IL Supreme Court: Rahm Emanuel Eligible To Run For Mayor

My favorite part of their opinion is this nugget right here:


“the novel standard adopted by the appellate court majority is without any foundation in Illinois law.”

That’s legalese for “go fuck yourself”

Rahm’s eligibility isn’t a real hot button issue for me one way or another. From a purely pragmatic partisan point of view, I like it because it keeps Emanuel in the national spotlight allowing him to move up to a higher office eventually. But as I mentioned in my previous post, eligibility requirements for office holders like this are mostly stupid anyways. If anything we should encourage a market for competent bureaucrats.

Advertisements

Blagojevich Does Not Pass Go or Get $200 Because He’s Going To Jail

According to the
Chicago Tribune
, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested this morning by the Federal authorities. (The Hot Fuzz Fed’s)

Blago was already under investigation because of his alleged ethical violations with Obama’s favorite land developed Tony Rezko, but it seems like the FBI is seeking new criminal charges based on Blagojevich’s attempts to sell Obama’s Senate seat to the highest bidder. Yes, you read that right. Blagojevich tried to sell the Senate seat. Oy! those Chicago politicians.

According to the federal complaint (pdf.), Blago refused to appoint Obama’s prefered replacement (which appears to be Valerie Jarrett) unless he got something valuable in return. Jarrett pulled her name from the consideration for the open seat weeks ago, indicating that the President elect refused to pay to play with the Gov. (The federal complaint indicates this as well.)

Blago also sought to quid pro quo the Senate seat to SEIU in exchange for personal benefits but it seems that they wasn’t going anywhere either.

While this story is certainly amusing, there isn’t any real news here. Everyone knew Blagojevich was a corrupt politician and everyone knew he was going to try and get politicial favor from this appointment. But unfortunately for Blagojevich his greed took him from your standard politicial logrolling to unethical attempts for personal gain.

Jesse Jackson Jr To Replace Obama In The Senate?

Man I wish my dad was famous.

For those looking for a reason to not vote for Barack Obama here’s a big one. If elected, there’s a good chance that Jesse Jackson Jr could replace Obama in the Senate.

That would be the same race baiting Jesse Jackson Jr who accomplished the rare double whammy when he managed to play the race card AND the Hurricane Katrina card, not once but TWICE in less than two minutes.

…there were tears that melted the Granite State. And those are tears that Mrs. Clinton cried on that day, clearly moved voters. She somehow connected with those voters.

But those tears also have to be analyzed. They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45% of African-Americans who participate in the Democratic contest, and they see real hope in Barack Obama.

And:

We saw something very clever in the last week of this campaign coming out of Iowa, going into New Hampshire, we saw a sensitivity factor. Something that Mrs. Clinton has not been able to do with voters that she tried in New Hampshire.

Not in response to voters — not in response to Katrina, not in response to other issues that have devastated the American people, the war in Iraq, we saw tears in response to her appearance. So her appearance brought her to tears, but not hurricane Katrina.

Obama’s Folly: Why just showing up isn’t enough

I’ve been trying to lay off the Obama bashing lately because despite what it may seem like I think he’s an okay guy. Certainly on his worst day better than any of the Republican candidates on their best day. But its things like this that piss me off about Barack Obama, Obama politics and Obama supporters.

Among those, Mr. Obama did not vote yes or no on a bill that would allow certain victims of sexual crimes to petition judges to seal court records relating to their cases…

On the sex crime bill, Mr. Obama cast the lone present vote in a 58-to-0 vote.

Mr. Obama’s campaign said he believed that the bill violated the First Amendment. The bill passed 112-0-0 in the House and 58-0-1 in the Senate.

But of course this is just ONE of the many present votes Obama cast on important issues like children’s safety, abortion rights, and fair sentencing. (And these are just the times where Obama alone voted present of his own accord)

So what was Obama’s defense? :

WTF kind of answer is that? (HINT: It’s not a good one)

I’m a big fan of constitutional law so I can relate to Obama on some levels, though I don’t think the law was unconstitutional.

HOWEVER, this represents an intrinsic flaw with Obama the politician. Politics is a game. Not in a delegitmizing way, but in the cat and mouse, try to out manuever your opponents and “win” sort of way.

In order to win in a high stakes game like this you need boldness and vision. Most importantly, you need to realize YOUR ROLE in the game.

As a legislator, and more importantly an alleged “supporter”, of this bill Obama shouldn’t be highlight perceived weakness of his side.

If you think the bill is unconstitutional voice your concerns in private.If the changes you advised for aren’t made then SHUT UP AND VOTE FOR THE BILL. Unless there is some major negative side effect to voting for the bill then the advantages of passing a bill that MIGHT be unconstitutional outweigh the disadvantages of allowing the victims in need of the bill to suffer.

As a legislator you legislate. Let the court decide whats unconstitutional or not.
If the courts strike down the bill then you rewrite it better the next time.

This is just bad politicing by Obama. Don’t get me wrong. If your opponents are bringing up a bill you disagree with then by all means question the constitutionality of the bill. But you never shoot your own side in the foot. Futhermore, going on public record and using the senate floor to question the constitutionality of a bill you support risks undermining the entire bill. Obama could have very well given opponents of the bill the ammo they needed to kill the bill in the courts.

This would be like an engineer for the Empire going on public record saying “while I support the Death Star, I think that we should have fixed the lone structural weakness which if exploited will blow up the entire ship.”

PART TWO- BAD FOR NOVEMBER

In Public Relations there’s a saying. If you’re explaining you’re losing. If Obama can’t give even give a concise anwser WHY he just voted present for THIS particular bill then imagine how bad that will look in November whe the Republican Attack machine is in full force. If they can swift boat an actual war hero imagine what they’ll do to someone who won’t stand up for rape victims or children being sheltered from pornography.