The Stonecipher Report

Don't Miss This SALE! Illinois Senate Seat 98.5% Off!!!

Posted By: Stonecipher

Dec. 31, 2008

The appointment of Roland Burris to the U.S. Senate on Tuesday afternoon has led many people to begin asking just what kind of contact the former Illinois Attorney General had with Governor Rod Blagojevich prior to the appointment, and when was that contact made?

We here at The Stonecipher Report have learned that the answers to these questions are extremely bizarre, even for this case. 

Our sources have told us that Burris initially learned of anopportunity to secure the appointment from Gov. Blagojevich via a late-night infomercial featuring Billy Mays that ran only once...at 3:00 A.M. Christmas Eve on WGN.

A high-ranking member of the Blagojevich Administration denied rumors yesterday that Mays was recently spotted hauling boxes from a moving truck into an apartment in downtown Springfield, IL, but FBI phone records indicate that Mays spoke to someone in Blagojevich's office in Chicago three separate times on Dec. 22.

Sadly, the YouTube video of this infomercial has been yanked down, and any remaining footage is in the possession of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, but The Stonecipher Report has been lucky enough to secure the following transcript:

Hi, Billy Mays here for Rod Blagojevich and do I have a great deal for you...

Don't miss this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to purchase your very own seat in the U.S. Senate! 

Due to low demand for this high-profile position, the governor of the great state of Illinois has been forced to drastically slash prices on the state's only available U.S. Senate seat.

No longer will you have to shell out seven figures just to park yourself in a big plushy chair next to American heroes like Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy and Mitch McConnell! 

This seat once sold for as much as $1 million, but it can now be yours...not for $500,000...not for $100,000...not even for $20,000!  No, this seat can be all yours for just $15,000!

You simply can't afford to pass this opportunity up!

Keep it for yourself, give it to a friend or even give grandpa that role in American history that he's always wanted.

This Senate seat is not only dirt-cheap, but it's also versatile:

• Use it to build an on-ramp directly from your driveway to I-94...and use government funds to knock down your annoying neighbor's house in the process
• Use it to grant millions of dollars to your brother-in-law's construction company
• Force friends and acquaintances to refer to you as "The Honorable..." 
• Get free, luxury accommodations when traveling internationally for "official government business"
• Be the first to learn about the latest terrorist threat to the nation
• Find out, once and for all, what the deal is with UFOs.
• Use it to convince the President to pardon your high school buddy for selling six pounds of weed to an undercover officer.
• Speaking of the President, use this as a springboard for your very own Presidential campaign!

This Senate seat can be used for almost anything, so act now, before the Governor appoints himself and this deal is off the table forever.

I don't know, this thing just sells itself!

So call now and be the next U.S. Senator from Illinois!

Merry Christmas you fuckers!

Blago Tries “Roland, Roland, Roland” His Senate Pick Past His Critics…

Posted By: Michael Sweeney

Dec 31, 2008

Just when we might have thought that it was getting quiet – a little TOO quiet – around Rod Blagojevich and his stonewalled shenanigans, suddenly here comes the Illinois Governor and his new pal, wannabe-Senator Roland Burris…

A little background for those from out of state (or otherwise unfamiliar with the name): Burris was once a trail-blazing IL politician. In 1978, at the age of 41, he was elected as state Comptroller (heading the office that controls the state budget and spending) – marking the first African-American elected to statewide office in Illinois. After serving three terms as Comptroller, in 1990 he was elected state Attorney General – becoming only the second African-American to reach that statewide office anywhere in the United States. Those years were the peak of his political career.

In 1994, he ran in the IL Democratic primary for Governor…and lost. (In fact, that year, all IL statewide offices were handily won by Republicans…so he may well have lost his A.G. office anyway.) The next year, he tried an ill-conceived run against Mayor-For-As-Long-As-He-Wants-(and-Don’t-You-Forget-About-It!) Richard M. Daley…and – of course – lost. In 1998 and 2002 (against Blago in that last one), he attempted additional Dem primary runs for Governor…which he lost.

As of today, it has been more than 18 years since Roland Burris won an election. Although mostly respected, he is not particularly seen as any sort of significant elder eminence in IL politics. In fact, his sometimes-arrogant, usually-more-than-a-bit-distant attitudes during the multiple losing campaigns of his later career have cast more than a little bitter spell on his previously ground-breaking achievements. Not to put words in their mouths (they may actually appreciate him greatly), but, for example, I’ve never heard next-generation African-American IL pols like Barack Obama or Jesse Jackson, Jr. ever cite Burris as any kind of an influence…

Flash forward to yesterday…and, no matter how many potential replacement Senator candidates that local pundits (like me) had bandied about, you would have had to scroll down pretty damned far (past at least the first 25, 30, maybe even 50 most logical possibilities) to hit the name "Roland Burris." But…hit it Blago apparently did – and, considering the likely always-Burris-centric attitude of the former Comptroller and Attorney General, it seems pretty darned likely that the embattled Guv could have guessed that if he offered Roland Burris the Senate seat, he would be getting a quick acceptance – AND creating an instant ally.

