What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

This isn't a hit on Obama, it's a hit on Bill Plaschke, but there's not really anywhere else to put it, so it goes here because it's somewhat topical.



Putting aside the whole "name one player from the White Sox" or the "Cominsky Field" aspect, I've got major beef with the idea that Obama's some kind of sports fan "unlike any other president."

I mean, you have to go all the way back to... um... 2008 to find a President who was a confirmed sports fan. I know it's considered bad form these days to praise GWB on... anything, but when it comes to a relatively unimportant part of being President - being a sports fan - it's hard to top a guy who, you know, owned the Texas Rangers. I know plenty of Democrats who thought (and think) that the country AND Major League Baseball would have been better off if he'd become MLB Commissioner instead of Bud Selig.

But then again, Bill Plaschke's kind of a moron. Anyone who's ever seen him on ATH can confirm.

Even though we agree on the main point (Plaschke), a few points need to be made.

1. The Rangers don't look like they've been owned by a fan in a long, long time.
2. Jeremy Jacobs owns the Bruins, and he freaking hates them.
3. John Henry is lead owner of the Red Sox (right?) Can anyone name anything that he seems to be a fan of? Anything at all? That man wouldn't be excited to play mixed doubles with Ana Ivanovic.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

1. The Rangers don't look like they've been owned by a fan in a long, long time.
2. Jeremy Jacobs owns the Bruins, and he freaking hates them.
3. John Henry is lead owner of the Red Sox (right?) Can anyone name anything that he seems to be a fan of? Anything at all? That man wouldn't be excited to play mixed doubles with Ana Ivanovic.

Those all seem to be the same point, really: owners aren't necessarily fans.

It's been "a long, long time" since Bush owned the Rangers (he sold them in 1998), so this piece from ESPN ten years ago might answer this.

http://static.espn.go.com/mlb/bush/wednesday.html

Then managing general partner of the Texas Rangers, Bush would kick his cowboy boots up on the railing, spit out the husks of the sunflower seeds and shoot the bull under starlit summer skies with his guest of the night, sometimes a Rush Limbaugh or a Muhammad Ali, other times his wife and daughters or some local corporate honcho.

He would be there for almost every home game, usually until the last out, yelling encouragement to a Julio Franco at the plate, exchanging howdys with fellow Texans who wandered down the aisle to shake his hand, signing his own special baseball card for the kids and their charmed parents, too.

And here's one that indicates he might have been a better commissioner than Selig:

Bush valued tradition and loyalty.

At Major League Baseball meetings, he fought lonely, losing battles against an expanded playoffs and interleague play, arguing that one of baseball's greatest strengths is a fan's ability to reasonably compare the Mark McGwires of today with the Babe Ruths of yesteryear. And, in 1992 he gave an impassioned, losing plea to keep Fay Vincent, a family friend who spent a summer with the Bushes in West Texas when George W. was a boy, on as commissioner.

But at least we can agree on Bill Plaschke being braindead.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Those all seem to be the same point, really: owners aren't necessarily fans.

It's been "a long, long time" since Bush owned the Rangers (he sold them in 1998), so this piece from ESPN ten years ago might answer this.

http://static.espn.go.com/mlb/bush/wednesday.html



And here's one that indicates he might have been a better commissioner than Selig:



But at least we can agree on Bill Plaschke being braindead.

We're not disagreeing at all. I can pretend, if you think it looks bad. :D

I was just pointing out that if Bush was a fan, it had less to do with him buying a small fraction of the team and more to do with him, well, being a fan.

Guys like Steinbrenner are the exceptions to the rule. A lot of owners measure success mainly on the balance sheet.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Not surprising that the biggest aristocrat (big being the level of psuedo-aristocracy, not physical size - we all know who the "biggest aristocrat" is) prefers an aristocratic president.

The working class hero card. Not often played by the right, but highly enjoyable when attempted.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

The working class hero card. Not often played by the right, but highly enjoyable when attempted.

As opposed to when the left repeatedly plays it, much to my never ending humor.

Vote for us! We'll make you slaves to the government, but it's OK, because we're NICE masters!
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Similarly, if a politician wants to line up a job for some crony once in awhile, so be it.
The problem is that the Obama administration apparently offered a job to somebody opposing one of their picks in a primary so that he could run unopposed. Isn't that illegal?

From this: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=158617 I found this:

The Section 600 statute states:

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.


I'll answer my own question. Yes, it does amount to an illegal act. If the job offer was in fact made by the Obama administration, whoever made the offer needs to be prosecuted for it. If Obama signed off on the move to offer the candidate a job, he could be in serious trouble.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

The Section 600 statute states:

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Every ambassadorship in American history has been illegal.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Ooh, fun. Maybe another impeachment.

