The Tennessean’s Frank Daniels III (The Third) is an obviously conflicted man.
In what at first appeared to be a typical liberal screed criticizing Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, Daniels The Third did a 180-dgree pivot late in his article on judicial retention elections and a proposed constitutional amendment. At the risk of becoming just one more voice inside Frank’s head, the RTP will attempt to dissect the column and shed a little light on why the MSM just can’t seem to overcome personal animosity towards conservative politicians as they laughingly attempt to deliver “the news.”
What is it about Ron Ramsey that sets the MSM’s teeth to gnashing and gives establishment GOP types heart palpitations? Is it his mountain twang? Perhaps it is his droopy countenance that reminds them of Johnny Cash (or perhaps Quasimodo)?
[Note: RTP is purposely abusing our thesaurus with “fancy” words like Daniels’ use of “rapacious” and “maddeningly insouciant.” Daniels apparently feels throwing around such words makes him appear to be smarter and more refined than his hick readers. RTP has now tried it and we concur that it increases our self-esteem and “critical thinking” faster than you can say Common Core PARCC test. Now, back to the article, you peasants…].
Daniels tried to back his opinion by declaring: “Fellow Republicans did not line up to support [Ramsey].” He then delivers former justice Mickey “Who” Barker and sometimes Republican, Bill Haslam as his only proof. Since establishment Republicans are the only Republicans with whom Daniels would [fancy word alert] deign to associate, RTP would humbly suggest Daniels ask the opinion of Republicans in other countries or from far-away lands. Maybe Smyrna.
Daniels rambles on before finally coming to the conclusion that the only way for Tennesseans to protect their “rights” was to vote against non- retention (which is a “right” guaranteed by the Tennessee constitution) and to also vote against the constitutional amendment (which would leave in place the current system of retention votes that Daniels decries).
Unfortunately for all of you rapacious, insouciant types who are thoroughly confused by Frank The Third’s conclusions, he offer no further words of logic – fancy or otherwise – to back his assertions.
Is RTP’s assessment both extemporaneous and erudite? Indubitably.