Rapidly after the announcement, lines were drawn – some of them seemingly racial. IL Secretary of State Jesse White (an African-American) repeated that he will NOT sign off as approving (as the law requires) for ANYONE Blago chooses – including Burris. Previously, Dem US Senate leaders Harry Reid and IL’s Dick Durbin led the other sitting Dem Senators to pledge not to seat whoever the allegedly dirty B-Rod tried to send to D.C. Rep. Bobby Rush (also African-American) spoke at the press conference where Blago announced and introduced Burris as his pick…and he somewhat embarrassed himself by stating – as a seeming taunting threat – that he didn’t feel that any sitting Senator would want to deny an African-American being seated to replace the President-Elect. (Frankly, Rush seemed to have popped up suddenly at the conference; he spoke rushed, yet a bit garbled and haltingly.)

Additionally, it was even reported that Rep. Danny Davis – also an African-American, who had strongly campaigned publicly to get the Governor’s nod BEFORE Blago’s mess started on Dec. 9 – was offered the seat before Burris…but took a stand and turned the Governor down. (If that is true, that act ALONE makes Davis nearly infinitely more qualified to become IL’s next Senator than Burris…)

It seems clear that the still-rocking-back-on-his-heels-and-grinning B-Rod is slyly and mockingly challenging all who oppose him, including the President-Elect (who issued a statement rejecting Burris – not personally, but Blago’s making of the pick). It appears that he thinks he’s gathering some sort of black political bloc – of voters and officials – around him, trying to erect some desperate and cynical firewall. (His already-sparse approval ratings have fallen to single digits; still…I want to know who those 7, 8 percent of Illinoisans on Blago’s side could possibly be at this point…) It’s as if he feels that he’s moved his chess pieces into some clever end-game strategy, daring his opposition to officially take a stand AGAINST Burris – i.e., "What’s the matter – you mean you DON’T want to send the historic, trail-blazing, symbolic, BLACK Roland Burris to the Senate?"

…But the wooden, misguidedly egotistic Burris ain’t exactly seen as this state’s pioneering equivalent to John Lewis or Shirley Chisholm or even Adam Clayton Powell, for chissakes. (Were he still alive, that would be Harold Washington; arguments could also be made for the long-ago Machine-controlled Congressman William Dawson…or, even better, the Olympic medalist and Congressman who later broke away from Machine politics, Ralph Metcalfe.) Burris managed to burn a different generation of bridges before Blago came along to more fully torch the rest of the current ones. And – ahem – he’s not exactly perceived as…umm…the sharpest of knives in the political drawer…

Some 25 years ago, I even had a bit of semi-close-up exposure to this. I was stuck in a long traffic jam on the South Side’s Dan Ryan expressway. And, while creep-creep-creeping along so slowly that summer day, I noticed that the limo I was jockeying with in the next lane happened to contain Mr. Burris sitting in the back. And, during the hot, frustrating full half-hour or so that our vehicles were crawling along near each other, the state Comptroller remained visibly reading the comic pages of the Chicago Tribune…

Now, in the years since then, it HAS occurred to me that the Jumble, crossword puzzle, and perhaps some other word games ALSO appear on those pages. But…I didn’t see any pencil or pen in Burris’ hand – and, knowing the details of his overall reputation, I wouldn’t be surprised that it was taking him all that time that morning just to try wending his way through the likes of Barney Google, Beetle Bailey, and Dick Tracy…

So…slow-motion comics in ’83…and now, in ’08, the joke’s punch-line seems to be on us, the IL voters. The current scoreboard seems to indicate that it’s Blago, Burris, Rush, and a few others vs. ALL of the rest of us (including Obama, Durbin, the US Senate, all the other statewide IL officers, US Attorney Fitzgerald, the Feds, etc.). I gotta say I DEFINITELY prefer the side that I am – and just about all of you are – already on…

For more coverage of Illinois politics, look for my regular posts here on The Stonecipher Report. (And, for a free subscription to my twice-weekly e-mail column on politics and pop-culture, "And, in the News…" send a note to: m_l_sweeney@hotmail.com)

Could Even Classic “Newspaper Town” Chicago Lose One – or Both – of its Last Two Daily Papers?

Posted By: Michael Sweeney

Dec. 30, 2008

Back when I was a college journalism student in Chicago (starting in 1980), the city had just transitioned to being a two-newspaper city – the Chicago Daily News (a classic writer’s haven) had just folded a few years before. I can even recall childhood visits to my grandparents in the city when there were still four daily newspapers; when those grandparents had been Chicago kids, that number was around 10.

Today, things are up in the air in this, Ben Hecht’s classic old-school newspapering town…and I’ve gotta say that things don’t look so good for the papers still hitting the streets...

The long-standing grey lady in town – founded in 1847 and key in the decade-later formation of the Republican Party – the Chicago Tribune, is wavering under the multi-billion-dollar debt of its parent, the Tribune Company, which is seeking bankruptcy protection. The smaller, often-times more liberal paper, the Chicago Sun-Times, is barely hanging on while its corporate parent – which was pilfered by its previous owners – has seen more than 95% of its value recently vanish. Both papers are shedding writers as well as readers – and, even more importantly, advertisers.

Even the Chicago Reader – the city’s longtime free alternative news-weekly – is having trouble. It was recently purchased by alt-weekly chain Creative Loafing (along with its sister paper in Washington, DC)…which then cut much of the paper’s already-small writing and production staff AND then declared bankruptcy itself.

Of course, a major part of the problem is the bizarrely circular relationship that local media has developed with the Internet. Let’s see if we can follow the trail: Ads have fled to Craigslist (and other online sources)…Original newspaper content is posted freely on the papers’ sites…Younger potential readers primarily get their news online AND / OR pick up free tabloid news digests (pitched at mass-transit users), like RedEye – which the Trib ironically put together to take down (or at least seriously tweak) the Sun-Times.

