Rahm Vs. Axelrod: Obama Loses

Newsmax has a story about a growing battle between Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod.

In the days of the old Pravda, one could determine who was winning secret Politburo power struggles by just looking at the official Soviet newspaper. Those winning simply got better press.

Perhaps it may be no different
here in the United States.

This week two of the heaviest guns in American media, The Washington Post and The New York Times, unloaded their missiles at Obama adviser David Axelrod while heralding White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel as a centrist and pragmatist.

Newsmax concludes that all the good ink that Emanuel has received recently means that he's winning this battle. In fact, all this really means is that Obama is losing.

The ship is sinking and everyone is pointing fingers everywhere but themselves. So, Emanuel has gotten both the Washington Post and the New York Times to print favorable articles toward him.

What are these articles really saying? Here's one example.

But a contrarian narrative is emerging: Emanuel is a force of political reason within the White House and could have helped the administration avoid its current bind if the president had heeded his advice on some of the most sensitive subjects of the year: health-care reform, jobs and trying alleged terrorists in civilian courts.

It is a view propounded by lawmakers and early supporters of President Obama who are frustrated because they think the administration has gone for the perfect at the expense of the plausible. They believe Emanuel, the town's leading purveyor of four-letter words, a former Israeli army volunteer and a product of a famously argumentative family, was not aggressive enough in trying to persuade a singularly self-assured president and a coterie of true-believer advisers that "change you can believe in" is best pursued through accomplishments you can pass.

In fact, almost everyone can see that the Obama presidency is on the brink and Emanuel is getting out ahead to make sure that the bulk of the blame doesn't land on him. So, most people believe that his allies reached out to the Post and Times and presented him in a positive light while painting Axelrod negatively.

The most important thing is not which aide is viewed favorably and which is viewed positively. What's important is that the ship is sinking and the rats are turning on each other. In this case, it is President Obama that loses.

The U.S. as an Oligarchy

The President, in his 60 minutes interview, came out with this quote in particular that seems to have the most staying power.

I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street

Whether President Obama did or not, in fact, that's exactly what's happened. The only thing that is clear that's come out of the financial crisis is that our banks were on the brink of collapse, they were given a near $1 trillion lifeline, and now most are doing just fine. That was followed immediately by a $50 billion lifeline to the auto companies.

So, President Obama's populist rhetoric means little with a policy that clearly favors the connected in the business world. In fact though, President Obama is not unique. Most of those in power produce policies that favor those in power. This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing but a power thing. President Obama merely produced rhetoric that made some people believe that he would be different. When push came to shove, he showered the elites with billions like every other politicians.

What we effectively have in this country is an oligarchy.

An oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) (oligocracy) is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military, or religious hegemony

It's a government run by the special interests, big business, and everyone else with access to power. Long ago, it stopped being a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, if it ever really was.

This time last year, Goldman Sachs was on the verge of collapse. Now, it's making billions trading oil futures. The same could have been said of Chase. Now, it's making billions in mergers and acquisitions. Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac have stripped the illusion entirely of being separate of the government and are now just owned. Before then, powerful politicians would move seamlessly from D.C. to powerful positions within either or both (a la Rahm Emanuel) and, as a result, both have been given special treatment and perks for decades. While President Obama demands reforms of just about everything, he's doing nothing to reform either Fannie/Freddie.

After the banks got their bailout, the auto companies were next and the bailout was followed by cash for clunkers which made served as a major stimulant to sell cars. All of it has a dubious effect on the economy as a whole, but certainly it benefits the bankers and the automakers.

President Obama is not unique in this at all. For decades Republicans have protected the oil industry as though their cousins worked there. Six companies control more than 60% of the entire market. All of them make tens of billions yearly all at once and no politician finds anything the slightest bit wrong with any of it.

The insurance companies receive their own special favors. McCarron/Ferguson gave the health insurance provider a special denomination that exempts them from Sherman Anti Trust and as a result they have conducted a so called market that's actually just created a set of regional monopolies that allow the insurance companies to dominate their own regional markets and leave other regional markets for their so called competitors. In reality, it allows a series of health insurance companies to all make money at the same time all while enjoying an environment with little competition.

If it isn't big business that gets special treatment, then it's big labor. The labor unions enjoy just as many special privileges from our government as many of our biggest companies. Health care reform can't pass unless it gets its stamp of approval from the top labor unions. When I say stamp of approval, I mean that health care reform can't hurt the health care packages of the unions.

The list goes on and on. We have a government based on influence and power. In Chicago, we call this clout. Our government benefits those with clout. If you have clout, you have influence. If you have influence, the government legislates in your favor. You could just call it an oligarchy.

