In the first comment on Jeff Scheuer’s excellent post “Shall we overcome?“, reader Henry Pelifian implies that Governor Blagojovich’s corruption is not a big deal and that his crime amounts to essentially just “loose and foolish talk” because, after all, “[g]oing to war with loose and foolish talk by elected officials is all right politically.” You see, goes the logic (as far as I understand it), since no one seems to care about the foolish and loose talk by President George W. Bush that led to war, and since Bush did something far worse than Blagojovich, we shouldn’t make a big deal over what Blagojovich did.

In a comment on a conversation between Paula Marantz Cohen and Robert Anthony Watts called “Political entitlement — liberal hypocrisy,” in which our dynamic duo discusses the propriety of giving Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat to Caroline Kennedy, reader Ari writes, “I think we’ve got a long way to go before liberals come anywhere near the cronyism of the Bush administration…”

These are only two examples from this site, but I have been seeing this sort of thing elsewhere — in blog comment sections and other op-eds — and maybe you have, too. Apparently, Bush is so dishonest and corrupt and Republicans are so dishonest and corrupt, no liberal or Democrat politician can commit any crime or be corrupt or improper, because whatever they do, it isn’t as bad as what Bush did.

Let us grant for argument’s sake that Bush is guilty of whatever misdeeds, motives, and lies that are attributed to him. The corruption or even downright evil of one politician, or one political administration, does not remotely excuse corruption by other politicians. Democrats, if you want to change the political culture (we heard a lot about change in recent months), the way to do it is not to ignore or excuse corruption in your own party by noting that sure, it isn’t good, but at least it’s better than the Republicans or Bush.

Leaving Bush out of it, there will almost always be some historical (recent or otherwise) example of political corruption and even evil that is worse than whatever is in the news that week. But “not as bad as” whatever is the worst example you can find is hardly something to aspire to. You’ve won the election, guys. It isn’t about Bush anymore. Your politicians must stand on their own accomplishments, policies, and integrity and be judged by what they do. It doesn’t matter how bad the last guy was. You can’t excuse corruption on the grounds that there is worse corruption out there. Have a little self-respect.

Tags: rulers & ruled
4 Comments »

At a time of unprecedented national pride and renewal, as we approach the inauguration of America’s first nonwhite president, it’s hard to imagine anything more squalid than the behavior of the president-elect’s home-state governor, Rod Blagojovich of Illinois, who was arrested Nov. 12th on charges of conspiring to sell Mr. Obama’s own seat in the U.S. Senate. Nothing could be more distracting or at odds with the spirit of the moment. Or so it seemed.  

Gov. Blagojovich will of course have the day in court to which he is entitled — followed, most likely, by many years of incarceration. But from the standpoint of racial harmony and conciliation, which is a key subtext of the past election, the present time, and the coming administration, I would single out another chapter of this story for its inappropriateness: something less despicable than what Gov. Blagojovich allegedly did, but in a way, more depressing. That is the reaction of some African-American leaders in Illinois and in Congress, to the Governor’s nomination of a distinguished black politician, Roland Burris, to fill Obama’s Senate seat.

Blagojovich remains governor as of this writing, with the powers pertaining to that office. He himself claims to have a legal duty to fill the seat; duty or not, his nomination of Burris is perfectly legal.

The problem is that the governor is so deeply compromised, not just by the charges pending against him but by the nationally-publicized recordings of some particularly damning evidence for those charges, that any act he performs in his remaining time as governor bears the taint of corruption. [Read more →]

Tags: race & culture, rulers & ruled
1 Comment »

Michelle, you’ve got the right idea … and I am speaking from experience. Do everything you can to convince your mom to move into the White House with you. I know she’s super independent and also wants to give your family some space to be a family — my parents said the same thing — but who really needs that much space? Don’t let her get away with it. Her moving to her own place near the White House just won’t be the same as you all living under one roof.