Now, the not-free media finds that it cannot easily convert browsers or riders to subscribers (or even occasional buyers)…AND the advertisers – corporate and individual – are finding strength in the buyers’ market of available options.

…But, the flipside is also out there – if the local media of established reporters and columnists dry up, where does the news come from that goes in disposable tabloids or on websites? If the proven, professional sources of this material vanish, then where will online aggregators get their bits and bytes that attract surfing readers?

Sure, someone like Roger Ebert – whose well-trafficked pages are BY FAR the most-accessed thing gatewayed from the Sun-Times’ site – could attract enough subscribers to support a paid site (although nobody supports his newspaper as strongly as does Ebert – Chicago’s leading post-Terkel "Liberal Lion" man of letters). But, what of all the experienced writers taking retirement buy-outs…or the younger ones just being let go?

Meanwhile, in Detroit, home delivery of the already-partnered Free Press and News papers will only be maintained on Thursdays, Fridays, and Sundays. The Christian Science Monitor is leaving paper-printing altogether (retreating to the web). And many other papers in smaller markets are limiting editions and services or cutting employees.

Will this continued industry crunch and crisis eventually mean the crash of one – or even both – of Chicago’s so-recently-quite-profitable newspapers? Insiders at both the Trib and the Sun-Times are warily saying they will survive (although not easily), while pointing fingers at the other paper as being the one most likely to fail. Industry sources say the Sun-Times’ situation – even with its parent company’s still-mainly-profitable spread of suburban dailies and weeklies – is perhaps the more fragile. In any event, the day-to-day situations in both newsrooms are tense – and don’t show much signs of improving anytime soon.

The ironic thing over the last few weeks was seeing both papers puff up and strike out hungrily (and well) on the Blagojevich story that suddenly dropped into their laps (and, in the case of the Trib, actually included them). They also did some yeoman work over the last few months on the various Obama stories, as nation- and world-wide focus turned to the Windy City. At this point, though, those highlights may end up being among some of the final good memories of the long history of traditional Chicago print media…

For more coverage of Illinois politics, look for my regular posts here on The Stonecipher Report. (And, for a free subscription to my twice-weekly e-mail column on politics and pop-culture, "And, in the News…" send a note to: m_l_sweeney@hotmail.com)

It's Official: Sean Hannity is the Most Annoying FOX News Anchor

Posted By: Stonecipher

Dec. 27, 2008

Turn-out is never very high for run-off elections and The Stonecipher Report's 'Most Annoying FOX News Anchor' Poll was no exception.

After almost 800 votes in the initial poll, which included eight different FOX News anchors, turn-out for the run-off between Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly was disappointing.  Less than 10% of TSR readers turned out for the run-off.

The run-off was deemed necessary when neither O'Reilly or Hannity managed to garner 50% of the vote, although Bill O'Reilly finished a full six points ahead of Sean Hannity in the initial poll.

O'Reilly was expected to win the run-off, but the low turn-out probably helped Hannity, who developed an early lead and never let go of it.

Exit polls show that much of O'Reilly's support was due to his now famous "Fuck it, we'll do it live!" rant, while Hannity scored points with voters for his complete, unwavering and unthinking support of the Bush Administration and its neocon policies.

In the end, Hannity ended up with an eight-point victory over O'Reilly, 56% - 44%. 

So congratulations to Sean Hannity - you are officially The Stonecipher Report's most annoying FOX News Anchor!

Thanks to all those who voted in this poll and please don't forget to vote in our latest poll which can be found in the right hand column of this page.

It's Time To Take a Deep Breath and Relax About Rick Warren

Posted By: Stonecipher

Dec. 26, 2008

OK fellow Lefties, let's all take a deep breath and calm down here. 

Yes, Rick Warren's position on gay marriage is wrong and his comparison of gay marriage to incest and pedophilia stinks to high heaven, but isn't the full blown rejection and suppression of opposing viewpoints exactly what we have railed against for the past eight years?

More importantly, did anyone on The Left actually listen to Barack Obama during the campaign?  Did anyone on The Left catch the message that Obama's intention was to expand the national dialog on all sorts of political issues?

Didn't many of us vote for Mr. Obama, in part, because we knew that we desperately needed a new approach to foreign policy?  One which included discussions with our enemies?

It doesn't make sense to praise a man for having the strength to be willing to sit down and talk with real enemies like Iran, North Korea and even the Iraqi insurgents, but at the same time condemn him for not completely shutting domestic political opponents out of the conversation, yet that is exactly what many on The Left are doing these days.

We've seen what eight years of an administration that actively seeks to destroy dissent does - and it ain't pretty.  So why demand exactly the same from the incoming administration?  That's insane and, in this case, absolute hypocrisy.

But if accusations of insanity and hypocrisy aren't enough to convince you to calm down about Rick Warren, maybe pure politics will instead.

Even the most ardent Obama supporters will admit that, despite all the talk of hope and change, Barack Obama is still a politician, and a gifted one at that. 

Remember back in 2004 when George W. Bush claimed that he had earned some political capital and that he intended to use it?  Well, that's what this decision is all about - Barack Obama's political capital.  It is just a small investment of "a few coins" worth, as our own Michael Sweeney put it earlier this week, but the hope is that by spending a few coins on Rick Warren now, some big dividends will come down the road later with relatively little political risk.

