With all due respect to some of my fellow warriors on the right, Sen. John McCain is correct that it is out-of-line to use "Barrack Hussein Obama." Karl Rove today made a convincing case that using Sen. Obama's middle name will be more likely to hurt Republicans than help us. He did not seem amused at the prospect, and rightly so.
We agree with Sen. McCain's fundamental point, made to reporters after the event in question: part of treating one's opponents with respect is to use their proper titles and the names they themselves use. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama are duly elected members of the U.S. Senate, and their official positions are worthy of respect, even if their policy positions are just plain wrong most of the time. While there are doubtless plenty of exceptions in the archives of Montana Headlines, we try to make a habit of using the proper titles of elected officials and to use the names that they use for themselves.
For instance, in the recent Republican nomination battle, MH never hid the opinion that Gov. Mitt Romney's record pointed towards him being a Massachusetts Republican who was at least as liberal as Mayor Giuliani and more liberal than Sen. McCain or Gov. Huckabee. Others who disliked Romney (and there are lots of them, found amongst the supporters of virtually every other GOP presidential candidate) often referred to him as "Willard Romney," presumably to make him seem like more of a patrician north-eastern establishment Republican or to make it seem like he used "Mitt" in a (spectacularly unsuccessful) attempt to seem more like a "regular guy." But as far as we were concerned, if the guy calls himself "Mitt" -- that's his name.
Second, there is a serious point to be made regarding Sen. Obama and Islam, if one has the courage to make it. But we've not seen anyone of stature who is willing to put it on the line and make a case along these lines:
If Sen. Obama's father and paternal grandparents were Muslim, will he have a tendency to have enough sympathy for Muslim interests (when they compete with ours) to make him less than objective? And given that our current war pits us against Muslim extremists, is this relevant?
And should the combination of this plus the allegedly anti-Semitic statements of his pastor and some of his supporters make backers of Israel worried? And did anyone else notice that in his recent debate with Clinton, he said that Israel was "one of our most important allies in the region" -- even though conventional foreign policy wisdom in the U.S. has long been that Israel is the most important ally we have in the region, period? Does Sen. Obama disagree with this, and if so, why?
The overall point is not a straight-forward one at all -- and we're not at all convinced that it could be made successfully. After all, it could just as easily be claimed that Sen. Obama's Muslim familial background would give him some insight into Islam that could make him more effective in combating Muslim terrorists, not less.
There is some psychology worth exploring here, especially with a candidate like Sen. Obama who responds to claims that he doesn't have enough foreign policy experience by saying that it is the judgment that he will exercise that is important, not the presence of a track record. We are told that we can trust his judgment -- but of course that is for voters to decide, and given what is at stake and how little we know about Sen. Obama, many voters are going to use every piece of information that they have at their disposal in making that decision, including deciding whether they care that he has Muslim relatives, when for the foreseeable future our military opponents will be Muslim.
But we won't have that discussion as long as Sen. Obama's opponents play silly name games. Until then, we'll assume that those who make a habit of using "Hussein" in referring to Sen. Obama are doing so precisely because it conveys an implication of dual loyalties without actually having to come right out and make the case that perhaps Sen. Obama may be predisposed to go easy on enemy combatants who happen to be Muslim. And we'll assume that they don't want to make that case because they don't believe that they can do so successfully -- and maybe because they themselves don't believe it to be true.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Tussing, Molnar and the PSC race, Part II
When Montana Headlines decided to feature the entry of Billings Mayor Ron Tussing into the PSC District 2 race, it was without any inkling of the vitriol that the post would arouse from passionate haters of PSC Commissioner Brad Molnar. Read the comments for entertainment -- and, taken with a grain of salt, perhaps a little enlightenment.
We had no idea what a fan club Molnar had developed over the years. We're still rooting for the other guy in the Democratic primary -- but we have to admit that the PSC race would hardly be a sleepy one with Molnar and Tussing (and their supporters and detractors) facing off.
