Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Rollin' Down Highway 41


Another day, another musing. Time for another column of shorter thoughts. As always, bonus points to whoever figures out why I used the title I did.

1. So Rod Blagojevich got nailed for corruption. Is anyone actually surprised by this? Just look at the guy. Doesn't he have that "I'd shake down your kids for their lunch money" look to him? People act as though they're shocked - SHOCKED - that he would try to ransom a Senate appointment. Haven't they been paying attention? He was already under investigation for about twelve other forms of corruption; the only shocking thing is that he was stupid enough to do this now. He must have known that Fitzgerald was still listening in on his conversations. And what kind of idiot speaks so candidly about making an under-the-table deal when he's already under investigation? Even Mafia guys know to speak in code unless they're in a safe house. Didn't he watch any of The Sopranos?

As for the Senate seat, the state pretty much has to have a special election. I can't foresee the people of Illinois being willing to let anyone in that administration appoint someone for the remainder of what used to be President-elect Obama's term. That said, I'm in favor of the lieutenant governor's suggestion of a temporary appointment until such a special election can be held. There's really no excuse for Illinois being underrepresented in the Senate for the minimum 4 months it would take until the election is held (as they'll almost certainly piggyback it onto the usual local election primaries in April; this would save up to $25 million) when there's an easy way to solve it. Of course, the Republican Party is painting with a broad tar brush yet again, claiming that anyone who stood in line with Blagojevich's aides for a cup of coffee at Starbucks is equally corrupt, and as such no one in the administration should be trusted with the power to make this decision. Naturally there's no evidence for this, but hey, evidence is the standard of proof of the last century, right? Honestly, what's the worst that could happen? Congress has an equally difficult time getting the necessary things accomplished because of pointless partisan filibustering? If there's going to be an election in April, what would they stand to lose? If the guy that gets appointed is corrupt, the voters will get rid of him. Simple enough.

2. Off and on, I read Ruben Navarette's column, either on CNN or when it's in the local paper. I don't always agree with his viewpoint (in fact, I'm usually about 80-20 against), but usually I can at least respect his opinion, as it comes from thought and reasoning (a rarity in conservative writing these days). In fact, in some regards I consider him one of the very few who is pretty much right on regarding immigration. That being said, his last column actually bothered me quite a bit, though not for the reasons you may think. As you can read, he argues that Bill Richardson would have been a superior choice for Secretary of State. In that regard, we're on the same page; I said for months after Biden was named VP that if Lugar didn't want the job, it should go to Richardson, as his years as UN ambassador and his numerous negotiations in the Middle East made him the most qualified candidate. Navarette, however, argues that Richardson - and the Hispanic community in general - deserve better than what they've been given because of their support of Obama in the general election. In essence, he claims that Obama "owes" the Hispanic population for their support, and failing to name Richardson Secretary of State (and, to this point, failing to name any other Hispanics to Cabinet posts) is an insult to the community. That is utter hogwash. This is the problem I've long had with the Cabinet: rather than appoint the people most qualified for the positions, politicians feel they need to hit every demographic group to show their "desire for equality." In some cases, the two coincide. I don't think anyone had a problem with Colin Powell as Secretary of State; Condoleezza Rice, on the other hand... No one group of people is owed anything by the President; their support was freely given in the hope that said President would best represent the wishes of the constituency. Instead of complaining about the people put into these jobs, perhaps Mr. Navarette should be more concerned about what these people are going to do. The best way to ensure that your community is best represented is to make your policy wishes known and to fight for them; that, rather than fighting the choices of who will enact said policy (especially given that most potential choices have relatively similar views), presents the greatest opportunity for effecting change.

3. The auto "bailout" is a touchy subject with me. First of all, I come from a family of unionized labor, so my opinions on the subject are naturally going to be colored by my experience. Second, it's not really a bailout at all. The companies aren't asking to just be given money with no expectation of return payment; they're asking for a bridge loan, something that the government has done for them before. Third, the fact that is even a discussion at all bugs the hell out of me. The federal government gives $700 billion to Henry Paulson to do with as he sees fit, and now we have no idea where huge chunks of that money went, and Congress is balking at $15-30 billion? I think Jon Stewart said it best: "When the auto industry f**** up, WE STILL GET CARS!" I'm not saying that there shouldn't be conditions attached; a good chunk of their problems were obviously self-inflicted, and there need to be drastic changes in their business model if they're going to succeed and pay back said money. However, when you're facing a 3 million job sinkhole (thank you Rachel Maddow, that's a good way to put it), you don't just let it swallow the city! If you think things are bad now, what do you think would happen if unemployment were to jump 1-2% literally overnight?

4. On a related note, Senate Republicans killed the last attempt to lend money to the automakers following two things that seem astonishing to the outside viewer. First, they tried to directly force the UAW and its related unions to accept substantial wage cuts, using the threat of vetoing the loan as leverage...no, let's call it what it was: extortion. The claims that UAW workers make drastically more than Japanese workers are so far off base as to be laughable. In actual wages, all the major auto companies pay about the same; the numbers the Republicans used for their arguments included both pensions and health benefits. Anyone with even basic knowledge of how health care works globally knows that the average health care plan has a drastically higher per person cost here as opposed to most other countries. You can thank the insurance companies for that. Forcing people who are already making the industry standard to cut wages (because any person who would willingly sacrifice health benefits must need them to treat that massive head injury they must have sustained) by holding the prospect of losing their livelihoods over their heads isn't just low, it's criminal.

The second thing is that said Senate Republicans were warned by Dick Cheney (honestly, how many of you thought that I'd be siding with Dick Cheney, well, ever?) that if they failed to work to push the auto loans through, "it'll be Herbert Hoover time." You know what the sad thing is? THEY TOOK IT AS A COMPLIMENT! Think about that for a second. There is actually a segment of our Congress that thinks that Herbert Hoover made the right moves in the early 1930s. They honestly believe that taking no action is the best way to overcome certain economic collapse, that if we just get out of the way, things will fix themselves. You want an example of how ass-backwards this is? Bush and Cheney both think these guys are completely wrong, and they've been championing the free market for the last 8 years! Shouldn't someone be looking into recall votes for these guys? Heck, shouldn't there be protesters sitting outside their houses right now?

All right, that ended up being longer than I thought it would be. I've got a lot of other thoughts, but they'll have to wait for another night. Part 2 should be coming within the next couple nights.

P.S. If you've been reading these, please feel free to post a comment, either here or on my Facebook page. I'd like to know if people are actually reading these, and I'm always interesting in fomenting discussion.