I know I have not commented much on the Blageovich. Not really much to say, we in Illinois knew he was the amoral bastard he has shown himself to be, before we re-elected him. So in that regard, we only have our own selves to blame for the mess we see today. Now I do have an issue with the smearing of "all" Illinois politicians because they are in the same state and may have had contact with the, you know, governor of said state.
Regardless of if the lead prosecutor says that these individuals have done nothing wrong. You are still guilty because you "may have had contact with". That is just plain silly. Of course most politicians on the state and even federal level will have had some contact with the governor of that state. It is their job after all and the people did overwhelmingly re-elect that person. The way the media has tarred anyone who has Illinois political roots, is disingenuous at best and down right malpractice at worst. It isn't like people are running to Blago's aide? The state, virtually all the pols, and anyone who isn't related to him by blood or marriage wants him to a) lose his job, b) go to jail. How much more consensus do you need? So in short I kind of feel sorry for Jesse Jackson Jr. by all accounts he as been an exemplary Representative for his constituents and was interested in the vacated senate seat (also he does at least have the qualifications to hold such a seat). But because he actually pursued that, he has been sullied by this whole affair. If you are interested in a position it is only logical that you would try to speak with the person in charge of hiring for that seat. That isn't unethical, though there are ways it could become so. From what U.S Attorney Fitzgerald has said, JJ hasn't done anything worth investigating.
----
On the auto bail-out/flame-out. I find it ironic ( in the non-humorous way), how quickly the government as a whole swooped in to provide aide for Wall Street, yet the stance and demeanor taken with the U.S Auto industry has been decidedly different. Far more criticism (which in general I applaud, but the way in which it has been applied is amazingly asymmetric) then the previous bailout received and a lot more blame placing. In particular the disproportionate vigor with which Republicans have attacked the UAW. Now that is not to say the UAW is not complicit in the current state that the auto industry is in, they are not the sole antagonist. But the general tenor is off. Different rules for white-collar industries versus blue-collar ones, is the way it is being played out in the press. This seems like very sloppy reporting.
----
Over at the Nation, Chris Hayes has an interesting piece up on Ideology vs. Pragmatism. It is a piece mainly in defense of ideology, about it's usefulness and about the moral ambiguity of that pragmatism can foster. Ta-Nehisi Coasts over at the Atlantic has some interesting analysis on the article and general observations as well, that are very much worth the read.
My basic read on the subject is this. The fetishization of Pragmatism has become a catchall and cover for those that have been wrong over the last 8-10 years. Since the current administration was so wrong on so many things, the obvious conclusion was that ideology itself was the problem not, god forbid, the ideology in question. Therefore you push for a pragmatic solution to all problems. This is not a good idea, supporting any sort of policy even pragmatism, can lead to a far to stringent orthodoxy. What we need is not people devoid of ideology, but who couple that with occasional pragmatism and most importantly exhibit a healthy skepticism of even their own ideology. Colluding with
evil acts (torture, rendition, preemptive war) purely for pragmatic reasons is not a solution, but merely a deepening of the problem.
-Cheers
No comments:
Post a Comment