The risk that does exist is that Obama could alienate some of his base, but from a cold-hearted political point of view, is the GLBT community really going to jump ship on Obama because of who said a short prayer at his inauguration?  No.

Thirty seconds after Warren's prayer ends it will be forgotten and the big news of the day will be America's new president.  There will be no long-term political wounds from Warren's words on January 20, 2008, but there may be some benefits.

One of those benefits is the opportunity to bring some more moderate evangelicals into the fold.  The likelihood that Obama will bring in enough bible belters in to flip places like Oklahoma or Alabama into the blue category come 2012 is small, but flipping voters isn't the Obama Team's primary goal.

The real aim of doing things like inviting Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration is to preemptively blunt the daggers that will undoubtedly be used to attack the Obama Administration once Mr. Obama is sworn into office on the 20th of next month. 

During the Bush Jr. years, particularly during his first term, it was easy for The Left to make a villain out of a man who never bothered to give them the time of day.

By the time Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, the narrative of incompetence, ignorance and crony-ism was already written and well defined by The Left, in large part because Bush never directly took it on.  Instead, he made an effort to marginalize those who opposed him and stifled dissent every chance he got.  So when those dismissed as crazy by Bush and his GOP cronies started to look right, it wasn't difficult to gently nudge that the anti-Bush narrative into the mainstream.

Bush never took the time to blunt the daggers out there, instead he spent five years allowing The Left to sharpen them and learn how to aim them.  So in 2005, when those sharp points began to pierce the skin of the Bush Administration they hurt much more than they otherwise would have.

This is exactly what Barack Obama is attempting to avoid.  He has the good sense to understand that it is much more difficult to make a villain out of a man who is willing to hear his opponents out, even if he ultimately will not side with them, than a man who refuses to hear a peep out of the opposition.

As sharp as Barack Obama and his political advisers are though, from David Axelrod to Rahm Emanuel, they are far from perfect (Exhibit A: Emanuel's entanglement with Rod Blagojevich).  So what's the next best thing to perfection?  Preparing for imperfection.  And while The Left hyperventilates about an anti-gay, evangelical preacher showing up at the inauguration, Barack Obama is calmly and methodically taking the weapons out of the right-winger's hands and carefully dulling their tips.

So fellow lefties, let's relax about Rick Warren and make a New Year's resolution this year to pick our battles more wisely.  We've got much bigger issues to worry about than whether or not a big guy with a neatly trimmed goatee gets to say a prayer for Barack Obama.

The Night Before Christmas...at the Blagojevich House

Posted By: Michael Sweeney

Dec. 24, 2008

(with much apologies to either Clement Clarke Moore or Henry Livingston…)

‘Twas the night before Christmas, ‘round Blago’s home, car, and sheds

Not a creature was taping, not even the Feds;

Trib editorials were hung with darts tossed at their pages –

But that was last week, now B-Rod was over his rages;

The children were distributed to various Mells,

While Blago and Patti contemplated barred cells;

She with her sailor’s mouth and he with his hair

Were wondering what plea deals might seem to be fair

When outside their house there arose such a clatter,

They knew it was news crews…so they donned clothes that flatter.

Away to the lit cams, B-Rod flew like a flash,

While silently wondering should he only talk for cash.

The glare from 2, 5, and 7 glowed so brightly and strong

And there was the Trib’s 9 and FOX News, who knew he was wrong.

When, what to the Guv’s ears floated in so quick

Were questions about who he favored for the Senatorial pick.

Ah, the scribes DID still care, Blago mused in his head

(Even though he did truly wish some of them dead).

More rapid than Cubs errors did the queries inflame

As the reporters demanded he toss them a name.

"Ah, Jarrett! Or Jackson! Or Luis or Emil!

Or Jan, even Lisa (wouldn’t that have been ill?)

Could be Tammy the vet…or the guy from the Hyatt

Though things have been tough, I just haven’t decided yet!"

He heard the name "Quinn" tossed and just plain ignored it

And then came a bribe joke – where’d they get that dumb shit?

He felt the tide turning (and not in his way)

But he couldn’t just flee them – he had to still stay.

Rod thought about maybe giving ‘em that Kipling again…

Then heads started turning – he heard "What?" and then "When?"

From the back of the crowd there arose such a gasping

The reporters parted, microphones and pens still grasping

"Durbin got through to Bush!," came the loud voices cryin’ –

‘Cause there in the middle was a commuted George Ryan.

He was dressed all in orange, a jumpsuit grown baggy

He’d lost him some weight, ‘though his jowls were still saggy.

The ol’ pharmacist had just walked out of the pen

Without ever admitting guilt or even making a friend

Lura Lynn and the kids had driven all day

To deliver him there, to give him his say.

B-Rod was a-stunned to see his precursor freed

But…maybe, he thought, this is the distraction I need!

Ryan’s eyes – how they looked dead! His skin was so pale!

His nose it was swollen – hey, it was a tough year in jail.

His cruel little mouth showed that ol’ GOP smirk

And he looked quite unlikely to take crap from some jerk.

"Here I am," he cried out – "The Guv of Christmas past

I told you I was innocent – they let me out at last!"

The cameras and mikes started circling old Ryan;

Most reporters knew when he spoke, he likely was lyin’.

