Friday, August 22, 2008
Another good commentary on Obama and the state of the race from Gerard Baker
From the guy who brought us one of the finest parodies of Obama-mania, again, courtesy of the London Times.
More reaction on the governor breaking the law
What Western Word said.
LITW comments on the above "crowing" post. (Did Jay read the same post that everyone else did? Or do crows sound different in Missoula than they do in Billings?) A point that should be clarified is that Jay read the MH post to mean that we believe the governor knew in advance that he was breaking the law. That would be a serious charge, and it is not at all what was meant.
A review of MH coverage of this imbroglio will reveal that our position from the beginning was that this was probably an oversight on the part of the governor, and not intentional:
...it seems as though this is probably the result of carelessness on the governor’s part, or on the part of one of his state employees. It probably didn’t even cross anyone’s mind that the governor couldn’t just do what he wanted to — which is a problem in and of itself.
Jay also comments on the very real phenomenon of "weird and obsessive hate" on the part of some Republican stalwarts vis a vis the governor. He seems to realize that it has something to do with the governor's talent for sticking his finger in the collective eye of the Republican Party -- but hey, this is politics, so there is no need to get bent out of shape over that sort of thing.
Anyway, we would note that in our next post on this matter, we specifically criticized the tendency to overblown rhetoric and over-reaction when it comes to the GOP talking about the governor. When the Montana GOP accused the governor of "arrogant, heavy-handed tactics" and implied an intentional breaking of the law, we had this to say:
There is a difference between intentionally arrogant actions in which one knowingly flouts the law and the kind of passive arrogance that is shown by not bothering to think about the fact that there might be rules to be followed. Montanans will understand the difference, and if it is clear that the governor was just being careless, then overstating the case isn't going to help the overall GOP message about the governor and the unsuitability of his style of governance.
Jay still would likely think that this was too harsh, but the point is that while MH still takes a dim view of carelessness or, at worst, "passive arrogance" in the apparent failure of the governor's office in neglecting to notice that maybe Dem. Sen. Joe Tropila's law might just apply to the governor, at no point did we take the view that the governor intentionally set out to break the law.
After it had been drawn to the governor's attention, however, it should have been a no-brainer, upon even the briefest reflection, for the governor and his staff to know they had broken the intent of the law as Sen. Tropila drafted it, even if it was broken unintentionally. What MH criticizes -- unapologetically -- is the inexplicable unwillingness on the part of the governor, after having time to think about it and to review the discussion that surrounded Tropila's legislation, to say "I made a mistake, you're right, my bad, won't happen again."
While the LITW commentary is reasonably thoughtful, the Lamnidae commentary was simply silly, implying that the dastardly Erik Iverson's intent in bringing this complaint forward was to bring Montana economic development grinding to a halt. It couldn't have had anything whatsoever to do with the governor using public employees and state-owned equipment to put out an ad that contained his re-election campaign slogan? Naw...
Seriously, we Republicans should be flattered that Lamnidae credits us with thinking on such a big-picture scale: "Hm, without the governor's PSA's, Montana's economy will come to a standstill, people's bank accounts will empty, they'll blame the governor, Roy Brown will be elected!" (Cue evil, haunting laughter.)
Following Lamnidae's argumentation, such as it is, it is apparently OK to break state law whenever it seems like it would be a good idea to do so. (Or is it only that Democrats can break the law if Democrats think it is a good idea -- it is easy to get confused.) If Lamnidae has a problem with the existence of this law, the complaint should be taken to the guy who drafted it (a Democrat,) the legislature that passed it (controlled by Democrats,) and the guy who signed it into law (also a Democrat.)
And that law can be overturned by any future legislature. But until then, good idea or bad, it is the law that everyone has to adhere to.
Sec. State Brad Johnson's office has done plenty of PSA's, but hasn't used his name, voice or face. If Johnson is bright enough to figure out how to get his job done within the law, surely the governor -- widely acclaimed by his fans to be one of the most brilliant politicians in Montana history -- should be able to manage to figure out how to promote Montana in spite of being hamstrung by what must seem like an eternity of an 8 month blackout on taxpayer funded ads.
