Monday, February 16, 2009

The Chicagoization of America

By Douglas Kohn
Kohn@Fordham.edu

Corruption and greed are every bit as real in the Obama Administration as it has been in every other administration. Obama- Mr. Squeaky Clean- has appointed no less than 17 lobbyists to his government. So much for Obama being allergic to lobbyists.

All this stems from where he learned politics. America’s great cosmopolitan cities are exciting and productive places to live and work in, but one should not want to be a politician in them. Chicago and New York both have the most dysfunctional political systems in the country, dominated by Democratic Party machines with no significant opposition.

Machine politics is nothing new to America but it has bred relatively few presidents. New York and Chicago are constantly riddled by unrelenting political scandal as evidenced by Eliot Spitzer, Rod Blagojevich, the Richard Daley machine, the David Dinkins fiasco with a list of others ranging back to the days of Tammany Hall.

The politics of neither of these cities or the states they are in are something we should like to see on a national scale. But it would seem that the Democratic Party, led by the Chicago machine of Barack Obama and his hatchet man Rahm Emmanuel are intent on turning American politics into Chicago politics.

Rahm Emmanuel has been granted permission by President Obama to take on direct oversight of the Census Bureau. This is a travesty and has not been given nearly the attention by the American media it should have been. A backgrounder follows.

The Census Bureau is a division of the United States Department of Commerce. After Governor Bill Richardson was taken down in a corruption scandal of his own, he withdrew from the offer of being Secretary of Commerce. President Obama then offered the job to a Republican senator from New Hampshire, Judd Gregg. Gregg accepted on the condition that the Democratic governor of New Hampshire appoint a Republican to replace him on his seat. Rahm Emmanuel was then given control of the Census Bureau.

The Bush Administration had been criticized for its ill fated attempt to create permanent conservative leaning government. Now it seems Rahm Emmanuel, architect of the Democratic victory in 2006, is bent on doing the same for his party. The Census Bureau is responsible for assigning electoral weight to each district and each state. Every ten years, a census is taken and based on shifts in populations, states and districts gain or lose electoral votes. Having a rabid partisan such as Emmanuel in control bodes ill for American Democracy. Combined with the possibility of giving illegal aliens permanent resident status, it seems that if the Democrats do not usher in a period of permanent control they will be ushering in a period of prolonged control.

The last real bastion of Conservative resistance is on the radio. Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage are continuing their fiery rhetoric trying to save American nationalism. Nancy Pelosi is going to try to impose her fairness doctrine on the American media. Sound like freedom? That’s because it is not. The Democrats are going to roll back freedom in this country to an extent we have not seen since the Civil War. Do not write it off thinking they cannot do it, it has been done before.

Remember 2004? The Bush Administration was feeling righteous over the ‘wardrobe malfunction’ of Janet Jackson in the Superbowl. Who did they take it out on? Talk radio. Howard Stern was brought under new pressure by the FCC’s Michael Powell. They began to put the clamp on his show because of ‘decency’ issues. Meanwhile, Howard Stern’s most important staffer, Robin Quivers, is a black woman who voted for George Bush in 2000. Howard does not usually take up politics on his show but has consistently been libertarian and right leaning. He was a proponent of the Iraq War. He regularly talks of his respect and admiration for Ronald Reagan. He supported Giuliani and then John McCain.

What is happening now is scarier, as the Obama Administration begins to talk in earnest about the “fairness” doctrine. What is the need for fairness? There is mostly liberal media with Conservatives on talk radio. What happened to freedom? Why fairness? This is more terrifying because this is a liberal assault on talk radio for their political views and ideas, not some notion of decency. The Bush Administration began it by hurting one of their supporters, but the Democrats are going to destroy freedom of speech in this country.

6 comments:

DSKohn said...

Before anyone comments I should add that I wrote this article before Judd Gregg withdrew from the offer of Commerce Secretary.

Also another example of the assault on talk radio was what happened to Imus, though he should have apologized and what was said was reprehensible, it is nothing short of a politically correct establishment removing a very moderate radio personality. Don Imus can be quoted as saying "Hillary Clinton is still Satan, Dick Cheney is still a war criminal, and I'm back on the radio." He then endorsed McCain for the election. In the end, an apology should have been sufficient for Imus.

Terry said...

ARE WE NOT MEN!?

Emily Genetta said...

Assault on talk radio? Is that what it is when you criticize people for saying racist things? Oh, I mean, for 'not being politically correct.'

Racism is beyond being un-'PC'. And as for actually being un-'PC,' I'll let you in on a little secret: People who are too 'cool' or 'edgy' or 'honest' for political correctness are actually people who are too ignorant and apathetic to bother being decent to their fellow human beings. If you don't understand this, I suggest doing a little reading on sociolinguistics.

msebi said...

Dems roll back freedoms? You a fan of Alex Jones?

http://www.infowars.com/

Take a dip in knowledge, friend.

Phil said...

Emily you have done it again. Doug mentioned nothing at all relating to racism in his blog post yet you've chosen to bring it into our discussion.

The Fairness Doctrine is designed to fine radio stations that do not present both sides of issues deemed to be "controversial." This has absolutely nothing to do with race, gender, sexuality etc. Yet, as a liberal, the idea that racism, sexism or homophobia isn't involved in an issue is one you can not comprehend.

DSKohn said...

Emily, I suggest you learn a little history. There used to be a breed of Liberal who said, 'I may disagree with what you say but shall defend to the death your right to say it.' Yes racism is disgusting, but as free people everyone is permitted to believe as they wish. If you could cite to me an incident of real racism among the talk radio hosts I'd gladly listen. Personally I only listen to Howard Stern and Michael Savage and I have heard Howard be racist but not Savage. Savage is the one who does political commentary Howard is an entertainer.