But George waved off questions, said he didn’t play their game;

Said he was there to see Rod, so he didn’t end up the same.

"Oh, the Feds are just phony – they lie to the judge

And even my best lawyers couldn’t get the jury to budge.

Now, I see that my young successor could use a hand –

I’m here to advise him, to keep him out of the stand."

At that, the crowd turned back, again looking toward Blago…

But not even Patti was there – so where had they gone to?

…A week later the word came in New Year’s Day

That Rod and his wife had apparently up and ran away.

Some say to Vallarta; others insisted Peru –

Not too many cared, it seemed the best thing to do.

So, with Obama in the White House and Quinn in Springfield

Things calmed the hell down and the state felt more healed.

Some insisted that B-Rod and Ryan had a plan

To stick it to Fitzgerald and not give him his man.

But, all things considered, most thought his exit was neat

(Still, did Gov. Quinn have to give Oprah the seat?)

And while the black SUVs had suddenly pulled away

Some witnesses insisted they saw Blago that day…

They claimed he shouted out, ere he drove toward the south,

"Happy Christmas, you fuckers! Hope you all take it in the mouth!"

For more coverage of Illinois politics, look for my regular posts here on The Stonecipher Report. (And, for a free subscription to my twice-weekly e-mail column on politics and pop-culture, "And, in the News…" send a note to: m_l_sweeney@hotmail.com)

Could "Da Coach" Really Become "Da Governor"?

Posted By: Stonecipher

Dec. 23, 2008

Over the past couple of months here at The Stonecipher Report two stories have dominated many of our headlines, Barack Obama's recently vacated U.S. Senate seat and the arrest and resulting turmoil of Rod Blagojevich.  Both stories will soon have a major impact on the state of politics here in Illinois, but what's beyond the next couple of months?

Yes, we here in the Land of Lincoln will soon have a new Senator and a new governor, the latter likely to be named Quinn, probably within the next few months and probably minus an election in both cases.

So what about the next big election in Illinois, 2010?

Just a few short months ago there was no doubt in anyone's mind that both the U.S. Senate seat and the governor's office would remain in the hands of the Democrats, but recent events have given the Illinois GOP a tiny sliver of hope.  And I do want to emphasize, it is tiny, but it is there nonetheless.

In the case of Obama's former Senate seat, there have been whispers that Mark Kirk, the recently and barely re-elected Congressman from Chicago's suburban North Shore, could be just the man to give the GOP a shot at embarrassing the President-Elect by winning back his Senate seat just half way into his first term in the Oval Office.

Kirk's name has also been tossed around as a potential candidate for governor in 2010, at least on FOX News it has.  But there is another name, a really, really big name.  In fact, a huge name.  A massive name.  According to some a God-like name, that at least one Illinois resident would like to see in the race for Illinois governor in 2010:

Mike "Da Coach" Ditka.

Just this week a 27-year old Burr Ridge, IL man named Shaun Radecki recently created a website called dagovernor.com.  The site's intent is to convince "Da Coach" to jump into the 2010 race.

The site has t-shirt ads prominently displayed, but it also has a mission statement of sorts that goes as follows:

We da people of Illinois are sick and tired of scumbag politicians who think dat it's their job to lie, cheat and steal. No more! We deserve somebody in charge who we can trust. Somebody who we can depend on. Somebody who we know understands the difference between right and wrong and won't be afraid to kick corruption in the ass harder than da '85 Bears beat down da Patriots in da Super Bowl!

Dat's right, my friends. Da man for da job is Coach Ditka. So let's make it happen! Ditka for Governor!!

Radecki now needs to track down Bill Swerski and have him create an audio recording of the statement for the site - that would drive some traffic there.

For our part, here at The Stonecipher Report, we've already had one of our own writers, The Rick, endorse Coach Mike Ditka...for President.  Michael Sweeney and I also joked about this possibility on the air yesterday on WHPK in Chicago, but all joking aside, there was a serious movement to draft Mike Ditka for the 2004 Senate race against Barack Obama when Jack Ryan was forced to bail out, and there is no reason to believe that the 2010 Ditka movement can't become just as serious.  After all, we are talking about Illinois politics here...anything is possible.

Oh, and by the way, speaking of "Da Coach", congrats to Da Bears on a big Monday night win over the Packers last night to keep their play-off hopes alive.

Y’Know, Illinois Politics Ain’t ALL Blagojevich…

Posted By: Michael Sweeney

Dec. 19, 2008

From our perch here in Chicago, what I’ve long called "The Capital of the Middle of America," we’ve gotten a close-up view of the Blago-sphere explosion and repercussions. I mean, even with the history and depth of Illinois political corruption, who in the world coulda foreseen an early-morning, at-home arrest of a sitting Governor?

But, of the wide-ranging media reactions and analysis, a few of the most misguided ones have focused on: A) Illinois is horribly, undeniably, completely corrupt (and apparently always has been); and B) How did the IL voters not know – in 2002 and (especially) in 2006 – that B-Rod was, well…B-Rod-den to the core? OK, let’s take these on…

Yes, we in IL now have a current Governor in the Feds’ crosshairs AND a former one (George Ryan) in jail…AND three of our last seven Chief Executives have served time (looks like we’re going for an even .500 now, too). And, what about the "Chicago Machine," eh? Totally corrupt, right?

