Buck B.
Blago busted
Gov. Blagojevich and his chief of staff were taken into custody by the FBI this morning. The Tribune has the story, as well as the statement from our old friend Pat Fitzgerald (pdf):
Throughout the intercepted conversations, Blagojevich also allegedly spent significant time weighing the option of appointing himself to the open Senate seat and expressed a variety of reasons for doing so, including: frustration at being “stuck” as governor; a belief that he will be able to obtain greater resources if he is indicted as a sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor; a desire to remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016; avoiding impeachment by the Illinois legislature; making corporate contacts that would be of value to him after leaving public office; facilitating his wife’s employment as a lobbyist; and generating speaking fees should he decide to leave public office.
Wow. Never in my wildest dreams did I think he was that stupid.
That may be the most over-the-top part, but there’s plenty of other fascinating details in there. This quote from Fitzgerald is particularly awesome: “They allege that Blagojevich…involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target.”
To say this throws a wrench into Illinois politics is a bit of an understatement. Who picks the junior senator now? Will Blagojevich resign? Is there a special election in our future? Will people actually notice Pat Quinn now?
Have at it.
How’s your civics knowledge?
I thought this quiz was and its results were pretty cool. Embarrassingly, I got two wrong: No. 10 (brain fart) and No. 33 (kind of a dumb question, if you ask me).
I’ve never understood why civics was eliminated from high scroll curricula. Along with making Election Day a national holiday, it’s probably the easiest and best step we could take toward a more involved and educated citizenry. We devote a whole semester to teaching students to drive, but can’t spend a few hours on how to vote.
Anyone actually have a civics class, in high school or otherwise?
The Grand Unified Unified Theory of Palin
Ever since McCain “suspended” his campaign Wednesday, I’ve been struggling to figure out what’s going on. Is this one of the greatest unforced errors in presidential campaign history, or a brilliant masterstroke that turns things around just as Mcain’s poll numbers are beginning to slip?
Well, if you’ll forgive a little conspiracy theory, here’s a chronology I came up with. The bold headers are essentially factual, followed by my interpretation.
Friday fiscal blogging
It’s all in the timing
The American people are in the process of summarily rejecting the Republican Party. This has been going on since 2006 at least, and while the Weekly Standard article seems to view those mid-terms as the nadir, I think this fall will be even worse for the GOP. Some (reasonable, I think) appraisals at Daily Kos have the Dems gaining another 30-40 House seats and three or four Senate seats. The 25-and-counting House Republicans who have retired would be bad news even in the best political climate.
Regardless of the actual outcome this fall, it’s inarguable that the Republican brand has never been more tarnished. Yes, that includes post-Nixon: while Bush wallows in historical levels of unpopularity, the GOP itself is polling just as badly. People are pissed.
But why? Or more precisely, why now? There’s been ample evidence for a long time that the Republican Party in its current incarnation is just really, really (really) bad at governing. You can’t throw a dart at the Federal Register without hitting something they’ve fucked up.
Your guess is as good as mine. Here are three explanations why the GOP has reached this level of unpopularity now and not, say, four years ago. Feel free to add your own in comments.
It’s the economy, stupid
Idiotic foreign policy and cronyism to make Harding look like an amateur? No big deal. But people start caring when events hit them in the pocketbook. Tough economic times have brought down many a presidential candidate, regardless of the problems were actually their or their party’s fault.
People are just slow
It can be hard for us political junkies to remember that the rate at which a normal person absorbs news, especially political news, is really fucking slow. There are people in West Virginia who still think Janet Reno is going to take their guns away.
You’ve simply got to give the public a healthy amount of time to a) Pay attention enough to see what’s going on and b) Really come to terms with and internalize that yes, those guys really do suck that bad. Shit, I do pay attention and it’s hard for me to believe some of the shit the Bush administration has pulled. Of course, maybe people don’t pay attention because…
The media sucks
I’m partial to this one. See my bitch-fest with Brian for some of the ways we feel the news media has failed the American people. Not only have they failed to simply report the truth so people can make up their own minds, they have actively perpetuated government propaganda. Enough news has managed to seep into the electorate through osmosis to bring us to where we are now, but we would have gotten there a lot sooner had the media been doing their job.
It’s all in the timing
The American people are in the process of summarily rejecting the Republican Party. This has been going on since 2006 at least, and while the Weekly Standard article seems to view those mid-terms as the nadir, I think this fall will be even worse for the GOP. Some (reasonable, I think) appraisals at Daily Kos have the Dems gaining another 30-40 House seats and three or four Senate seats. The 25-and-counting House Republicans who have retired would be bad news even in the best political climate.
Regardless of the actual outcome this fall, it’s inarguable that the Republican brand has never been more tarnished. Yes, that includes post-Nixon: while Bush wallows in historical levels of unpopularity, the GOP itself is polling just as badly. People are pissed.
But why? Or more precisely, why now? There’s been ample evidence for a long time that the Republican Party in its current incarnation is just really, really (really) bad at governing. You can’t throw a dart at the Federal Register without hitting something they’ve fucked up.
Your guess is as good as mine. Here are three explanations why the GOP has reached this level of unpopularity now and not, say, four years ago. Feel free to add your own in comments.
It’s the economy, stupid
Idiotic foreign policy and cronyism to make Harding look like an amateur? No big deal. But people start caring when events hit them in the pocketbook. Tough economic times have brought down many a presidential candidate, regardless of the problems were actually their or their party’s fault.
People are just slow
It can be hard for us political junkies to remember that the rate at which a normal person absorbs news, especially political news, is really fucking slow. There are people in West Virginia who still think Janet Reno is going to take their guns away.
