Some Struggle To Understand Corbett's Use Of Political Posturing

In his article today in The Bulletin, Chris Friend suggests that the conflict of interest allegations against Attorney General Tom Corbett by his political opponents are baseless. Then proceeds to point out how challenging the constitutionality of the health care law by Corbet somehow has nothing to do with political posturing.

Later in the week, Corbett sued the federal government over the passage of health care legislation.

He didn’t do this as a partisan Republican, attacking a Democratic health care bill.

No, his decision was rooted in something much more basic: his belief that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to usurp the rights of the state, and force citizens to purchase health care --- or risk fines and jail.

Wow. Call me crazy, but isn’t that what a state Attorney General is supposed to do --- protect the citizens of his state from criminals and unconstitutional laws? (The Bulletin)

Click Here To Read More

Apparently some struggle with understanding the concept of political posturing in order to gain a political advantage over one's opponent. O.K. Chris I will take this opportunity to call you crazy for you pointless rant today.

If Corbett is not using these high profile cases for political posturing than where was Corbett during the 2005 pay raise? I don't remember Corbett immediately holding a press conference and challenging the constitutionality of that law. I mean after all that is what state Attorney Generals do right? And why has it taken so long for these Bonusgate trials to occur considering the Patriot-News first reported the bonus scheme over three years ago. I think Chris needs to take the Tom Corbett, Space Cadet blinders off.