| Page 4 of 4 < |
Tina Reinvents the Web
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Well, at least they were just shoes, and he missed. But for me it's a metaphor of sorts about how Iraq still isn't safe, or a normal society, nearly six years later. Mission Not Accomplished.
Now for the latest from Chicago: Is Obama getting a raw deal from the scandal-obsessed press, given the inexhaustible juiciness of the Blago saga? Salon's Joe Conason says it's back to the future:
"Questions are raised. Connections are drawn. Conspiracies are theorized. Guilt is imputed, implied, asserted and very widely associated. And more of the same feckless fingerpointing is exactly what Barack Obama should expect from the Republicans, the right-wing propaganda machine and their enablers in the mainstream media -- even after Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has met whatever fate he deserves.
"From the kooky obsession with his place of birth on WorldNetDaily to insinuations about his Chicago pedigree by the Associated Press, all of the attacks launched lately on Barack Obama give off the same familiar smell. Even a quick sniff is enough to bring back memories from a decade ago, when no perfidious accusation against Bill or Hillary Clinton was too crazy to deserve attention. . . .
"Everyone playing by those rules, including the mainstream journalists who echo the mindless 'questions,' understands that mere facts need not get in the way of a juicy scandal. Everyone playing by the Clinton rules also knows that it is virtually impossible to prove a negative -- to prove, for example, that Obama didn't know how Blagojevich was abusing the Senate appointment. (Which is why civilized judicial systems presume innocence and require proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, of course.)
"Moreover, everyone knows how easily the equations of guilt by association can be constructed: Obama and Blagojevich are both Chicago Democrats and they know lots of other Chicago Democrats, some of whom gave money to both of them; therefore, both are products of a corrupt political machine. Suddenly, it is time to measure the tall, skinny guy for an orange jumpsuit."
Well, Obama clearly knew some people who turned out to be corrupt. But Blagojevich also dismissed him with a string of curse words because he'd offer only "appreciation" if his candidate got his Senate seat.
How, exactly, did Blagojevich break the law? Slate's Jack Shafer takes a look:
"If Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is immediately guilty of anything, it's of making overt what other politicians make covert, and doing so while the wiretaps roll.
"Despite the sensational treatment given the arrest of Blagojevich and aide John Harris in the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and Chicago Tribune, the governor has yet to be charged with attempting to sell Barack Obama's vacated Senate seat . . .
"So far, the actual charges against Blagojevich and Harris are very narrow. The complaint says they 'corruptly solicited and demanded a thing of value' -- the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial writers by the paper's owners -- in exchange for 'millions of dollars in financial assistance by the State of Illinois' for Wrigley Field, which is owned by the newspaper's corporate father, the Tribune Co.
"Blagojevich's first mistake was asking the Tribune Co. for way too little in return for the state's financial favors. What allegedly angered him was a Sept. 29 editorial calling on the Illinois House to explore his impeachment and an Oct. 25 endorsement of a state representative -- a dentist -- for re-election. The editorial observed that the representative was the 'only dentist in the legislature. Can he extract a governor?'
"I can't believe that the governor wanted to extract absolute revenge for these minor offenses. Besides, there is no way that the scalps of a bunch of meddlesome editorial writers are worth the $100 million in financial assistance mentioned in the complaint."
Yeah, you'd think a half-million, max.
Jonah Goldberg describes the gov's targets as virtually having landed on the coveted Nixon Enemies List:
"There are so many bleeping things to love about this bleeping-bleep Blagojevich scandal it's hard to know where to begin. For starters, the folks at the Chicago Tribune are Christmas Pony Happy because Blago tried to strong-arm the Trib's owners to fire members of the editorial board. Instead, Trib editors will get to have a big tailgate party outside Blago's cell window.
"Newspaper people love that sort of thing."
We haven't heard from Biden for an awfully long time, and Politico says that may not change much:
"Joe Biden is laying plans to significantly shrink the role of the vice presidency in Barack Obama's White House, according to an official familiar with his thinking. "It's not just that Biden won't sit in on Senate Democrats' weekly caucus meetings -- a privilege Republicans afforded outgoing Vice President Dick Cheney. He won't have an office outside the House floor, as House Speaker Dennis Hastert gave Cheney early on. "Biden will not begin every day with his own intelligence briefing before sitting in on the president's. He will not always be the last person Obama speaks to before making a decision. He also will not, as a transition official calls it, operate a "shadow government" within an Obama administration."
Grudge Match
Judith Regan gets bleeping mad at Michael Wolff over his new Murdoch bio.
Quote of the Day
" 'I don't know what Caroline Kennedy's qualifications are, except that she has name recognition, but so does J.Lo,' quipped Queens Congressman, Gary Ackerman, during a radio interview Monday. 'I wouldn't make J.Lo the senator unless she proved she had great qualifications, but we haven't seen them yet.' "


