This morning my cleaning lady E., expecting an affirmative response, asked me whether I was pleased by the appointment of a woman to the presidency of Harvard University (where I am a professor). A year ago her English was not good enough for such a question. College-educated in São Paolo, with what I believe was a major in government, she tells me a female president will be able to smooth over the troubles of the previous administration. Evidently, she perceives the ascendancy of Drew Gilpin Faust as a boost for her own chances of advancement in America. Apparently, Brazilian women gained fully equal legal rights only in 1988.
Just a day earlier I was reading Heather Mac Donald’s post at City Journal‘s Eye on the News, in which she remarks that “The feminist takeover of Harvard is imminent.” Her warning struck a nerve. When the Women’s Lib movement started up in America in the 1960′s, I predicted it would do as much damage here as Bolshevism had done in Russia. I felt almost vindicated in my fears when I watched the feminist culture of grievance at Harvard help to topple President Lawrence Summers (a controversy I wrote about in the pages of COMMENTARY)—who tried to pacify the aggrieved women by appointing none other than Drew Faust to head a Task Force on Women Faculty. That Task Force won a $50 million commitment to increase faculty “diversity efforts” at Harvard. In the past, the call for such “diversity” has been a code name for greater ideological conformism, since those appointed through it are expected to share the ideological premise that brought them the job.
My Portuguese is not up to E.’s English, so I cannot explain to her the difference between a woman and a Women’s Libber. She is still fighting the original feminist battle for equal rights and opportunity; I oppose the demand for preferential group advancement. But E. is keen, and she sees from my hesitation that I am not quite as inspired as she is by this appointment. We will watch events unfold at Harvard with unequal expectations.
Are you kidding, Reid and Obama love that Blago did this. It avoids the risk of a special election (which is a huge risk, since they have to have an election for Emanuel’s seat). Obama and Reid can fein outrage, but not enough to over turn Blago’s action.
Oh, I don’t know, Blago is certainly demonstrating much more audacity than the One. And he is putting the Senate in a bind if 99 whites reject one black. Change you can believe in.
With Blago’s actions (including appointing … surprise! an African-American) and Reid’s letter & bluff backed by all the Dem Senators not to seat a Blago appointment (BEFORE they presumably knew Blago would go ahead and appoint a black), we can all see just what a glorious post-racial era Obama has ushered in by getting himself elected POTUS.
Yeah, some change alright…
I would have expected Obama, of all people, to understand that the Governor of Illinois — regardless of what he thinks about the allegations against him — is not obliged to respect the delicate political sensitivities of Senate Democrats; rather, the governor’s obligation is to abide by the US Constitution and the constitution of his state.
So Senate Democrats discover they have a backbone and now want to rear up on their hind legs and feign outrage about Blago performing his legitimate duty and obligation to appoint a qualified, “untainted” pol — who happens to be black — to fill a Senate vacancy? Please.
Obama would’ve been better off not displaying his ignorance in his statement by remaining on his “no comment” Hawaiian tour.
Am I the only one who got a huge laugh out of this? I just started laughing when I heard the news. I think Blago just gave his fellow Democrats the finger. “Check. Your move.”
I’m no expert on the law, but it appears that he is fully in his right to name Burris, and the Senate doesn’t have a legal grounds not to seat him. So Burris it will be as the junior Senator from Illinois. And the sweet irony is that a lobbyist, those evil lobbyists that have been so thoroughly denounced by His Presidential-Electedness, is taking his Senate seat.
Now all we need is for the vote to seat Burris to be 57-8 Democrats voting no, and all the Republicans voting aye. Of course, the Republicans don’t have the cajones to do it….but it would be sweet.
“I was hoping for a change.” You can hope in one hand and $hit in the other–guess which one will change first?
Get used to it. The Anointed One isn’t even President yet, and he’s already betraying his nutroots supporters. Keep hoping that he’ll change things for ordinary Americans.
Hope has never been a substitute for confidence, anyway.
Larry,
maybe you can explain how Burris is a “qualified pol” who “happens” to be Black. At least you put “untainted” in quotation marks. Even you know Burris is dirty–not that you care.
I am still weeping of the thought of Stewart Smalley getting into the Senate.
Maybe that Russian Professor is right that the U.S. will break apart in 2010. Death of the Republic, without even the benefit of Julius Caesar and Augustus. We jumped ahead to the equivalent of Caligula sending his horse to the Senate, except the people of Minnesota sent a jackass.
