-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2008/09/24/the-wrong-debate/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
So you're assuming he has principles ?
But let's be fair here...liberals have been jumping all over Sarah for taking those federal dollars in a state where mooching off the feds
is the state sport. Gotta back off on that too.
Are you talking about Alaska or Illinois? Because Illinois consistently ranks near the bottom in per capita federal spending.
Well, since you claim it is the real question, then "yes". When Obama endorsed Machine candidates who did a poor job in office, don't deserve re-election, and continue to fail in office, then Obama is responsible.
When Obama endorsed Todd Stroger, he lost any credibility to claim he is a reformer. When he sits back and stays mum while Chicago's corruption bleeds into the public, he can't claim to be a reformer. When Obama endorsed Mayor Daley after the Hired Truck scandal, he can't claim to be an agent of change.
The ad is correct.
When you put yourself on a pedestal as Obama has ("we'll look back at this time as when the oceans began to recede, when the planet began to heal") and sell yourself as a change agent, and you don't have much of a resume, it's fair for people to point out the company you keep.
Where is the Obama ad on the Keating 5?/McCain the Deregulator? This Wall Street fiasco is a gift -- don't blow it.
As for Obama's cozier relationship with the Democratic establishment, I really don't think he's sold his soul. It's just a mutually beneficial cease fire as far as I can tell. And once Obama has the presidency he can tell all the hacks to go to hell and there's nothing they can do about it. I mean did he actually endorse Todd Stroger or just not endorse Forrest Claypool? I know not endorsing at all was essentially the same thing, but I just don't recall him actually endorsing Stroger.
Obama himself in his resume is quick to point out his non-machine credentials then grows silent when he embraced that very same machine. His silence in the face of the many corruption scandals surrounding his Democratic "friends" in Chicago, Cook County and Springfield is shameful behavior for a so-called "reformer" who claims that he will be changing things.
The more he hangs with them, the more he is associated with them, no matter how hard the Chicago Tribune editorial page tries to explain it away.
Be a man, Obama. Walk away from those guys and be true to what you claim to believe in!
Many Republicans had their heads handed to them for endorsing and supporting George Ryan. Why the double standard for Obama?
Obama should counter these machine ads with an ad saying he is tough because he took on the machine and won and now he is leading the charge for reform and has the machine leaders following his guidance.
Of course he shouldn't metion they are on board only because they want to get at the federal money after he becomes President.
So, is this why you feel as you do? Also, did you notice I brought up this very subject above?
Actually Paul himself endorsed Barack shortly before he died almost 5 years ago.... they didn't film a commercial before his heart surgery so she ended up in the ad. Didn't help her mayoral campaign, I guess....
While we're on the Paul Simon topic, please check out www.senatorpaulsimon.org for info about the museum in Troy, where Paul started his political career! (Events are out of date but I think they are planning something for the 5th anniversary of his passing/80th birthday later this year).
At the risk of getting lambasted, I'm cautiously optimistic that if and when Obama is elected president, he'll bee much less reliant on the resources of the Machine, and will act accordingly. I'm not sure specifically what these actions may consist of, but a good start (albeit nothing more than a symbolic gesture) would be keeping Patrick Fitzgerald in his current post.
Based on illegal and formerly secret FBI wiretaps of Outfit guys, historians now believe his administration gave early release to Paul Ricca and Johnny Roselli from federal prison due to the Mafia's influence in the Democratic Party at that time.
Harry didn't get rich, but a lot of people around him did. We've heard that song before -- then and now.
Why do we think anyone who would pursue the position of most powerful person in the world is as pure as Ivory Soap? Read some Shakespeare, folks.
Is this from the Joe Biden American History Seminar?
Obama stayed quiet during the primary, when he could have endorsed Claypool over John Stroger, but then issued a public letter claiming Todd was a "progressive" who would "lead us into a new era of Cook County government." (See: http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists...)
I guess Obama was right; Stroger has lead Cook County to a new level of ineptitude. That's the similar problem with Obama's "change" motto. Change is a journey; the destination is what's important.
He is so beyond Chicago politics now.
There used to be a hard and fast line between Regular Democarts and Independent Democrats and the defining issue was Race and Open Housing.
