Where’s mine?!?

You’ve got to love the way some political people are quick on the draw to figure out how one person’s tragedy of a lifetime can work to their benefit.

ROSKAM: The new Whip?

That seems to be the situation these days for Peter Roskam. He’s the one-time state legislator from Wheaton-turned-member of Congress who carries the title of “chief deputy whip” in the Republican congressional caucus.

THAT MAKES HIM a person of some note amongst the Republicans who run the House of Representatives, although not one that’s going to get a lot of national attention.

Yet his situation could change significantly in coming weeks.

For the great story of congressional politics these days is the fact that on Tuesday, Eric Cantor lost his bid for re-election.

Cantor is a member of Congress from Virginia who is majority leader. Which puts him just under House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, in terms of Republican leadership.

YET THE FACT that Cantor is a veteran member of Congress made him suspicious to the ideologues who desire to turn all of government into a conservative ideological operation that does their bidding. Or, more specifically, that goes out of its way to stomp all over those people who disagree with them.

Cantor lost in the Republican primary to a candidate who has the Tea Party types all in support of him and their misguided rhetoric that they think constitutes some sort of revolution.

These things do happen from time to time. Even in Chicago.

 

CANTOR: Soon to be a 'former'

I still recall when the all-powerful House Ways and Means chairman Dan Rostenkowski lost his re-election bid to a no-name Republican who wasn’t even thought much of in Republican circles.

LOCAL VOTERS DON’T always take into account, or really care, about the concept of keeping nationally-ranked officials in their positions of authority.

Anyway, Cantor is gone. He’ll finish up the year, then leave come January.

Although Cantor says he likely will give up his leadership post (thereby becoming just another rank-and-file legislator) sometime next month.

That means there’s going to be a leadership shakeup. And it seems that the “Gentleman from DuPage” wants to be sure his name is in line for a political promotion – although admittedly he’s not being so gauche as to openly campaign for the post.

BOTH THE CHICAGO Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune report that Roskam is refusing to say much of anything publicly about the move.

It would seem that Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., is in line to move up to Cantor’s post, which would make him the second-ranking person to Boehner. With McCarthy currently holding the “whip” position, Roskam could then move up and into it.

It could wind up being in the hands of a former state legislator to be the official who keeps the members of the Republican caucus in line on issues of significance, and also is responsible for making sure GOP congress members are actually in attendance when votes are taken.

It’s a lot of procedural moves. But it is just the kind of post that can go to someone who is a party loyalist. Which could then be used by that official to gain more influence for the causes that they take interest in on behalf of their hometown constituents.

IT WILL BE intriguing to see just how this situation shakes out, and if Roskam is able to work his way up from the guy who only gets noticed in the western suburbs to someone of national repute.

Although the whole concept of local focus versus national when it comes to our members of Congress (whose purpose is to put a local spin on national issues) is a constant balancing act – one that legislators occasionally fail to meet.

Take Cantor, who may have developed a national reputation but I’m sure would gladly give it up Wednesday if it could mean he could keep his House seat!

  -30-

What should we think when political people conflict on what they say

Learning of the latest dispute involving the Republican distaste for President Barack Obama reminded me of an old incident right here at City Hall – one in which then-Mayor Richard M. Daley didn’t come across as looking that good.

DURBIN: Says somebody insulted president

I recall that the Chicago Sun-Times came up with a story related to the McCormick Place convention center that infuriated Daley!

HE MADE PUBLIC statements to the press corps at City Hall about how the newspaper was so wrong and must have shown its complete ignorance by taking comments so far out of context that they made no sense.

There was just one problem – the on-the-record source for that particular story (whose minutia was so intense that I must confess to not even remembering the specifics) was then-Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority director John Schmidt.

I specifically remember calling Schmidt that morning (I worked for the now-defunct City News Bureau of Chicago back then) to talk to him about the story, and he told me that the Sun-Times had quoted him accurately – and gotten all its facts right.

It’s a minor dispute of facts. It wouldn’t shock me to learn that I’m the only person who even remembers this particular story.

BUT IT WAS a lesson I learned about how seriously we should take it when people start attacking the legitimacy of what gets reported.

Sometimes, the denials shouldn’t be taken that seriously. Some people just want to be able to say something didn’t happen.

OBAMA: Ignoring the slur

While others are willing to let the word about something get out, while having their own reasons for not wanting to publicly stand behind it later.

And sometimes, there are just conflicts amongst the various officials. It doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

ALL OF WHICH is relevant to comprehending the dispute concerning Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., who had his people put something on his Facebook page about the Republican official who supposedly told the president to his face, “I cannot even stand to look at you.”

Aides to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, quickly made a point of saying they want a retraction and an apology for what they say is a, “reckless allegation.”

Obama’s official spokesman said he looked into the incident, and couldn’t find any evidence that anybody had the nerve to say that directly to the president.

BOEHNER: He's outraged!!!

“It did not happen,” spokesman Jay Carney told reporter-types at the White House, with officials later using the word "misunderstanding" to describe why it was thought something bad was said.

YET DURBIN STILL says it did, going so far as to use the incident in a fundraising pitch. He's definitely not going along with the rants coming from House Republicans who are demanding that Durbin cough up his source for the tidbit and apologize for besmirching their reputation – which in the overall scheme of things isn’t all that important.

Is anyone shocked to learn that the distaste for Obama is so intense in certain quarters that there are people who don’t want to work with him? The underlying premise of this tidbit is so apparent that it is beyond dispute!

Personally, I don’t have any first-hand information about this moment. I don’t know who said it, or exactly when. Or what Durbin’s motivation for passing along trivial gossip would be if that is what truly has occurred.

In fact, I’m not about to take it as any sign that Obama and Durbin are in some sort of long-term political split. I don’t think the Daley/Schmidt dynamic was impacted much by the long-ago difference in public statements.

IF ANYTHING, I’M inclined to think the Obama camp wants to downplay this particular incident because it supposedly occurred during the now-complete talks to end the federal government shutdown that lasted for 16 days.

What’s the point of dredging up old trivia about how people don’t like the president and let their personal taste influence their politics. He’s forgiving, in that sense. Maybe he realizes there will be many more insults in the future for him to get worked up over.

Or maybe Obama is just following a pair of axioms given to us by the fictional Don Vito Corleone. “It’s business, not personal.” And, “Revenge is a dish best served cold.”

  -30-

Boehner ain’t no “Fast Eddie,” who wouldn’t have apologized for actions

I’ve always thought of the opposition to the Barack Obama presidency as being a national equivalent of the “Council Wars” of old.

BOEHNER: Fast Eddie wouldn't apologize

The Republican opposition that wants to oppose everything on ideological grounds (they don’t want Obama having any accomplishments to claim, and would impeach him in an instant if they could come up with anything resembling grounds to do so) looks, and sounds, a lot like the Vrdolyak 29 of old.

THAT MAJORITY IN the City Council in the mid-1980s, after all, was willing to create some short-term harm in city government if it meant taking down Harold Washington as mayor.

A lot like the way the ideologue Republicans in Congress, particularly the House of Representatives majority, plans to vote on Friday for a measure that continues to fund the federal government ONLY IF it also includes measures that dump all over the Obama version of health care reform!

It comes across as cheap and petty and whiny and obnoxious and short-sighted and harmful an act as anything that the City Council did when it had a majority opposition leadership of Edward R. Vrdolyak.

Except, …

I COULDN’T HELP but be astounded at the news coverage this week when House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, let it be known he was going to let the ideologue-minded segment of his caucus dominate this issue.

There was speculation early on that Boehner might try to keep federal government working without turning the whole affair into a politically partisan battle.

Envision a similar Obama/Boehner moment

Instead, Boehner is letting his caucus tell him what to do, and he is trying to make it appear as though he has little to no choice in the matter (although it should be noted that some of the members of Congress in his caucus have hinted they would be more than willing to dump Boehner as House speaker if he DIDN’T go along with them on this issue).

“The key to any leadership job is to listen,” Boehner told the New York Times.

WHAT A WIMP!?!!

The “Fast Eddie” of old would never have tried to sound apologetic for an action that was openly hostile to the interests of Mayor Harold Washington. Even if he disagreed with the actions of his allied aldermen, he’d try to make it appear as though it was the aldermen who were following his lead.

Heck, they probably would be following his lead. For it was Vrdolyak who came to the realization that he could get away with open defiance of Washington because of the number of people who didn’t want to perceive it as any kind of historic moment that Chicago had elected its first African-American as mayor.

Just as there are some amongst us who resent the idea that it’s at all special that Obama was chosen as president in the 2008 election cycle, and that their most hostile mood didn’t sway the true majority of the electorate in 2012.

I’M NOT ABOUT to predict how this particular Congressional mess will play out. It won’t surprise me if they manage to create a procedural mess that impacts the federal government operations in some form.

Although I suspect the only people who will look upon this approvingly will be the individuals who live in those isolated congressional districts that actually elect these yahoos and put them in positions where they can impact all of us!

A part of me wonders if actions like this will wind up backfiring upon the GOP desires for increased control of the federal government because it will make many of us appalled enough to want to have leadership that can contain their harmful desires.

OBAMA: Does he compare to Harold?