Blago was quite savvy with this pick. Burris is the first black man ever to win a statewide election in Illinois. He’s a legend among black liberal voters, a pioneer. For Dems to dismiss him, to refuse to seat him, would be VERY hard on them, particularly in Chicago. Burris is a hard man to reject.
Lots of noise being made, but it will come to nothing and Burris will get the seat.
He’ll be hard to dislodge in 2010 because he brings a strong name ID among black Dems and a reputation unsullied by the dirt now being shaken down on everyone ELSE associated with Blago.
I only wonder how much $$ Burris managed to send Blago’s way.
))
“I was hoping for a change.”
Hahaha. Gotta lie better, Rubin – your “troubling” yet vague “unanswered questions” were all asked in hope of another Whitewater. Although, speaking of ethical psychopaths – will someone at Commentary step up to write a moralistic denunciation of the monstrous John Yoo?
Fuggedabadit. It’s Chinatown.
John V:
I share your mirth. This is pure fun!
To the long sigh:
Let is take a moment to celebrate the scholarship, patriotism and raw courage of Berkeley Professor John Yoo.
Blago’s decision was undoubtedly dictated by his criminal defense counsel — and it is a brilliant tactical move. First, by exercising his appointment authority and choosing an arguably ok person, Blago sets up the “no harm, no foul” defense, which may play well with a Chicago jury, particularly if it has a number of blacks on it. Second, he undercuts his lame duck status, which the prosecution would have used to further bury him. Third, this supports his “I was just looking to get the most for the people of Illinois” defense. Fourth, Burris will be the star defense witness — “Blago never asked for money or favors, he just wanted assurances from me that I would be independent and look out for the people.” Burris will be followed by a phalanx of black (and possibly other ethnic) Chicago politicians, who now have a rationale to get behind Blago. Fifth, and most delightfully, now the news focus shifts to Dirty Harry and the D hacks — it’s a loser for them, no matter what they do/don’t do. I originally thought that Blago had about a 40% chance of beating the rap — I’ll now change that to 60%.
Obama isn’t the only one who knows how to play Chicago politics.
Blago showed why he’s the guv. Nice move indeed.
If there were a opposition party in Illinois they might make some headway. But no such luck here.
I’m not sure that appointing someone “arguably ok” AFTER the attempt to elicit favors for appointing someone else is a defense.
zzzzzz: Yawn again.
Obama will be gone in 4 years. Can’t wait for 2012.
I certainly hope that Blago’s gambit fails, but I think it’s going to be very hard for Reid to exclude Burris and Obama won’t want to help him out any more than he did with today’s statement.
That statement is really very soft—the words of a man who doesn’t want to get more involved. He says basically that Burris is a fine man; the Senate should handle this; and Blago should resign and let someone else make an appointment.
There is nothing there to stop the likes of Bobby Rush in his tracks. Burris already did some TV interviews, making the case plausibly that he’s not tainted and Illinois needs two Senators. The next move will be an orchestrated effort to get Illinois Black ministers, aldermen, community leaders, rank and file Chicago Democrats to support Burris. While Rush is not going to sweep Capitol Hill before him, he’ll be able to announce the support of a series of Black members of the House (I can think of six off hand who will chime in). How the “narrative” surrounding this will develop is not yet clear. The Obama-struck media will want to cover for Obama, not Reid, so Reid may find that Obama doesn’t give him any stronger statements in the days ahead.
I’ve been commenting on this issue all along on my blog at:
http://thepurplecenter.blogspot.com/
Everyone is welcome to join in the discussion there.
I couldn’t help but comment when I read this- “Left unsaid is how the Illinois voters are to be represented in the meantime”. Funny. Don’t you see? This is how Illinois voters have been represented for years, only this time we get to see it out in the open.
Now we care??
A better question is “Do we care enough to stop Minnesota from following suit?”
RW
I’m guessing Bobby is NOT a “magic negro”?
“Can Blago’s designee be denied a seat?”
Many constitutional scholars say that the Senate cannot deny Mr. Burris the Senate seat, and he has a precedent as well – back in 1967, a Congressman was denied a seat by the House and the Courts ruled that that was unconstitutional.
lllllllllllll
obamaalox
macrocephalic
wwwwwwwwwwwww