My parents moved in with us back in June and, honestly, it’s been fantastic. I never have to run out to get milk or eggs. I get weather updates every morning so I know how to dress myself and my kids. I change 50 percent less poopy diapers. I no longer need to feed the goldfish (although I wouldn’t expect mom to walk the new puppy coming your way; however, she may be willing to walk with one of the girls as they walk the new puppy). I get to sleep in every once in a while because my kids go down to my parents and bug them to get breakfast going. When my husband needs to work late I can still go out for a coffee to catch up with a friend. When my husband doesn’t need to work late we can put the kids to bed and then catch a 10 p.m. movie without worrying about a babysitter. Every once in a while my mom will cook (and it isn’t half bad). Plus, there is always someone to get my daughter off of her school bus when my husband and I are at work.

OK, so maybe some of my benefits won’t exactly translate to things you will get (or need) from your mom. However, what you will get is a comfort that is immeasurable. Knowing that there is someone else you trust, implicitly, living in your house is the unspoken benefit. Someone else there that will help keep your kids grounded and guide them when you and Barack get pulled away. Someone to read them bedtime stories when you are not around. Someone for the girls to talk to when they need the love that only a parent or grandparent can give. And I am not sure how Marian is with sweets… but my kids always know they get a little something extra for dessert if grandma is in charge.

So, to Marian, mother to the first-lady-elect and grandmother to two adorable girls about to transition into an entirely new world, move in to the White House. Your family needs you — and besides, you will get as much out of the next four years as they will. Just ask my parents.

Tags: blood, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

The father of history is a man named Herodotus, a Greek writer who lived in the ancient times before the birth of Alexander the Great or even Richard Nixon. Herodotus has been called the first “historian” in that he made it his business to write down the story of mankind as best he could with the available information in the 4th Century B.C., which was way before Google or Wikipedia.

As a result Herodotus has been referred to, even by some of his contemporaries, as “the father of lies.” His chief sin seems to have been a willingness to report popular lore alongside verifiable fact. For instance, during the reign of the Persian king Cambyses, the evil and murderous son of the first Persian conqueror, Cyrus, Herodotus wrote that a Babylonian journalist threw both his shoes one after another at the most powerful ruler in the world during a farewell press conference in Baghdad. 

Centuries later scholars of antiquity doubt if such a preposterous event could have taken place in such a heavily guarded and hyper vigilant venue as a close quarters photo-op by a universally unpopular and commonly detested foreign monarch in occupied territory.

Clearly Herodotus was just making this stuff up. And so, undoubtedly, will our current technological state-of-the-art Geek historian — You-Tube-Us — be rejected by future generations who will be expected to believe that the President of the United States was dodging hurled shoes like some kind of Whack-The-Mole video game.

Puh-LEESE! We all know how this kind of “live” video can be digitally enhanced, altered or completely fabricated. Will we expect intelligent life forms 2,500 years from now to believe that that was a a real event featuring the actual United States President, George W. Bush, grinning that infuriatingly guilty grin of his, ducking those Iraqi soles last week?

Tags: rulers & ruled
No Comments »

Paula: All this fuss over this Governor of Illinois’s corruption. Just indict the guy and be done with it; it’s not the first time we’ve seen some corruption in high places and won’t be the last. What really gets me is how in the same breath we’re told respectfully that Caroline Kennedy has thrown in her hat for Hillary Clinton’s seat and will probably get it. Now there’s a level of entitlement, given she has no political experience and doesn’t even think she should need to run, that I find pretty unsettling.

  Robert: I did not have a negative reaction to Caroline Kennedy wanting to be Senator. I figure a certain amount of celebrity and royalty is par for the course. I may be one of those folks simply dazzled by the celebrity, but the fact is that I “like” her. I have the sense that a person like her is the type of person who could make a great senator. She’ll use her celebrity for good causes.

To continue in the same line — the governor of the State of New Jersey spent $60 million of his own money to run for Senate and won. Does that bother me? No. Why? Because I think Corzine is a good guy. If I thought he were sleazy, then I wouldn’t have liked it. But I support his views and so I do. That’s essentially what goes into the way we tend to feel about these people. If we support their views and like them, we overlook the context; if we don’t, we decry it.

Paula: But that’s what appalls me. The hypocrisy — you’re admitting to it outright. [Read more →]

Tags: conversations with Paula and Robert, rulers & ruled
11 Comments »

Take a look at this miniscule* sample of Pork Barrel spending initiatives:

Representative Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) $211,509 in olive fruit fly research in Paris, France.

Representative Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) $1,950,000 for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service.

Montana Senators Max Baucaus (D) and Jon Tester (D) $148,950 for the Montana Sheep Institute.

Representative Ann Esshoo (D-Calif.) $1.6 million for the Allen Telescope Array.

Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) $344,540 for the city of Chicago GreenStreets Tree Planting Program.

Maine Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe (R), and Rep. Thomas Allen (D-Maine) for $188,000 for the Lobster Institute. [Read more →]

Tags: easy go, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

Caseworker Alice Pitney is beside herself with delight in her latest post because Nicholas D. Kristof of the New York Times is supporting what he calls the “Miracle Tax Diet.” As you probably know, Governor Paterson of New York is proposing a tax on soda, among a great many other taxes, to raise revenue for the state. The soda tax seems to be getting the most attention because it is being justified as a way to pay for rising health care costs allegedly caused in part by, you guessed it, soda. It is also being supported by Kristof and others as a way to reduce soda consumption (oops — there goes the extra tax revenue) and reduce obesity.

I addressed this issue of whether the “costs imposed on society” by unhealthy behavior could justify government interference with that behavior, in an interview conducted by Edward Pettit shortly after he reviewed my novel Mean Martin Manning in the Philadelphia City Paper.

I, of course, love non-diet soda — Coca-Cola — and am not remotely obese. Attribute that to luck of metabolism, a generally or at least reasonably healthy and low-fat diet, getting off of my ass once in a while, whatever. But when I visit New York, and when other states get around to imposing the same taxes, I’ll be required to shell out more money if I want to buy soda.

Whether or not you think “public health” can justify this sort of thing when it applies to something that you really dislike, like cigarettes, at least we all need to stop pretending that this ever had a chance of stopping with cigarettes. Those who asked, “What will be next?” when cigarettes were taxed, and tobacco companies were sued, were dismissed as paranoid or as shills for Big Business. “They’re just making slippery slope arguments. It stops with cigarettes — no one is coming for your donuts.” Well, fast food taxes have been proposed in various places, and now soda may be taxed, and maybe all sorts of other high-fat food like Twinkies. It is clear that the slope is slippery indeed — the grass is wet and the hose is on. Pitney represents an extreme result of the slippery slope, near the bottom of the hill, but the bottom seems a bit closer this week than it did before.

As for what I think of the government using taxes and other methods to manipulate and control the behavior of adults for “their own good,” I can only recommend that you read my novel, an outrageous satire that, among other things, exaggerates the government’s attempt to control what it deems unhealthy behavior, which seems less exaggerated each day. Also, Jacob Sullum’s For Your Own Good has an excellent section that addresses what he calls the “tyranny of public health.”

Update: Governor Paterson explains his obesity tax here and why he has targeted soda. It turns out it’s for the children. No one saw that coming. I’ll drop all objections now, seeing how it’s for the children and all. And how there’s an epidemic. Can’t argue with an epidemic.

Tags: Pitney patrol, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

You want to see the difference Democrats can make when in charge of American politics? Consider this: Rod Blagojevich won’t quit, Caroline Kennedy wants to run, and George Bush can’t run fast enough to dodge Iraqi shoes. This is a new world order, ladies and gentlemen. I have no idea what it means or will mean. I have great hopes for it. But whatever it is, it has begun.

I’m old enough to remember thinking that Bobby Kennedy was a shameless opportunist when he ran for senator from New York — he was a Kennedy from Massachusattes just like his dead brother. It struck me as obscene in a sort of Philadelphia neighborhood way. How could you just move to New York and get elected senator?

Well, sir, I have learned my lesson about American politics. I have seen a Boston Irish anti-Brahmin not only become the first Catholic president, but have seen his scheming younger brother win an election and my heart. And I have felt that heart, still broken from the first, break again. And then I swore off Kennedys and wondered why anyone would ever trust them again. We need leaders, not martyrs. [Read more →]

Tags: rulers & ruled
No Comments »

Robert: Paula, I’ve been afraid to write anything about the election and about the transition for fear that I would be disappointed or made a fool of for praising Barack’s achievements. But I’ll take the leap and say that I think he has handled the process marvelously. I mean, he has picked people who all seem to be really smart and really practical. He’s selected problem solvers — smart people who have “practical creativity,” as David Brooks put it in the Times.

I think the appointment of Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff was an amazingly smart choice. Emanuel is one of the most energetic and practical people in Washington. Emanuel will be able to help Barack forge great relations with the Congress. He’ll know how to guide Barack through the back and forth over legislation. Emanuel is famously abrasive, but Obama is likely to smooth his edges. And some abrasiveness seems called for in a chief of staff, who has to play the bad cop to the president’s good cop. But what about that other, controversial appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State? It’s a brilliant choice, in my opinion. What do you think?

   Paula: I agree with you about Obama’s impressive transition. His judgment and presentation have been so impeccable that one almost feels that he’s bound for a fall. [Read more →]

Tags: conversations with Paula and Robert, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

Shawn Macomber refers to The Age of Abundance in his latest post. I reviewed that book for the Philadelphia Inquirer on July 8, 2007. I wanted to send a link to the review to Shawn, but the Inquirer only keeps its online content posted for a limited time. I don’t know why. CNN.com does the same thing. Since When Falls the Coliseum’s host provides us with infinite storage space for, like, a nickel, surely major news outfits could afford to keep archives posted indefinitely. Anyway, I am posting the review here so it will exist online. The book and my review were published well before the current financial crisis and we might not all take the material security I mention in the review for granted quite as much as we did just a year and a half ago. Still, I don’t think the discussion of American wealth is any less relevant today.

Review of Brink Lindsey’s The Age of Abundance

The Age of Abundance begins by claiming that America’s mass affluence has created a “post-scarcity” society. We can’t have it all, of course; Brink Lindsey, vice president for research at the libertarian Cato Institute, understands that, as economists use the term, “scarcity” is still with us. But the everyday scarcity, that even our recent ancestors knew, is not. In building his case, Lindsey takes the reader on a tour of American history, with particular attention to the six decades since World War II. What a tour it is. [Read more →]

Tags: books & writing, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

CNN reports that “[f]ormer New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer started a new job this week, debuting as online magazine Slate’s newest columnist.” Spitzer will be writing about economic policy issues.

If I had known Slate was looking for a columnist, I would have sent them a short note explaining why I should be their new columnist, instead of that dirty scumbag Eliot Spitzer:

• I have better hair. Way better hair. As we all know, that is a crucial qualification for being a good columnist.
• I am funnier than Eliot Spitzer. Even if you don’t think I’m funny at all, I’d have to be funnier than Eliot Spitzer. Slate might not think that a sense of humor is an asset in an economic policy columnist, but I would argue that, given the state of the economy, a sense of humor is the only real requirement.
• Spitzer is an arrogant, aggressive, overbearing, moralizing scold who thought he was above the law (turns out he was right about that). There has to be someone else Slate could have hired for this column with his qualifications. Wait, there is — me. I can be an arrogant, aggressive, overbearing, moralizing scold if the pay is good enough. And though I probably wouldn’t be quite above the law, I could try really hard to be just off to the side of it.
• I rarely insist on keeping my socks on. How are readers supposed to focus on the point of Spitzer’s column when all they can think about is how he insisted on keeping his socks on? 
• I have never prosecuted prostitution rings and then patronized one. That leaves me free to write about economic policies as they apply to prostitution rings. Let’s see Spitzer try that.
• I look less like a weasel.
• Spitzer spent thousands of dollars per session on a prostitute and attracted federal attention by transferring large sums between accounts to hide his misdeeds. He “paid up to $80,000 for prostitutes over a period of several years while he was Attorney General, and later as Governor.” This makes it hard for readers to take his opinions about fiscal restraint and responsibility seriously. I, on the other hand, have made no suspicious transfers of large sums — that would require having large sums. I don’t. So I can be trusted.
• Spitzer was known as Client 9 by the Emperor’s Club VIP prostitution service. Slate deserves a columnist who tries harder. While I have never patronized a prostitution service or cheated on my wife, I promise that if I were to ever do so, I would be known as Client 4. That’s 5 better than Client 9. It may not be Client 1, but still, 4 isn’t too shabby.
• Hiring me as a columnist won’t get Slate accused of seeking cheap publicity by giving a dirty scumbag politician his own column. In fact, hiring me won’t get Slate any publicity at all … Oh, now I see. Oh, okay. Never mind.