LITW comments on the above "crowing" post. (Did Jay read the same post that everyone else did? Or do crows sound different in Missoula than they do in Billings?) A point that should be clarified is that Jay read the MH post to mean that we believe the governor knew in advance that he was breaking the law. That would be a serious charge, and it is not at all what was meant.
A review of MH coverage of this imbroglio will reveal that our position from the beginning was that this was probably an oversight on the part of the governor, and not intentional:
...it seems as though this is probably the result of carelessness on the governor’s part, or on the part of one of his state employees. It probably didn’t even cross anyone’s mind that the governor couldn’t just do what he wanted to — which is a problem in and of itself.
Jay also comments on the very real phenomenon of "weird and obsessive hate" on the part of some Republican stalwarts vis a vis the governor. He seems to realize that it has something to do with the governor's talent for sticking his finger in the collective eye of the Republican Party -- but hey, this is politics, so there is no need to get bent out of shape over that sort of thing.
Anyway, we would note that in our next post on this matter, we specifically criticized the tendency to overblown rhetoric and over-reaction when it comes to the GOP talking about the governor. When the Montana GOP accused the governor of "arrogant, heavy-handed tactics" and implied an intentional breaking of the law, we had this to say:
There is a difference between intentionally arrogant actions in which one knowingly flouts the law and the kind of passive arrogance that is shown by not bothering to think about the fact that there might be rules to be followed. Montanans will understand the difference, and if it is clear that the governor was just being careless, then overstating the case isn't going to help the overall GOP message about the governor and the unsuitability of his style of governance.
Jay still would likely think that this was too harsh, but the point is that while MH still takes a dim view of carelessness or, at worst, "passive arrogance" in the apparent failure of the governor's office in neglecting to notice that maybe Dem. Sen. Joe Tropila's law might just apply to the governor, at no point did we take the view that the governor intentionally set out to break the law.
After it had been drawn to the governor's attention, however, it should have been a no-brainer, upon even the briefest reflection, for the governor and his staff to know they had broken the intent of the law as Sen. Tropila drafted it, even if it was broken unintentionally. What MH criticizes -- unapologetically -- is the inexplicable unwillingness on the part of the governor, after having time to think about it and to review the discussion that surrounded Tropila's legislation, to say "I made a mistake, you're right, my bad, won't happen again."
While the LITW commentary is reasonably thoughtful, the Lamnidae commentary was simply silly, implying that the dastardly Erik Iverson's intent in bringing this complaint forward was to bring Montana economic development grinding to a halt. It couldn't have had anything whatsoever to do with the governor using public employees and state-owned equipment to put out an ad that contained his re-election campaign slogan? Naw...
Seriously, we Republicans should be flattered that Lamnidae credits us with thinking on such a big-picture scale: "Hm, without the governor's PSA's, Montana's economy will come to a standstill, people's bank accounts will empty, they'll blame the governor, Roy Brown will be elected!" (Cue evil, haunting laughter.)
Following Lamnidae's argumentation, such as it is, it is apparently OK to break state law whenever it seems like it would be a good idea to do so. (Or is it only that Democrats can break the law if Democrats think it is a good idea -- it is easy to get confused.) If Lamnidae has a problem with the existence of this law, the complaint should be taken to the guy who drafted it (a Democrat,) the legislature that passed it (controlled by Democrats,) and the guy who signed it into law (also a Democrat.)
And that law can be overturned by any future legislature. But until then, good idea or bad, it is the law that everyone has to adhere to.
Sec. State Brad Johnson's office has done plenty of PSA's, but hasn't used his name, voice or face. If Johnson is bright enough to figure out how to get his job done within the law, surely the governor -- widely acclaimed by his fans to be one of the most brilliant politicians in Montana history -- should be able to manage to figure out how to promote Montana in spite of being hamstrung by what must seem like an eternity of an 8 month blackout on taxpayer funded ads.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)