It turns out that, with some notable exceptions, the corruption here is lingering on from its perhaps more organized, assumed days (for example, when the Mob had at least one active member in the Chicago City Council)…and that it has become more individual-focused than institutionally wide-spread (although it can indeed be entrenched in certain areas).

For example, yes, Blago and Ryan turned the IL Governor’s office into some sort of a "Pay for Play" ATM…but, for more than 20 years prior to that, two moderate, old-school IL Republicans – jovial pol "Big Jim" Thompson and straight-arrow (a teetotaler who even removed the bar from the Gov’s mansion) Jim Edgar – ran the state as Governors without a whiff of controversy or corruption. Not to mention the other notable longtime elected (and re-elected) current and previous state pols – Jesse White, Lisa Madigan, Jim Ryan, Neil Hartigan, Alan Dixon – who kept on serving without ever being accused of any misbehavior (nothing beyond typical occasional sniping, anyway).

And, as for Chicago, hey, everyone assumes the city is corrupt…yet, nothing has ever stuck against either Daley, not Richard J. (Mayor from 1955-1976) or Richard M. (1989-present). Sure, some mayoral underlings end up dismissed or even jailed from time to time…but, don’t you think if there were even breadcrumb trails from these losers back up to the big guy on the Fifth Floor of City Hall that the authorities could follow them and take down the powerful, "Boss"y headmen? So…it ain’t exactly Al Capone Sr. OR Jr. running things in the City of Big Shoulders…

Next – what about Blago runnin’ wild, while still getting elected (and re-elected) by the must-not-give-a-shit people of IL? Well, his (also slick, but thus far totally clean) father-in-law, powerful and longtime Chicago Alderman Richard Mell, helped grease the rails for the young, photogenic Blago (nice hair!) to ride and rise fairly quickly from the state legislature to the US House of Representatives to the Governorship.

At the time in 2002 – with stinking-assumed-filthy Gov. Ryan heading for retirement (before imprisonment) – Blago the candidate talked up his reform credentials, big time. Post-Clinton, he seemed the smart, clean, fairly straightforward next-generation guy (he was 46 when initially elected). So, he was lying – but, back then, nearly everyone bought it.

And, while there were some rumors or problems during his first term, there wasn’t so much out there to react to yet…PLUS Dems did so well in 2006, that, well, even though his vote totals were down a bit (AND a Green candidate even managed to pull a 10% protest vote), he was easily re-elected. But, shortly after that, the suspicions, investigations, and growing distaste for Blago grew.

In fact, well before the stunning December 9 arrest, his guilt (about SOMETHING) was pretty much assumed and his popularity was long gone – as we covered during the fall months, his ratings had dropped even further below President Bush’s. He was reduced to pulling a pathetic baker’s dozen – 13% – in approval ratings. Calls for his impeachment – or even for the implementation of California-style voter recall options – pre-dated his arrest by months. It wasn’t like we suddenly woke up the other week and said, "Gee, there’s something wrong with Governor Rod – who knew?"

In conclusion, not to sound repetitive, but…yeah, Blago, Ryan, Walker, Kerner…also Rosty, Aldermen Vrdolyak and Keane (and many others from that low-level city office), and – reaching a bit further back – IL Secretary of State (and his shoe-boxes full of ill-gotten cash) Paul Powell. But, ALSO, weighing on the other side: Obama and Durbin; Edgar and Thompson; two saintly Senator Pauls, Simon and Douglas; beloved pioneering Mayor Harold Washington; Everett McKinley Dirksen and Adlai Stevenson (heck, we had THREE smart, principled, serving Adlai Stevensons – a late-1800s vice president, a post WWII IL Governor and Ike’s two-time Presidential opponent, and a ‘70s / ‘80s US Senator); and, oh yeah – let’s dial it ALL THE WAY up: Abraham freakin’ Lincoln!

By the way, in the aftermath of all the Blago churnings, Chris Matthews’ "Hardball" show ranked the per capita political corruption by each of the US states…and IL "only" ranked 18th (the top two were North Dakota and Alaska). So…we’re a bit higher than average, but only in the upper part of the middle-third. It’s just – perhaps – that some of OUR corrupt pols may make bigger, more noticeable splashes with their crimes than may happen elsewhere. (Other measuring standards have placed Louisiana as the most corrupt state…and ranked IL just in the lower half of the top ten.)

…But, hey – at least Blagojevich and his tapes and his foul-mouthed wife and just about ALL of the other crap surrounding him has been nearly infinitely entertaining so far. Ya gotta at least give us some credit for THAT…

For more coverage of Illinois politics, look for my regular posts here on The Stonecipher Report. (And, for a free subscription to my twice-weekly e-mail column on politics and pop-culture, "And, in the News…" send a note to: m_l_sweeney@hotmail.com)

Montana Delegation: "No" to the Auto Industry Bailout

Posted By: Madame Fleur

Dec. 17, 2008

Montana representatives voted decisively last week against the proposed $14 billion rescue plan for the ailing auto industry. Echoing the mood across the state, Montana Democratic senators Jon Tester and Max Baucus and Republican Representative Denny Rehberg agreed that the proposed plan would not benefit Montanans.