Now we just have feuding families among Democrats.
Obama had the power to overcome that and chose not too. I think he could have done a lot of good and lost him little and helped him nationally.
If Obama were born of the machine we'd have far clearer expectations of what to expect from his administration. But he's not and there is really no machine-of-old anymore anyways.
He is very much the blankslate he wrote of, upon whom people project their wishes and desires, and what he will chose to do with all of that if elected will be a fascinating thing to watch unfold.
Hope it turns out better for Obama than it did for Dan Walker.
Was it illegal when it was done? I don't think so.
Paul Simon would’ve been a much better governor than Dan Walker?
I will doubt it. Walker was unable to get much done because the machine hated him, and the Rs smelled a governorship next time.
Simon may have gotten along better with Daley, but would he have DONE things much better? Yes, he would have done something, but would it have been a good thing?
Rod B has manufactured his problem with the legislature, and agressively so. Walker had a problem because he was "somebody that nobody sent."
Ah the Daley's, if only the entire country were Chicago. All McCain has to do is show a clip of Daley's rant and then roll into all the city hall scandals and there you have the next commercial.
Maybe he should just keep quiet and get the guy elected, then we can all laugh about it later.
How many times has an incumbent legislator ever been tossed off the ballot by the Chicago Board of Elections? Those petitions must've been pretty darned horrible. It's not subverting the process.
Getting your petitions right is the basic way to separate a tyro from someone who is serious about running for office.
It's not rocket science. For someone who has a ward machine in his camp, one would think he'd need to WORK at making them bad.
Yes they did. After Pendergast was dumped and lost his power, Truman had to run for re-election for his Missouri senate seat in 1940. He was grilled as the "Senator from Pendergast", and derided mercilessly throughout the campaign. Pundits believed he was an easy loser because he was so roundly chastised.
When he got his Senate seat in 1934, few US Senators would talk to him. They considered him a Pendergast dupe. He was ignored and laughed at. He was a very lonely man throughout his Senate years.
It wasn't until he showed how he mastered his duties as a US Senator during the Truman Committee WWII years, did he gain any respect beyond being considered a Pendergast stooge. After his surprise 1940 re-election, he continued to demonstrate a strong maverick streak and was on the forefront as a guy not to mess with. Since he wasn't welcomed in DC until he made a name for himself, he felt he didn't owe anyone anything. So he proved his independance.
Truman, and Chester Arthur surprised pundits and critics by revealing powerful personalities in the White House. Both men were machine stooges who refused to tow the line once they got into office. Both were denounced while in office and were extremely unpopular presidents. Truman's poll numbers make Bush's look good. Arthur was so unpopular he didn't even have enough support to be renominated in 1884.
What Obama says, and what he has done since first becoming a state senator are often at odds.
Obama is no Truman.
He doesn't seem to be an Arthur either.
Pat, that's based on the books of Bill Roemer, former Chicago FBI agent. He planted them, eavesdropping devices, not wiretaps, my mistake, and he's the one who said they were secret and illegal.
You can look it up. Give him a google and buy his books. They're a great read.
Read Cooley and the Gus Russo books, and find out how this state really works.
Before we can consider Obama as "Trumanesque", one has to follow up on Vanilla Man's backgrounder and remember that even though Truman earned respect and his stripes after 1940, he was never considered a national figure of consequence. He was a down-the-list, compromise candidate for Vice-President (the candidate of those Democrats who had become appalled with the red-leaning incumbent Wallace and wanted no more "New Dealers" on the ticket) and an accidental President (President FDR died three months into his fourth term (Truman's first term as VP)). Truman basically was a blank slate as a new President in 1945, and fairly little known throughout the country. As a new President, he was more of a Palin than an Obama.
Truman was in fact Obama's opposite: dogged by his machine background, he had to spend years advancing through the Washington politcal scene before he had a modicum of respectability. Then, fortune struck, and he became an accidental President.
Obama, by contrast, has suppressed or at least shielded his relationship with the Chicago/Cook machine and has speedily scrambled to the top of the greasy pole driven by ambition and without any long term Washington experience or Trumanesque seasoning.