Tags: rulers & ruled, trusted media
2 Comments »

Although I clearly was not an Obama supporter and wasn’t celebrating his victory through the night, I want to mention that I do think it’s cool that a black man won. Whatever major political and philosophical differences might separate us, I am happy for the elderly black woman crying tears of joy on the news this morning. I can only imagine what this feels like to people who grew up during segregation. Nothing in my experience helps me understand just how big this moment is to many, just how heavy the weight was that seemed to lift from their shoulders. So, for that reason, I’m glad that a black man won. [Read more →]

Tags: race & culture, rulers & ruled
2 Comments »

I don’t want Obama to be President. I don’t want McCain to be President.

I don’t want McCain to be President, but I really don’t want Obama to be President.

It’s clear that at best, I will get what I don’t want, and if the pundits are right, I’m likely to get what I really don’t want.

Enough of what I don’t want. What do I want?

I want politicians to stop leaving robot voice-mails for me and to stop calling my house every five minutes. I want to be done seeing political ads on TV and lawn signs on lawns. I want the news to go back to telling me about something — anything — less annoying than the political campaign … a return to reporting on the latest multiple homicides would do nicely, thank you very much. I want friends I mostly like to stop talking about politics, so I can go back to mostly liking them again. I want politics to stop being the center of existence.

These are modest wants, I admit. The more ambitious ones are beyond plausible, so why bother? I mean, I really want the next President, and the citizenry, to protect and defend the Constitution and individual rights and to be at least vaguely aware and supportive of the nation’s founding principles and the notion of limited government. What I really, really want, is for the government to be less powerful and less important in our lives, to the point that we don’t all care much who becomes President. But that won’t happen no matter who wins. So I’ll have to settle. That’s politics, I guess.

What I want, then — and this might not be likely, either — is for the country to get through the next four years with a minimal amount of lasting damage. 

Also, I wouldn’t mind a pizza.

Tags: rulers & ruled
3 Comments »

Seriously?  This is the best the Republicans could do? I keep thinking we’re being punk’d. I envision Ashton Kutcher, breaking through a polar ice cap with a frozen camera crew and announcing that he’s pulled off the ultimate prank. I know we’re at the end of the game here. I know it’s all been said. Regardless, I just can’t get over the fact that this woman was ever invited to the party in the first place. Blows my mind.

Tags: art & entertainment, rulers & ruled
1 Comment »

It occurred to little Jimmy Peter one August morning, after the electricity went and video games with it, that he hadn’t even opened the chemistry set he’d received from his parents for Christmas. In the backyard Jimmy tested the Bunsen burner’s flame on the chemistry set’s instruction book. He smiled with satisfaction as the fifty-five pages of red warnings in 11 languages burned away. No sooner had Jimmy mixed a clear liquid with a thick blue, added just a dash of salt, and heated the concoction, than a monstrous orange cloud wafted from his test tube and was picked up by the wind and carried away. The cloud continued to expand as it departed. He stared at it for a second, but the whole thing rather bored Jimmy, and he went inside to play with the dog.