Tester’s vote was no surprise.  Earlier this year when congress debated the bank bailout, the senator made clear his distaste for using tax payer funds to rescue struggling companies.  He reaffirmed that opinion with his vote this week, saying:

"After hearing nine hours of testimony during two committee hearings, I wasn't convinced that a taxpayer-funded bailout for Detroit was the right thing to do for Montana. I'd rather see the Treasury Department use the funds it already has from the Wall Street bailout before another bailout is passed…In order to ask Montanans to give their tax dollars to the automakers, I needed to see a solid business plan, a commitment to building more dependable, fuel-efficient vehicles, and a promise not to use taxpayer money to expand operations in other countries. But those were not in the Senate bill, and that is why I opposed it. No one--not the CEOs, labor unions, or outside experts--could assure me this plan would work.”

Echoing the calls of his Republican colleagues, Rehberg urged the auto industry to seek private funds to replenish their empty bank accounts.  Like Tester, he was critical of the companies’ business plans and was pessimistic about the likelihood of a government bailout heading off disaster for the “Big Three” auto companies.

"I'm not unsympathetic to the plight and the blight of the situation in the Midwest where most of the manufacturers are. The bottom line for me was, 'Would you buy a car manufactured by Congress?' No, you wouldn't. These companies are bleeding cash, they're piling up liability and all this bill would do is postpone the day of reckoning."

Democrat Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, surprised some constituents with his dissenting vote - he was one of the primary proponents for the bank bailouts earlier this year.  He avoided taking a stand one way or another on the bailout, citing an unrelated tax provision within the proposed plan for his dissenting vote, calling it an “abusive tax shelter.”

Tester and Rehberg are correct that the proposed government bailout is not a feasible solution.  In all likelihood, a private funding investment is needed to actually fix these companies.  Without private dollars, however, we will be compelled to take on the burden of this failing industry: our economy cannot withstand 3 million middle-class workers entering the growing ranks of the unemployed.  As our middle class bears the brunt of the economic downturn, we can’t afford inaction on the auto industry meltdown. 

The Neocon Express is At it Again - Seriously, Obama and Blagojevich are NOT Allies

Posted by: Stonecipher

Dec. 16, 2008

The problem with neocons is that there is no such thing as uncertainty in their world, and that's not healthy.  Everything must be an absolute to them - America is good, everyone who was sent to Guantanamo is bad, the end justifies the means, etc...

The neocon world is a black and white one, and when shades of gray enter into the equation your average neocon is quick to label it either black or white and then argue until they're blue in the face against any opposition, any logic or even any changes in the circumstances.  When a neocon says it's black, it's black...forever...even when it's white.

So when I recently instigated an exchange with a neocon blogger in regards to Barack Obama's relationship with Rod Blagojevich, I wasn't surprised at all by his response.

The topic: Whether or not President-Elect Barack Obama can be considered a close ally of embattled Illinois Governor, Rod Blagojevich.  As a lifelong resident of Illinois and long-time political observer of state politics here, I can confidently say it is clear that Obama and Gov. Blagojevich are not allies, let alone close allies.

After I commented on Joe Gelman's blog, Neocon Express, and after I argued my position here at TSR, Mr. Gelman responded to me by saying that the Obama and Blagojevich political alliance is "clear, extensive and irrefutable."  In other words, it sounds like Mr. Gelman is saying that the evidence of this close alliance is clear beyond a reasonable doubt.

With that in mind, let's take a look at the evidence to support the claims made at Neocon Express.  Mr. Gelman provided four links and one short video in order to make his point.

Here's how he presented the links:

Of course, I am not the only one who is familiar with the relationship. Here are a few astute observers. Feel free to google "Blagojevich Obama Allies" for thousands of results:

Illinois Governor and Obama Ally Arrested
How Chicago shaped Obama
7 Questions For Obama About Blagojevich
Blagojevich, the Stupidest Governor, Puts Obama in a Bad Light.

Looks good from here, but what happens when we drill into these links?  Will they provide "clear, extensive and irrefutable" evidence?

Let's start with the second link on the above list, "How Chicago Shaped Obama".  This was a piece that Ryan Lizza wrote for The New Yorkerback in July of this year.  The article provided an in-depth look at Illinois and Chicago politics and Obama's ascendance through both.  Rod Blagojevich's name was not mentioned anywhere in the first 12,000 words of the piece - hardly a focus of Lizza's.

When Blagojevich isfinally mentioned it is in regards to a comment made by Rahm Emanuel, Obama's pick to be his White House Chief-of-Staff.  Emanuel told Lizza that he and Obama were two of then-Congressman Blagojevich's top campaign strategists.  Lizza follows the Emanuel comments up with this though:

David Wilhelm, who now works for Obama, said that Emanuel had overstated Obama's role.  "There was an advisory council that was inclusive of Rahm and Barack but not limited to them." Wilhelm said, and he disputed the notion that Obama was "an architect or one of the principal strategists."

Yes, Wilhelm now works for Obama, but so does Emanuel.  Clearly one of the two of them does not accurately recall the events of six years ago, so it comes down to the question 'who do you believe, Rahm Emanuel or David Wilhelm?' 

Either of them could be wrong, but there is no reason to believe one over the other.  This is not exactly "clear, extensive and irrefutable" evidence.

So how about another link?  What about the first one on the list with the title "Illinois Governor and Obama Ally Arrested"?  Well, that doesn't exactly work either since it consists of nothing more than a quote ripped from the only relevant bit of Lizza's lengthy New Yorker piece that was just mentioned above.  Basically links one and two are providing the exact same flimsy shred of evidence.

OK, well, how about links three and four?  Maybe one of them will provide something "clear, extensive and irrefutable?" 