Cheney Unloads On Obama

The former VP is at it again.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the Bush administration had developed a new strategy on the war in Afghanistan before leaving office -- a strategy that he said "bears a striking resemblance" to the one announced by President Obama in March.

In a speech to the Center for Security Policy, Cheney said the Bush administration handed Obama's transition team a policy review of the Afghan war conducted last fall to meet the new challenges posed by the Taliban.

"They asked us not to announce our findings publicly, and we agreed, giving them the benefit of our work and the benefit of the doubt," Cheney said.

The former VP went after the Obama administration's policies on GITMO, missile defense, enhanced interrogations, among just about every foreign policy initiative. Cheney also went after Obama on Afghanistan. It isn't that the policy is different but instead that it's the same. Rahm Emanuel suggested over the weekend that the Bush administration left the Obama administration "starting from scratch".

Cheney countered that the Bush administration had done a thorough review of the situation for the Obama administration on the request of the Obama administration. The current counter insurgency strategy is, in the former VP's words, much like the policy that the Bush administration recommended privately. To top it off, the former VP says that the Obama administration asked the Bush administration to keep their analysis and review quiet. Then, Emanuel claims that Bush left them with nothing. If this is all accurate, this is dirty, cynical and the worst kind of politics.

The speech came late in the day and the news media has only now started to cover it. Expect this to be a major story all day tomorrow. Cheney has been much effective attacking Obama policies and defending Bush policies out of the White House than inside the White House. Each of his attacks has had an effect, and you can bet this will drive the debate for at least the next twenty four hours.

Reporting From the Open Meeting For Replacing Mike Qugley on the Cook County Board (Update)

Prologue: As of this writing, no one has yet been selected to replace Mike Quigley, now a U.S. Congressman, to the Cook County Board but I will update as information rolls in.

This morning I strolled into Truman College to witness the open meeting to select the replacement to Mike Quigley (now a U.S. Congressman elect replacing Rahm Emanuel in the 5th district) to the Cook County Board of Commissioners. The entire spectacle was a study in the inner workings of government, irony and dichotomy. The meetin was open and easy to find and as the chosen head, Tom Tunney (my alderman in Chicago), to maximize transparency. Of course, the selection of a new board member won't be voted on by the public. Instead, a committee of 8 committee men will select the replacement. In fact, their votes won't even be equal. Here is the breakdown.

44 - Tom Tunney - 20.5%48 - Carol Ronen - 19.9%46 - Tom Sharpe - 19.1%43 - Michele Smith - 17.1%40 - Pat O'Connor - 8.8%39 - Randy Barnette - 5.8%50 - Ira
Silverstein - 3.8%49 - David Fagus - 2.3%32 - John Fritchey - 1.9%45 - Patrick Levar - 0.3%41 - Mary O'Connor - 0.3%

This breakdown is based on the weight of the vote for Quigley in his last election for Commissioner. For most of the rest of the country, this selection is a non issue. Here in Illinois this is of utmost importance. That's because Quigley was genuine agent of change, reform, and anti corruption, and unless he is replaced as such the County government will move towards the corrupt machine again.

The first candidate to speak was Committee Woman Michele Smith. If that name sounds familiar, it's because she is also on the committee to decide the candidate. She was also able to ask the other candidates questions. In the greatest bit of irony, she asked three questions of each including "what will you do to reduce the conflicts of interest in County government". (the county commissioners hold second jobs and often their private business comes in front of them as Commissioners). Now, I could state the obvious, but I will let my readers come up with their own thoughts about someone running for office, on the committee to decide said candidate for that office, and on the panel asking questions of said candidates asking questions abou CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

The main themes of the meeting were: reform, the cook county sales tax, hospital funding, and efficient government. This happened for three reasons. First, again, Quigley has been a genuine agent of reform. Second, the indictment of Rod Blagojevich has made corruption the issue du jour. Third, Todd Stroger and his massive sales tax increase has made the issue of corruption especially relevant in Cook County itself. Furthermore, between the bloated budget and massive new sales tax, Todd Stroger did manage to cut the budget on Cook County Hospital also known as John Stroger Hospital.

Speaking of Todd Stroger...I decided to the some simple mathematics. At the beginning of the meeting, I decided to count the number of times that the name Todd Stroger was mentioned by either the candidates or the questionners. The exercise turned out to be easy because the number of times was ZERO. Stroger became the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Todd Stroger is the Cook County Board Commission President. He took over when he orchestrated a backroom deal in 2006 to replace his father, John, then President of Cook County, on the ballot when his father fell into a coma during his own run for re election. Since then, he has been the subject of so much corruption it is frankly to long to list here. (go here for a fairly full list)

With Stroger being the ghost, the candidates went through litany of promises for budget reform, consolidation of departments, and a series of boring and technical reforms of process. To me, much of this is pie in the sky. The reason the budget is bloated is because the County is run as a machine. To fix the budget, we need a commission ready to take on Stroger and the machine that runs it. Both the words CORRUPTION and PATRONAGE were also mentioned exactly ZERO times by both the commission candidates and questionners.