You’ve simply got to give the public a healthy amount of time to a) Pay attention enough to see what’s going on and b) Really come to terms with and internalize that yes, those guys really do suck that bad. Shit, I do pay attention and it’s hard for me to believe some of the shit the Bush administration has pulled. Of course, maybe people don’t pay attention because…
The media sucks
I’m partial to this one. See my bitch-fest with Brian for some of the ways we feel the news media has failed the American people. Not only have they failed to simply report the truth so people can make up their own minds, they have actively perpetuated government propaganda. Enough news has managed to seep into the electorate through osmosis to bring us to where we are now, but we would have gotten there a lot sooner had the media been doing their job.
A post-Indiana conversation
Note: The following exercise in Obama wankery and bitching about the media is only for those with a high tolerance for such things. All others should use caution. In other words…
We won, bitches! Suck it!
Buck B: Can I just say that this is the fucking awesomest thing ever?
Brian Pierce: I keep thinking that it’s finally, finally over, and then realize there’s a whole general election campaign left
Buck B: Yes. But I was a lot more worried about Hillary than I was about whoever the Republicans nominated.
Brian Pierce: I’m not worried as much as I am exhausted. But, yeah, it’s a fun night. Nice to see none of the nonsense the past few weeks has hurt him.
Buck B: Amazing, really. Maybe people are actually. waking up.
Brian Pierce: Yeah, for all the talk about Obama not responding effectively, it seems like in reality he has an almost uncanny ability to cut through bullshit in a way that is actually persuasive to voters.
Buck B: It’s called “telling the truth”.
Brian Pierce: No kidding! I think it’s not so much that people are waking up, but that the media has this weird view of what “regular people” think that kind of assumes they’re all really dumb. So you hear a lot of talk about, “Well, Hillary may be totally full of shit on the gas tax holiday, but it’s good politics!”
Buck B: Right. The media won’t just give the candidates to the people directly and let them make up their minds, they think they have to analyze it for them. It’s hard to build a convincing case in 15-second sounds bites followed by five minutes of analysis.
Brian Pierce: And analyze it not based on what’s true, but what’s “effective.”
Buck B: Yup. With “effectiveness” based on absolutely no empirical evidence.
Brian Pierce: I mean, it should be extraordinarily offensive every time some pundit says that this gas tax holiday stuff was good politics and then in the same breath say that it’s bad policy. Yet they say it totally un-self-consciously. Even though there’s no way that could be true unless you are saying, “The American people are too stupid to understand they’re being lied to.”
Buck B: Well…unfortunately, that’s at least partly true. But that’s why it’s so important the media take on the role of informing them. And not reporting on them like they’re some sort of amusing beast.
Brian Pierce: Yeah, it’s true to great extent because the media doesn’t even attempt to ascertain whether the claims politicians are making are true or false. Every time I see Tim Russert chuckling about spin I want to punch him in the face.
Buck B: That’s why I prefer partisan media.
Brian Pierce: Ideological media.
Buck B: I don’t like wasting energy trying to figure out how a reporter is responding to spin. I want to know what his position is from the start. Who the fuck’s side is Russert on? What is he doing? No one knows.
Brian Pierce: And because Tim Russert doesn’t have a particular stake in anything, there’s much more of a focus on game-playing.
Buck B: Yes. Surprisingly, taking a particular side makes you focus more on issues and less on politics.
Brian Pierce: In part because a focus on politics leads the public to view everybody as being the same, because it’s just this confusing haze of spin. But if you’re trying to advocate one side, you’re going to be jumping up and down trying to draw clear distinctions on issues.
Buck B: And because you assumably believe in what you’re advocating, you’re going to want to build sound and convincing arguments.
Brian Pierce: That’s why I used the term “ideological media” before, rather than “partisan.” If you’re advocating a particular point of view (as opposed to being purely partisan), you will be willing to call even candidates of your own party on shit you don’t like. Fox News is just a partisan version of CNN, but with all the same flaws as CNN that we’re talking about.
Buck B: Good point. That kind of distinction might be the eventual death of the two-party system.
Obama speech on race
I thought it was amazing, but then again I’m an Obama fanboy. A little long, perhaps, and I’m always annoyed when a speech concludes with a (semi-cute) personal anecdote. And it probably doesn’t contain any ready-made soundbites, or at least ones beneficial to Obama.
But it feels wrong to talk about this speech in purely political terms. Whether you believe he’s sincere or not, today Obama talked about race in a way we do not often see on the national stage, and certainly not from a presidential candidate. Talked about black resentment over the lingering and current effects of racism, yes, but also white frustration with their own struggles to get ahead, and how easy it is to blame others for those problems.
Moreover, Obama talked about them in a way that invites thoughtful discussion. My favorite part:
It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.
To me, that is the crux of the argument, and of the problem. The conservative coalition was built, in part, on demonizing the entire idea of government spending because some of your tax dollars might go to “those people” (see Atwater, Lee re: Southern Strategy). If success is a zero-sum game, then both the inner-city black who takes your tax dollars and the Mexican immigrant who takes your job are the enemy. This is the first time I’ve heard a candidate explicitly address these ideas, and how fallacious they are.
Talk, talk, talk. Yes, that’s all this is. But open discussion is the only way to work through issues of race and class; this is not a problem that invites policy solutions. To fix some of the problems endemic in our society, we have to to first understand “that investing in the health, welfare and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.”
But, again, I’m an Obama fanboy.
Like hope, but different
I so want to see this race.
Oh, by the way, I guess I’m posting here now. Hello, everyone.