Obviously, this is bad public policy on numerous levels. Ms. Jenkins, if you don't know enough about a particular subject Keep Your Mouth Shut! It's better to keep an open mind and say nothing than to have others, especially those lobbyists whose opinions are being paid for, tell you what to say.

In my opinion, this is now Strike Three for Rep. Jenkins. As a former candidate for Congress, I've been reluctant to critique Ms. Jenkins for several missteps in her first term in Congress (which has put me at odds with members of the state Democrat Party) because I am personally familiar with the steep learning curve necessary to become familiar with the multitude of issues with which an elected official must become conversant. Strike One in my book was her political cluelessness concerning her remark about seeking a "Great White Hope" among a handful of supposed brilliant Republican minds set to establish a resurgence in 2010 and 2012. The fact that she made a gaff at a speaking engagement was not significant to me; it was of an overt racist precedent that made it truly monumental and drew national attention and scorn. I took Ms. Jenkins at her word that she was unaware of the historical context. Still, I was disturbed by her comment because it seemed to me to show a serious disconnect from mainstream sensativities and cultural competence regarding the Jim Crow era of our nation's history. [Kinda make you wonder if she has ever been to the Brown v. Topeka Board of Education museum that's part of her district???] .

Not long after she made that misstatement her office admitted she had made the remark despite having voted for a resolution to honor the boxing champion Joe Johnson who was the focal point of the remark because he was a black man who had gained the championship by defeating white opponents. While this certainly would tend to undercut Ms. Jenkins' assertions that she was unaware of the racist nature of the remark, her explanation, which I also believe, revealed a far more disturbing aspect of her character. She had voted for the resolution without reading it! While I believe similar resolutions, which are introduced by House members in the hundreds each year, make it difficult for a congressperson to do their job effectively if they were to read them in their entirety, (just remember the stink that House Republicans made about having to read the 2,000 page Health Care Bill) the simple answer is to rely on your staff to provide a synopsis or to not vote on the resolution. Here, it was clear that Rep. Jenkins choose the politically expedient route and simply voted with the majority and it came back to bite her in the ass.

This last mistake is the worst because she actively substituted her independent judgment for that of a paid lobbyist. Perhaps, Ms. Jenkins really does believe that overseas competition for generic drug manufacturers is a problem to the U.S. economy, the problem is that we'll never really be able to tell in the future what she actually believes and what come out of her mouth might have originated in the board room of a Wall Street corporation. The loss of trust in her independence of judgment in the final straw. Rep. Lynn Jenkins should resign.