Watts to quit, cause/effect?

Great Debates
21

Now here is an example of a distinction without a difference.

Nixon had 2 1/2 years to go on his term–the executive in charge of the oversight of the entire Federal government. Watts had six months left, most of it scheduled for summer, pre-election, and post-election recess. He had also achieved the number three position in his party in the House, thus, regardless whether he is (objectively or in his mind) being denied the ability to wield that power, he has certainly declared his intention to walk away from it. In addition, before he announced that he would not run again, he was considered to have pretty much a lock on his seat–which, again, his is giving up.

If you wish to define quit so narrowly as to mean only “immediate surrender,” I suppose you may. Given that most people recognize that the job was “his” for the foreseeable future, an announcement to not run is tantamount to an announcement to quit.

22

Actually, the number 4 position. I point this out because this might’ve been the straw breaking the camel’s back. Tom DeLay knew Watts was unfit to serve in that capacity (I mentioned his temper earlier, I wonder how he’d deal with a guy like Chris Shays) and was most useful communicating the party’s message. So if he had been in the 3 position we wouldn’t be debating this right now.

I thought it was worth pointing out, even if it is a minor nitpick.