David Crisp over at Billings Blog puts it quite nicely:
If Tussing survives the primary, that could set up a highly entertaining race in the general election between Tussing and Brad Molnar: two straight-spoken, smart guys with acid senses of humor and probably plenty to disagree about.
This is the sort of race that makes politics a spectator sport. Bring on the lions.
Montana Headlines is hardly unaware of Molnar's sometimes pugnacious approach to political discourse (although Gazette readers are likely unaware of the life that he brings to PSC meetings, given the generally soporific reportage of the meetings.) Still, unless a more qualified Republican enters the race to challenge Molnar, we suspect we will remain unapologetic in our support for Molnar -- especially if the choice on the other side of the ballot is someone whose temperament is hardly more phlegmatic, and whose knowledge of the issues involved is doubtless inferior.
Agree with Molnar on his policy positions or not, even his detractors have to admit that he has a passion for the details of utilities and how the PSC's work affects the average person. Somehow we have trouble seeing Ron Tussing sharing this particular passion, but we are prepared to be proven wrong in that suspicion.
Does Tussing have a passion for political campaigning and for being in the news? Yes. But it takes more than that to be a good PSC Commissioner.
Tussing should have to convince the voting public that he will be a better commissioner than Molnar. He will have to do better than to drag out the same old canards about deregulation in the 1990's. That dog won't hunt, any more than Republicans can hope to succeed these days in elections just by labeling their opponents as pinko-commie-gun-grabbing-liberals for the 15th consecutive election.
And Molnar-bashers might have some hope in negatively highlighting Molnar's colorful personality if he runs against a conventional politician or against an apparently solid citizen like electrician Tom Curry (Tussings primary opponent.)
But he is running against Mayor Ron Tussing, an amateur musician who penned these delightful and statemanlike lyrics (preserved for posterity in the transcripts of the $1.3 million lawsuit we mentioned in our last post) about the Billings City Manager back when he held the august title of Chief of Police for Billings:
Take this job and shove it, you freaking little creep.
I think you're totally clueless and your bullshit is too deep.
We'll see your "cell-phone-gate" scandal, and raise you every time. Note to Molnar-bashers: start campaigning for Curry, soon, if you want to go down that road.
Some legitimate points were raised in the comments section of our last post: does Molnar miss more PSC meetings than other commissioners? We'd like to know that, and so, we suspect, would voters. Perhaps the Gazette reporting will enlighten us on that.
A commenter claims that Molnar has been convicted of assault and battery (see our response to that in our previous post) -- is this true, and did it happen while he was commissioner, and if it happened before he was commissioner, why wasn't it brought out in the press coverage of the last PSC race if it is relevant to his holding the position? We certainly had no trouble finding press coverage of Tussing shoving someone who annoyed him -- so Molnar detractors should have no problem bringing forth supporting documentation, especially if, as the commenter claims, Molnar was convicted.
Would Brad Molnar's lawsuit against the PSC over deregulation have helped ratepayers had it been successful? (No commenter asked this particular question -- we're asking it because it bears a direct relation to whether that lawsuit was, as claimed by a commenter, frivolous.) This bears exploration in the campaign.
And so forth. A PSC commissioner probably affects the day-to-day life of the average Montanan more than do many state-wide office holders. Who serves on the commission is important, and the issues that PSC commissioners face are ones that we should be at least as conversant with as we are about what the Secretary of State or AG does.
Let's hope that this will be an enlightening PSC campaign. Part of our disappointment at Tussing's entry into the race was that a race between Molnar and Democrat Tom Curry could have centered on policy differences rather than on explosive personalities. But that's a citizen's perspective. From a punditry perspective, Molnar vs. Tussing would be a dream: sort of a to-the-death political cage match.
But who knows, maybe the race will draw the kind of attention that paradoxically gets people to talking about PSC issues? Let's hope so.
We had no idea what a fan club Molnar had developed over the years. We're still rooting for the other guy in the Democratic primary -- but we have to admit that the PSC race would hardly be a sleepy one with Molnar and Tussing (and their supporters and detractors) facing off.
