Byron York shows that a change of Venue doesn’t mean a change of quality:
And what was going on this week? In a written statement released before his news conference, Gregg explained that “on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me.” A short time later, in front of the press, Gregg played down both issues, but a number of observers believed his original statement was the more accurate. On the stimulus, his decision to stay out of the debate had put him in an awkward position; as a longtime fiscal conservative, he couldn’t vote his conscience, because it would conflict with the president who offered him a place in the cabinet, and as the Commerce Secretary-designate, he couldn’t vote with the president, because it would violate his conscience. On the Census, Gregg told reporters that it “was not a major issue,” but he appeared to protest too much when he said the Census “wasn’t a big enough issue for me to even discuss what the issue was.” If that were the case, then why did he specifically mention it in his written statement?
At the very least, the Census issue would have made for a very uncomfortable confirmation hearing. Gregg’s fellow Republicans on the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee would certainly have asked him what he thought of a plan that would move control of the Census from professionals in the Commerce Department to Rahm Emanuel, the hyper-partisan White House chief of staff. What would Gregg have said? It was the stimulus problem all over again; Gregg couldn’t have said what he believed, but he probably couldn’t have brought himself to support the president, either.
Very much worth your read, what a loss for National Review.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 