One of the easiest ways to get the budget under control is to cut some of the 25000 employees now employed by the County. That was one thing not suggested by anyone, though cutting employees takes real political courage because that means making an enemy of about 5000 very powerful and connected voters.

The favorite of both the Chicago Sun Times, Tribune, and the crowd at Truman College was Kimberly Walz. That's because for the last eight years Walz has been a top deputy to Commissioner Quigley, as both his budget director and most recently his chief of staff. His accomplishments have become her own. White male, Jim Madigan, pronounced that if he were elected it would be historic. That's because he would be the first openly gay politicians at the County and the state. (Tunney, it should be noted, is the only openly gay alderman in Chicago)

To truly understand the absurdity and irony of this "transparent" meeting, you had to stay till the end. The public was welcome to the speeches and to the question and answer session, though not allowed to ask questions themselves. Then, Tunney announced that the committee would retire in private where privately they would debate, horsetrade, and ultimately choose the next Commissioner. All right, he didn't characterize it as such, however this process would be in private. As such, the public was allowed to the dog and pony show of the speeches and the question and answers, however the public couldn't witness the process of voting for our new Commissioner. Transparency is alive and well, and Smith's curious view of conflict of interest, the whole spectacle smells much like corrupt politics as usual.

(Update)

Bridget Gainer, a former park district and city hall employee (and currently an executive at Aon), won the private vote to replace Quigley.

Democratic committeemen bypassed Mike Quigley’s top aide as his replacement on the Cook County Board, instead choosing today to seat former City Hall and Chicago Park District official Bridget Gainer.

Gainer, 40, was one of eight candidates — including Quigley’s former chief of staff Kimberly Walz — vying to serve out the remainder of Quigley’s 10th District county board term.

“I’m very pleased with the outcome and I’m looking forward to getting to work,” said Gainer, who works for Aon Corp., but previously had worked for the park district and in the city’s budget office.

Gainer was mentioned in the Tribune's editorial which ultimately endorsed Walz. I wish her luck in her new endeavor.

Some Thoughts On the Special 5th Election

With little fanfare, the 5th District of Illinois, held the primaries for the special election to replace Rahm Emanuel in the Congress. The turnout was below 10% of the overall size of the district. That should be disheartening to all in this district. The area is extremely corrupt and that corruption occurs in part because of voter's apathy to it. The turnout in this one is not the start of any new day where voters aren't apathetic.

The election had some surprising and even couraging results. The winner on the Democratic side was Mike Quigley. Quigley, the Cook County Commissioner in the area, was not only running as an outsider, but rather, he was an outsider. He made his name being a thorn not only in the side of Mayor Daley but Cook County Board President Todd Stroger. Quigley has become a thorn in the side of Daley over Tax Increment Financing (TIF) which Daley uses to help move money to "friends and colleagues" on a variety of projects. Furthermore, Quigley has become an opponent of Daley's brother, John, on the Board.

Quigley made his name in opposing much of Stroger waste and corruption. Quigley opposed Stronger's massive tax increase, though he endorsed Stroger and also voted for Stroger's first budget.

Still, the machine candidate was Pat O'Connor and he finished a distant fourth. Sarah Feigenholtz, also a long time insider, finished second. Quigley's victory is an affirmation that the corruption of Blagojevich, Daley, Stroger, et al is on its way out. The election of a candidate that made his name as an outsider taking on the machine is a good start for this area.

On the Republican side, the most troubling aspect was that Rosana Polido, the winner, received as many votes, just over 1000, as the Democratic candidate way down the list. Whereas Quigley exceeded ten thousand votes, Polido's vote total was only one tenth of that.

Polido has made her name as a staunch supporter of the 2nd amendment as well as local leader of the Minutemen Project. Still, the election of Polido plays on all the perceptions of the Republican as a party of extremists. Her association with the Minutemen may play well with faithful within the party however it will do nothing but turn off independents. The election of Polido insures that the general election will be a bloodbath for the Republicans in this district.

The Chicago Media's Disingenuous Anti Corruption Stance

If you read this weekend's editions of the two major Chicago papers, the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun Times, you would think that the two papers were ready to do their Constitutional duty and become the tireless watch dog over the corrupt politicians. It was the Sun Times that broke the exclusive story of the offer from Rob Blagojevich for campaign cash to his brother's campaign by current U.S. Senator Roland Burris.

Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s brother solicited U.S. Sen. Roland Burris for up to $10,000 in campaign cash before Blagojevich named Burris to the coveted post — something Burris initially failed to disclose under oath before an Illinois House impeachment panel, records and interviews show.

Burris acknowledges being hit up for the money in a new affidavit he has sent to the head of the House committee that recommended Blagojevich be removed from office.

The affidavit is dated Feb. 5 — three weeks after Burris was sworn in to replace President Obama in the Senate.

Burris — who did not give money to the Blagojevich campaign fund in response to the previously undisclosed solicitation — provided a copy of the sworn statement to the Chicago Sun-Times Friday in response to questions about his contacts with the Blagojevich camp about fund-raising.

Meanwhile, the Tribune used its Sunday edition to announce an anti corruption campaign.

One governor imprisoned at the gray-bar hotel, another heaved out of office—and in each case, the corruption of our body politic exposed. Headlines speak of bold crimes, self-serving schemes and raw unfairnesses that suffuse our statehouse, our county buildings, our city halls.

Today's newspaper marks the launch—on the news pages and on the editorial page—of a Chicago Tribune campaign against the Illinois culture of political sleaze. We speak of culture, not just of crime, because citizens of this state have been ravaged and disadvantaged by offenses from outright thievery to lawful deception: For every pol who allegedly tries to sell a U.S. Senate seat, hundreds of others are exploiting us for personal or political gain. Changing that culture of sleaze will mean appreciating that we've all been cheated as much by favors as by fraud. The proven cost of conniving and clout in this state ranges from whose children get the choice jobs to whose children get incinerated in the van wreck.

Now, if you didn't live here for years, if you didn't know Chicago's history, you would think our two newspapers were sincere. First, corruption, like that in Chicago, can't exist without the incompetence or even the complicity of the media. In this case, both the corruption and the two newspapers date back more than a hundred years.

Even if one were to believe that the two newspapers had seen the light, there is still something missing. In covering the Grady Hospital scandal, I learned that to truly combat corruption the media must be relentless in its pursuit of said corruption. Often incompetent and complicit media, like that in Atlanta, go through the motions in reporting on corruption. From time to time, the media will get interested in the corruption but then the interest will wane. Often, it isn't so much what the media covers but what it doesn't cover that allows the corruption to continue.

That appears to be what is happening in Chicago. While both were screaming with righteous indignation this weekend about corruption, there is a story that neither is willing to investigate at all. That is the story of Ron Huberman. Huberman has had a remarkable rise up the political ladder of Chicago politics. Five years ago he was a beat cop. He was a beat cop for nine years. Then, suddenly, the mayor, Richard M. Daley, named him the head of the City Transit Authority. He has since become the Mayor's Chief of Staff and now he just got named the CEO of the Chicago Public Schools. How in the world does a beat cop suddenly became head of major Chicago institutions? No one seems to know but we can all bet the real story is seedy and corrupt. Either Huberman knows all the right people or he discovered something that someone wants kept private. Either way, there is no professional justification for making a beat cop head of the CTA and now head of Chicago Public Schools. Of course, no one knows the full story because our two new champions of anti corruption seem totally disinterested in pursuing it. As such, a crony, one that likely knows where certain bodies are buried, rises through Chicago politics in a trajectory that has nothing to do with performance or qualifications.

Then, on the same day that the Chicago Sun Times was breaking a major news story regarding the Governor, the Sun Times also made an endorsement of Mike Quigley in the special election of the 5th District to replace Rahm Emanual. What was missing in this endorsement is another endorsement. While the Sun Times made an endorsement on the Democratic side, the Sun Times acted as though there was no Republican field. Now, I won't pretend as though the Republican has little or no chance of winning, but in fact, when the local media ignores the field entirely, those chances are minimized even more.

Everyone agrees that the one party rule in Chicago, Cook County, and Springfield contributes to the obscene corruption. What do we call it if not corrupt, when a major newspaper ignores one of two parties running in acknowledging and endorsing candidates. The Republicans are fielding candidates as well. If the newspapers only recognize the Democrats, doesn't that contribute to the culture of corruption?

These two stories are not merely omissions by chance, coincidence or anomaly. It is all part of a pattern of two newspapers that have more than a hundred years of corruption to answer for. Make no mistake, these two newspapers have turned over no new leaves. They are the same incompetent/complicit newspapers that have contributed to a culture of corruption that rivals any in the whole country.