Headline should read “Obama can’t be bought”

December 11, 2008

Skin-deep coverage, backwards story

With the election over the MSM is looking for a juicy story to cash in on Obama’s popularity (even more).  So no wonder everyone including the AP is peddling this guilt-by-association narrative.  It’s so easy to sell to the headline-surfer:  Obama is from the same state as Blagojevich, a state with notoriously corrupt politicians, therefore they all must be corrupt, including Obama.

Dig a little deeper, and think a little more about it, and you arrive at the exact opposite conclusion:

First, as Cenk Uygur points out, the proof of Obama’s cleanliness is right in Blago’s own words:

Could Blagojevich have been any clearer: “They’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them.” Here is a man who clearly is not aware that he is being taped and man who clearly does not like Obama and so isn’t doing him any favors. In fact, he later calls Obama a “motherfucker.” And he clearly says on tape, “They’re not willing to give me anything.” [emphasis added since it apparently needs to be emphasized]

How much clearer did he have to be? Okay, you want more? Blagojevich then says, “Fuck him … For nothing? Fuck him.” Yet another reference to how Obama will give him nothing for the Senate seat. How can this possibly be interpreted as anything but a complete vindication of Barack Obama?

Second, it was Obama’s pressure and direct involvement that helped override Blago’s veto of ethics reform laws.  Laws which would have made it much harder to keep shaking everyone down after January 1 2009, and that effectively pushed him to overreach, and gave Fitzgerald license to tap away.

So if anything, Obama should be getting partial credit for taking Blagojevich down and cleaning up house. Print that AP!

2 Responses to “Headline should read “Obama can’t be bought””

  1. Still haven't thought of one Says:

    Are you seriously accusing AP of conservative bias? Yikes. Anyway, someone on CNBC actually mentioned a rumor that Fitzerald was pushed into action by Obama’s team upset at Blago’s auctioning, though they are denying any involvement. As for ‘guilt by association’, similar to any other form of profiling, it’s used because it’s often true. Not always, but often. Which means Obama will have to work to a higher standard, as if being black isn’t enough… Personally, I believe that the fact that he moved to national stage relatively early in his career means he’s likely avoided the corruption plague that seems to claim virtually every one in that state. One might even conjecture (and this is a pure speculation) that the reason he voted ‘present’ so many times was to attempt to navigate along all those ‘Blagos’ without either ruining his career or compromising his principles.

  2. maristi Says:

    Nah, no conservative bias. Just shoddy journalism.

    Good point on Obama’s short career in Illinois. It’s a rite of passage and at some point he would have had to play to stay in the game.

    As far as voting present, that’s true, but also just to minimize how much opponents in future races could use against him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: