You can listen to my latest radio show here.
Thanks to Roger for all the patience in helping to set it up.
So is anyone else concerned that the impeachment of Rod Blagojevich is happening with lightening speed for reasons other than genuine outrage or even surprise at his alleged "crimes" - crimes for which he has not yet been indicted, and of which there is no proof to date?
Could it be that the Illinois legislature really really wants to cover up the fact that this is business as usual in Illinois (and in Washington) and each and every one of our elected officials is granting favors in exchange for personal gain?
Is there any doubt that Chris Dodd's magical mortgage (for which he still refuses to produce the docs) was pay for play? After all he shunned regulation of Fannie and Freddie which helped the mortgage industry which means the mortgage industry should help Dodd, by waiving points and fees on his personal mortgage (after filling his campaign coffers with loot). Hey what's $50 or $60k of extra walking around money among Senators and those you are charged with regulating?
Does anyone not think Charlie Rangel's control House Ways and Means (for life now that Pelosi has jettisoned term limits) didn't make it possible for the Congressperson to rent out his rent controlled offices as his campaign offices? And what about his failure to report $75,000 in income from a rental property in the Dominican Republic, a rental property that he charges at least $500 a night to rent?
If that's not pay to play for personal gain, what is?
It seems to me that the outrage against Blago, sans indictment and any corroboration of Patrick Fitzgerald's allegations, feigned at best and aimed at diverting attention from what goes on every single day in Government in this country.
And is there a sane person amoung us who doesn't think that a trillion dollars of stimulus (essentially a giant earmark) isn't simply the biggest diversion in history of our money into politicians hands? The exact same people who brought us the subprime market debacle impoverishing the taxpayers and markets while getting richer by the second, themselves are now, with a straight face saying, we are going to pull the biggest Bernie Madoff scheme in history on you, and we allow you to applaud us while we do it.
Now that President Elect has made clear that he intends to grow government exponentially, I'd like to make a list of things that government does well. The one criteria should be that the government does it better than the private sector.
Please add your ideas and insight:
1.
I'm ringing in the New year with the latest from the Blagojevich-Chi-politics saga. Governor Blago's appointment of Roland Burris to Obamas Senate seat is nothing short of a political stroke of genius. Harry Reid vows to block the appointment of the only African American in the senate. In a clear pre-emptive move, former black panther and PEBO opponent Bobby Rush plays the race card by warning democrats not to "hang" or "lynch" Burris. President-elect
Obama defends Burris but decides he can't be a senator:
Roland Burris is a good man and a fine public servant, but the Senate Democrats made it clear weeks ago that they cannot accept an appointment made by a governor who is accused of selling this very Senate seat. I agree with their decision, and it is extremely disappointing that Governor Blagojevich has chosen to ignore it. I believe the best resolution would be for the Governor to resign his office and allow a lawful and appropriate process of succession to take place. While Governor Blagojevich is entitled to his day in court, the people of Illinois are entitled to a functioning government and major decisions free of taint and controversy,
The Supreme Court, where this will surely end up, may differ with the PEBO and side with Blagojevich.
I am certainly greatful that our new president, reared in Chicago politics, has transcended his roots, even if he doesn't understand the law.
I for one will raise a toast tonite to the end of "politics as usual", "transparency" and "hope and change".
Last week, former Huckabee adviser and contender for chairman of the RNC Chip Saltsman, sent out a CD to some republicans titled "Barack the Magic Negro" a parady of the Obama - Sharpton relationship.
I admit that I cringed when I first heard that title.
Saltsman was summarily creamed by the media for his poor taste, or lack of sensibility, or something.
In justification of his light-hearted prank, some referred back to a David Ehrenstein column in the LA Times back in March of 2007 titled: "Obama the 'Magic Negro'". Ehrenstein, decidely liberal, might not have coined the phrase, but he certainly led with it. No one complained, because, after all, he is on the left side of the fence. John Avalon, decidedly centrist, declared the death of the republican party, or some such tripe as a result of Saltsman's tone deafness - the implication being that of course all republicans are racist, they are just supposed to hide it better.
At some point in the two day controversy, which apparently symbolizes everything bad about the republicans, I started wondering when "negro" became an offensive word. When I was growing up, "blacks" were called "Negroes" and I certainly didn't find that offensive, or diminishing or anything else. It took time to switch over to the word "black" which at first sounded as uncomfortable as "negro" does today.
Then I started thinking about how utterly divisive and humorless political correctness is these days. We spend so much time attempting to not offend that there is no time left to attempt to get to know each other, and to understand what makes us different and thus interesting. We have become a bland, politically correct, boring country in that regard, and we are clearly worse off for it.
In college my best friend was Chinese. One day we sat down together in front of a mirror in order to figure out exactly why her eyes and my eyes looked different. In polite society today we would certainly risk ridicule for the same act, and perhaps even for the mere acknowledgment that a difference exists - a subject which seemed like the most obvious thing in the world to us at the time.
Chip Saltsman probably tanked his chances for RNC chair with his Christmas CD delivery,and that is unfortunate. If so, that says things about this country that I don't want to hear. It says that political correctness is an excuse to let some people escape criticism, honest review or even humorous parody. For a leader in particular, but for everyone in general, that is a huge mistake. In the case of our president elect, it will result in treating him differently than every other president in our history - because of the color of his skin.
Isn't that what political correctness set out to avoid?