The Protective Coloring of Madam Foxx

We had been wondering why Madam Virginia Foxx had toned down her off-year rhetoric. In the past, during odd-numbered years when she was not actively running for reelection, she dropped such bombs as these:

"Governmental attempts to regulate and tax tobacco are no different than if the government were to regulate and tax Mountain Dew." April 8, 2009, to teenagers at North Surry High School

"There are no Americans who don't have healthcare. Everybody in this country has access to healthcare." July 24, 2009, in a Capitol Hill press conference

“I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that [health reform] bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.” November 2, 2009, on the floor of the U.S. House

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

In 2011, she's mainly confined herself to personal braggadocio (recently claiming that she's one of the most accomplished defenders of women's rights in the history of the universe and that she's a "right-wing radical" just like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were). Oh, she did say that it was "unconscionable that we have 45 million people in this country getting food stamps," not because we have that many hungry citizens but because 45 million people were getting something for free.

But we digress. Comes this a.m. in the NYTimes a possible explanation for why she's keeping a lower rhetorical profile these days ... the verifiable statistic that most Americans now despise their own member of Congress. Used to be that voters despised everybody else's member of Congress. But now, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll in September, only 33 percent of registered voters believe their own member deserves to be re-elected.

Possible challengers to Madam Foxx are beginning to line up. Might make Foxx want to appear slightly less inflammatory (and, naturally, more Baptist).