Let's jump down to the forth link "Blagojevich, the Stupidest Governor, Puts Obama in a Bad Light".  This one sounds like it's got some potential.  It was written late last week by Michael Barone of U.S. News and World Report.

After reading the article several times, the best evidence of a "clear, extensive and irrefutable" alliance between Obama and Blago was the following:

All of this puts Blagojevich's constituent and sometime political supporter—and president-elect—Barack Obama in a bad light, though we have no evidence on record that indicates that Obama did anything wrong. Obama said on Tuesday that he had not spoken with Blagojevich about his replacement in the U.S. Senate and then refused to comment further when asked whether anyone had communicated with Blagojevich on his behalf. Of course in ordinary circumstances, when the governor is not a stupid greedhead, there would be nothing wrong with a senator elected president to speak with the governor entitled to name his replacement in the Senate. And there's some evidence Obama did. An Illinois TV station reported on November 5, the day after the election, that Obama was planning to meet later that day with Blagojevich. The logistics wouldn't be difficult; Blagojevich like most recent Illinois governors does most of his business from the James R. Thompson Center (named for one of the few Illinois governors over the past 50 years not indicted and jailed) in Chicago, a few blocks from Obama's campaign headquarters. And in an interview on Fox News November 23, Obama's chief political strategist David Axelrod said matter-of-factly that Obama had talked with the governor about the Senate replacement. Now Axelrod has now said that he was "mistaken" about that.

Hmm...clear?  Not really.  Extensive?  Not even close.  Irrefutable?  The phrase "some evidence" doesn't exactly suggest it is irrefutable.

So now we're down to Mr. Gelman's last link, and I gotta be honest, I'm not feeling too good about the chances of finding "clear, extensive and irrefutable" evidence of an alliance between Barack Obama and Rod Blagojevich.  As you saw above, the link's title is "7 Questions for Obama About Blagojevich".

As it turns out the first five questions have absolutely zero to do with a possible alliance between the two.  Questions six and seven, however, do have some relevance. 

Question Six: "When did you and Blagojevich last speak and about what?"

That's two questions really, but either way, if Obama answers with something like this, then Mr. Gelman might turn out to be right:

"I spoke to the Governor Monday night before he was arrested.  I was concerned about the brown paper bag that was sitting in my freezer with the words "Roddy-boy's $$$" scrawled across it in black Sharpie.  I wanted to know if I could just hand it to Patty at our Secret Kenyan Citizens meeting the following afternoon (I know, I was surprised as anyone that she's Kenyan, she hides it way better than I do), or if I should just leave it for Roddy-boy at "our spot".  I also wanted to know if the bag was big enough to get my good friend Valerie Jarrett into my old Senate Seat."

If Obama say that, I'll post an apology to Mr. Gelman, then immediately hop in my car and drive to wherever he lives and buy him the drink of his choice (unless he's a big fan of single malt scotch, in which case I'll buy him a drink that he'd hopefully find acceptable).

On to Question Seven: "Do You Regret Supporting Blagojevich?"

Here's another response Obama could give that would provide some "clear, extensive and irrefutable" evidence of a close alliance with Gov. Blagojevich:

"Of course not, I would never dream of skipping out on support of my partner in crime and BFF of seven years.  Come on, Roddy-Boy is my friend, I would never dream of skipping out on supporting him.  In fact, I still support him now and I hope all you guys are ready for this, but I'm gonna go ahead and endorse him in his run for Governor in 2010 and for his 2016 run for the presidency to succeed me."

That response would also earn Mr. Gelman that moderately priced drink.

I know this is getting to be a long post, but stay strong, we're almost done.

Since the links were incapable of providing us that "clear, extensive and irrefutable" evidence of a close Obama/Blagojevich alliance, it must be in the video that Mr. Gelman posted where all of that clarity, extensiveness and irrefutibility can be found.

Well...not exactly.

The interview shown, with local Chicago broadcaster Jeff Berkowitz, was conducted in 2002 - the year Rod Blagojevich was first elected as Illinois' governor.

Of greater significance is the fact that the interview was done during the General Election campaign, not during the primaries.  Obama did not endorse Blago until the General Election.

And really what else was Obama going to do?  He was an up-and-coming State Senator who was thinking about running for the U.S. Senate in 2004.  Why wouldn't he endorse a man who was a member of the same political party in the same state who had no record of corruption and who had just won a tough primary battle against not just one, but two, very solid primary opponents?

To say that Obama's endorsement of Rod Blagojevich in the 2002 General Election is proof that they are close political allies is like saying that John McCain's endorsement of George W. Bush in the 2000 General Election proves that they were close political allies.  It's absurd.

I will give Mr. Gelman one small bit of credit for the video he posted though.  It is irrefutable.  Misleading, yes, but irrefutable, no.  Obama was clearly in favor of a Blagojevich victory that year.

So we'll call it 0-for-5 for Joe the Neocon in his attempts to prove a close alliance between Barack Obama and Rod Blagojevich. 

The lesson from all this is that when a neocon says something like "clear, extensive and irrefutable" it actually means something more along the lines of murky, tangential and with no proof whatsoever.

Big Brother would be proud Mr. Gelman.

A couple more links relating to this post: 

The Neocon Express post that kicked off this whole debate (with a few updates)

Jeff Berkowitz on the Obama interview mentioned above

Governor Fonzarelli Jumps the Shark