David Crisp over at Billings Blog puts it quite nicely:
If Tussing survives the primary, that could set up a highly entertaining race in the general election between Tussing and Brad Molnar: two straight-spoken, smart guys with acid senses of humor and probably plenty to disagree about.
This is the sort of race that makes politics a spectator sport. Bring on the lions.
Montana Headlines is hardly unaware of Molnar's sometimes pugnacious approach to political discourse (although Gazette readers are likely unaware of the life that he brings to PSC meetings, given the generally soporific reportage of the meetings.) Still, unless a more qualified Republican enters the race to challenge Molnar, we suspect we will remain unapologetic in our support for Molnar -- especially if the choice on the other side of the ballot is someone whose temperament is hardly more phlegmatic, and whose knowledge of the issues involved is doubtless inferior.
Agree with Molnar on his policy positions or not, even his detractors have to admit that he has a passion for the details of utilities and how the PSC's work affects the average person. Somehow we have trouble seeing Ron Tussing sharing this particular passion, but we are prepared to be proven wrong in that suspicion.
Does Tussing have a passion for political campaigning and for being in the news? Yes. But it takes more than that to be a good PSC Commissioner.
Tussing should have to convince the voting public that he will be a better commissioner than Molnar. He will have to do better than to drag out the same old canards about deregulation in the 1990's. That dog won't hunt, any more than Republicans can hope to succeed these days in elections just by labeling their opponents as pinko-commie-gun-grabbing-liberals for the 15th consecutive election.
And Molnar-bashers might have some hope in negatively highlighting Molnar's colorful personality if he runs against a conventional politician or against an apparently solid citizen like electrician Tom Curry (Tussings primary opponent.)
But he is running against Mayor Ron Tussing, an amateur musician who penned these delightful and statemanlike lyrics (preserved for posterity in the transcripts of the $1.3 million lawsuit we mentioned in our last post) about the Billings City Manager back when he held the august title of Chief of Police for Billings:
Take this job and shove it, you freaking little creep.
I think you're totally clueless and your bullshit is too deep.
We'll see your "cell-phone-gate" scandal, and raise you every time. Note to Molnar-bashers: start campaigning for Curry, soon, if you want to go down that road.
Some legitimate points were raised in the comments section of our last post: does Molnar miss more PSC meetings than other commissioners? We'd like to know that, and so, we suspect, would voters. Perhaps the Gazette reporting will enlighten us on that.
A commenter claims that Molnar has been convicted of assault and battery (see our response to that in our previous post) -- is this true, and did it happen while he was commissioner, and if it happened before he was commissioner, why wasn't it brought out in the press coverage of the last PSC race if it is relevant to his holding the position? We certainly had no trouble finding press coverage of Tussing shoving someone who annoyed him -- so Molnar detractors should have no problem bringing forth supporting documentation, especially if, as the commenter claims, Molnar was convicted.
Would Brad Molnar's lawsuit against the PSC over deregulation have helped ratepayers had it been successful? (No commenter asked this particular question -- we're asking it because it bears a direct relation to whether that lawsuit was, as claimed by a commenter, frivolous.) This bears exploration in the campaign.
And so forth. A PSC commissioner probably affects the day-to-day life of the average Montanan more than do many state-wide office holders. Who serves on the commission is important, and the issues that PSC commissioners face are ones that we should be at least as conversant with as we are about what the Secretary of State or AG does.
Let's hope that this will be an enlightening PSC campaign. Part of our disappointment at Tussing's entry into the race was that a race between Molnar and Democrat Tom Curry could have centered on policy differences rather than on explosive personalities. But that's a citizen's perspective. From a punditry perspective, Molnar vs. Tussing would be a dream: sort of a to-the-death political cage match.
But who knows, maybe the race will draw the kind of attention that paradoxically gets people to talking about PSC issues? Let's hope so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)