In short, we’ll get tired of these political tactics – just as we eventually tired of “Council Wars” and future elections ate away at the “29,” turning it into an aldermanic minority.

I EVEN WONDER if these people in Washington could have an impact upon our state government election cycle in 2014.

I know Republicans are counting on the fact that the apathy surrounding Pat Quinn at the top of the Democratic ticket will be a drag on all Dems. But will enough of these ideological acts in Washington be enough to scare the Democrat-leaning Chicago-area voters into turning out in such large numbers for state elections that GOP candidates wind up losing anyway?

Not that I expect anyone in Congress to engage in last-minute reflection upon their actions before they take a Friday vote. Because, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told the Washington Post, “Bipartisanship is a thing of the past. Now, all we do is ‘gotcha’ legislation.”

That’s why little gets done by our government. And history will wind up recording our current era as being especially touched upside the head by the stupid stick, just like we now remember much of the nonsense that occurred in the City Council some three decades ago.

  -30-

Libya resolution all about partisanship

Friday’s resolution by the House of Representatives concerning U.S. military activity in Libya was all-too-predictable.

OBAMA: Getting too much credit?



That resolution got a 257-156 vote from the GOP-led House, and it says President Barack Obama should have come to them first to get them to approve the use of military force to keep Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi from running more roughshod over his people than he usually does.

REMEMBER BACK A month ago when Obama was the star of the moment because Navy SEALS managed to take down Osama bin Laden? One of my initial thoughts was to wonder how long it would take before Obama’s ideological opposition tried to shift the focus from U.S. forces taking down bin Laden, to U.S. forces just a few days earlier failing to kill Gadhafi.

Although they did get his son. For some people – particularly those who are determined to find fault with Obama regardless of what he actually does – they’re going to complain constantly.

That is how I see Friday’s resolution.

The Obama opponents are now trying to make it seem that the president is a screw-up for the mess in Libya, and they want to try every unsubtle measure they can think of to plant that thought in our brains.

PERSONALLY, I DON’T think Obama deserved so much praise for what happened to bin Laden. It happened on his watch. But it’s not like Obama himself came up with and single-handedly led the battle plan that resulted in those SEALS getting into (and shooting) bin Laden in that Pakistani compound.

He may be commander-in-chief of the armed forces, but that means he got to say “yes” to a plan that was crafted by professional military types (which is why I think people who claim a president needs to have military service in his record are missing the point that he has experts to rely upon for such issues).

BOEHNER: Playing politics



Which means the worst possible scenario for the conservative ideologues would have been if Gadhafi had also perished. Because then the ideologues wouldn’t be able to complain.

Or they’d sound absolutely stupid for passing a resolution such as they did on Friday.

THAT RESOLUTION SAYS that Obama never “provide(d) Congress with a compelling rationale” for getting involved with the mess in Libya – which has been ongoing for about three months and doesn’t seen anywhere near to driving Gadhafi from power.

That resolution says Obama has 14 days to come up with a statement explaining why U.S. interests are benefitted by having our military involved in Libya.

Which means that some ideologue has visions of forcing Obama to justify himself, perhaps even apologizing for “screwing up” the operation. Of course, if he manages to win a second term in office, these same people will be the ones who change their focus from harassment to impeachment.

I would take the House criticism more seriously if not for the fact that I’m sure the overwhelming majority of Congress members fully support being involved in Libya and would desperately like to take down Gadhafi.

THE SAME HOUSE of Representatives that passed this goofy resolution voted against a measure that would have demanded the United States military pull out of Libya altogether.

And as House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said of Obama, “He has a chance to get this right. If he doesn’t, … we will make it right.”

Which really means that GOP ideologues are looking for a way to take credit for such operations for themselves. In their wildest dreams, they’d get all the credit for everything that goes right, and dump the blame on Obama for every mishap.

What makes the ideologues so determined to push for such measures? I think a part of it involves the various polls. They show Obama with a sizable number of people who do not approve of his job, but a larger number who do.

I NOTICED THE other day the Gallup Organization poll that showed Obama with a 53 percent approval rating, compared to only 39 percent disapproving.

Admittedly, that figure only lasted one day, and by Friday was down to 51 percent approving, with 42 percent disapproving. But that’s still quite a bit of people who think too highly of Obama and his job performance for the ideologues to feel comfortable. These are the people who live in their own little world, and think the rest of us should be forced to live in it with them.

Such figures go a long way toward showing their view of our society being out-of-whack with the bulk of us – who will spend the next year before trying to assess how successful the Obama presidency truly has been.

Our House of Representatives, which is supposed to represent the composition of our country, is showing that by taking on such goofy, nonsensical resolutions, they’re doing little more than falling down on the job.

  -30-