The cloud soon covered the west coast of the United States, reached the east coast within hours, and had crossed the Atlantic by dark. Air raid sirens and emergency broadcast systems around the world were dusted off as people taped their windows and fought over bread and bottled water at the supermarkets. Lines for gas backed traffic up for miles and the price for a gallon nearly doubled. Industry insiders blamed increased demand, but Democrats pointed to a corrupt capitalist economy and decreased support for school lunch programs. Senior Republicans noted that this could all have been avoided if only kids prayed in school and we supported our troops. [Read more →]

Tags: creative writing, rulers & ruled
1 Comment »

Four years ago and four years before that, I was registered to vote in Northern California.  Just as in the current election, the chances of California going to anyone other than a Democrat was somewhere between slim and none.  So, while technically speaking, California’s 55 votes in the electoral college are consistently important, simply because of the sway those votes could carry, in practice, one’s individual vote seems somehow less vital, more diluted.  Regardless of which candidate you, your friends, or your neighbors select, the Democrat at the top of the ticket is likely to get the nod.  Oh, how I miss those halcyon hippy days!

In Ohio, things are different. [Read more →]

Tags: rulers & ruled
1 Comment »

On the day before this momentous election I thought I would take a moment to figure out which political party I really belong to… if any. I know who I am going to vote for. I have known for months — because there are a few issues that are very important to me. But just the other day a friend told me about this political site that has a simple Vote Match Quiz which, based on your responses, spits out the name of the candidate you most agree with. So, I took the quiz.

Well, shit, it spit out the wrong candidate. Not only did it tell me my choice goes against my true political leanings, it indicated that I am not even registered with the correct party. What the hell? I have been doing everything right. I’ve taken this election more seriously than any election I’ve voted in the past. I’ve paid attention. I’ve paid close attention. I’ve tried to recognize false reports in reported truths. I even watched every debate, intently, unlike others.

I honestly feel connected with my choice for President. Is it bad if I go with my gut on this one?

Tags: rulers & ruled
8 Comments »

In my line of work I deal with several overseas factories.  I received an email earlier from a contact in a China facility.  He inquired about some items we are sourcing and he signed off with, “We look forward to results of your election.  The whole world is waiting.”

The whole world is waiting.

Tags: rulers & ruled
4 Comments »

I never really much liked politics. The current election started years ago, and I’ve been resolved to apathy all the while. However, having spent the last two months surrounded by the local chapter of Cheerleaders for Obama, I feel compelled to voice my views.

I am truly unsure of what my political views are. The foundation of my views is best summarized by Mr. Justice Douglas: “The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.” Pub. Utils. Comm’n of D.C. v. Pollak, 343 U.S. 451, 467 (1952) (Douglas, J., dissenting). However, as to what end this leads me, I am unsure. On the one hand, it could lead to the individualistic views of libertarianism. On the other hand, it could lead to some view of communal living or some other utopian society. All I know for sure is that it does not lead to the sort of mediocrity that today’s politics is made of.

As we near Election Day, you really have to struggle to see the policy differences between Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama. Sure, they have very different ideologies, will select different judges and justices, and will push for different legislation. However, the legislation will all be fundamentally flawed — a product of compromise and moderation. Fundamentally, I have no idea where the candidates stand, beyond the fact that one is a bit to the right and the other a bit to the left.

We are far from the wisdom of Mr. Justice Black, who reminds us of a day when things were much simpler: “[The First] Amendment provides, in simple words, that ‘Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.’ I read ‘no law . . . abridging’ to mean no law abridging.” Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147, 157 (1959) (Black, J., concurring). Politics and law today are an exercise in pragmatism, rather than principles. I feel this exercise is doomed to fail, as society becomes an ever-increasing hodgepodge of regulation without any real basis in fundamental principles.

Tags: on the law, rulers & ruled
No Comments »

Ok, I couldn’t leave this one alone.

As reported on cnn.com, a McCain aide says Sarah Palin is “going rogue.”

Is that really a surprise? I mean, come on, people, she’s a maverick.

Wikipedia says: A maverick is a person who thinks independently; a lone dissenter; a non-conformist or rebel; it can also mean an unbranded range animal, especially a motherless calf.

My F12 popup dictionary widget says a rogue is primarily “a dishonest or unprincipled man,” but its 2nd ranking definition is “a person whose behavior one disapproves of but who is nonetheless likable or attractive (often used as a playful term of reproof): Cenzo, you old rogue!” [Read more →]

Tags: rulers & ruled, sticks & stones
1 Comment »