jobs plan yet. Finally, what I heard Thursday night wasn’t significantly different than President Obama’s stimulus plan. If there’s a nuance here or there that’s different, I don’t care. At this point nuances won’t change this economy’s direction. Micromanaged economies fail. What’s needed is true, unbridled capitalism.

  • Alec says:

    How is whether or not he attended a constitutional issue? Nice misdirection. It’s a respect issue. A respect for American tradition and the American presidency.

  • walter hanson says:


    Where was the respect for President Bush among Democrats. You are aware that then candidate Obama called Bush unpatrotic for something Obama then went and did in just three years instead of eight years.

    Where was the respect the President should show people like Paul Ryan by inviting him to be in the front row of a speech and blasting him.

    You and the Democrats have no right to lecture about respect!

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Gary Gross says:

    How isn’t it a constitutional issue? KR talked about a military officer disobeying the orders of a commander-in-chief, though I suspect the real purpose was to make it sound terrible.

    As for American tradition & the American presidency, addresses to a joint session of Congress have been traditionally reserved for huge speeches of national crises. Like the speech President Bush delivered on Sept. 20, 2001. That was an important speech at a time of national crisis.

    The speech President Obama gave Thursday night didn’t rise to that level of importance. It wasn’t even close.

    Of all the people who disrespected American traditions, it was President Obama.

Leave a Reply