No, probably not. No sex involved this time. Damm it.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

The problem is that the Obama administration apparently offered a job to somebody opposing one of their picks in a primary so that he could run unopposed. Isn't that illegal?

From this: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=158617 I found this:

The Section 600 statute states:

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.


I'll answer my own question. Yes, it does amount to an illegal act. If the job offer was in fact made by the Obama administration, whoever made the offer needs to be prosecuted for it. If Obama signed off on the move to offer the candidate a job, he could be in serious trouble.

So, stepping into the realm of fantasy here...on "The West Wing" when Bartlet orchestrated "promotion" of the FEC guy to become the Ambassador to the Confederated States of Micronesia, he should have been prosecuted? As would Toby Ziegler, Leo McGarry and the Republican guy with the huge staff that followed him everywhere?

In the realm of reality, should presidents be prosecuted for naming Ambassadors when the people they pick are clearly "political" appointees and they are only giving them a job to say "thank you for your support" on the campaign trail? What about political patronage? Should George W. Bush have kept John Podesta as CoS instead of hiring Andrew Card; or Obama kept Josh Bolten?

It's illegal to say "I'm giving you this job so you don't run." It's not illegal to say, "I'm giving you this job if you're interested" and it is interpreted by the recipient or a third-party to mean "as long as you don't run."

Now, if someone in the Administration said the former, they should be fired for incompetence. If they said the latter and he understood it to mean something else, that's his problem.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Every ambassadorship in American history has been illegal.

SOP; point a finger somewhere, anywhere, but here and now. Are we going to impeach Ben Franklin? There's a big difference in applicability of the law from rumored past wrongdoing to a sitting Chicago thug... that is, if the overt illegal act can be proven, of which I have high doubts.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Now, if someone in the Administration said the former, they should be fired for incompetence. If they said the latter and he understood it to mean something else, that's his problem.

Right, that's the thing though. Either someone in the executive branch committed a crime, or as you point out, Sestak misunderstood. Which means that the prospective Senator from Pennsylvania is a dolt. Which I'm not sure is necessarily better.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

Now, if someone in the Administration said the former, they should be fired for incompetence. If they said the latter and he understood it to mean something else, that's his problem.
From the article: For months, Sestak has repeatedly said without equivocation that the White House illegally offered him a federal job in exchange for dropping out of the race.

I don't see why a Democrat would falsely claim his own administration is breaking the law to move him out of the way. That sort of thing could kill a political career. I think there's something to this story, but until it is thoroughly investigated (or Sestak himself opens up and says who made the offer and what was said to him), we may never know.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

SOP; point a finger somewhere, anywhere, but here and now. Are we going to impeach Ben Franklin? There's a big difference in applicability of the law from rumored past wrongdoing to a sitting Chicago thug... that is, if the overt illegal act can be proven, of which I have high doubts.

No obfuscation here. Kepler's exactly right. It's almost like asking someone to name an example of a rainstorm that was wet. It's so common, nobody even pays attention to it any more.
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

The problem is that the Obama administration apparently offered a job to somebody opposing one of their picks in a primary so that he could run unopposed. Isn't that illegal?

From this: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=158617 I found this:

The Section 600 statute states:

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.


I'll answer my own question. Yes, it does amount to an illegal act. If the job offer was in fact made by the Obama administration, whoever made the offer needs to be prosecuted for it. If Obama signed off on the move to offer the candidate a job, he could be in serious trouble.


I LOVE the objectivity of the source:

"If a Democratic member of Congress is to be believed, there's someone in the Obama administration who has committed a crime – and if the president knew about it, analysts say it could be grounds for impeachment.

"This scandal could be enormous," said Dick Morris, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, on the Fox News Sean Hannity show last night. "It's Valerie Plame only 10 times bigger, because it's illegal and Joe Sestak is either lying or the White House committed a crime.

"Obviously, the offer of a significant job in the White House could not be made unless it was by Rahm Emanuel or cleared with Rahm Emanuel," he said. If the job offer was high enough that it also had Obama's apppoval, "that is a high crime and misdemeanor."

"In other words, an impeachable offense?" Hannity asked.

Aaron Klein's exposé of Barack Obama's notorious connections with extremists and America-haters is scorching the best-seller lists. Order your autographed copy of "The Manchurian President" today.

"Absolutely," said Morris. "

Uhhh, yeah. I haven't seen anything this funny since you guys were posting Obama's Kenyan birth certificate....after it had already been exposed as a fake. :D

I don't know what Sestak's motivations are for bringing this up after he won the primary (I can maybe see bringing it up beforehand). However, the bottom line is he can interpret people's motivations all day. That's not a crime. Neither is someone from the admin telling him "I know you have plans to run against Specter but we also have this job that you'd be perfect for if you decide not too." Of course everybody knows what's going on, but there's nothing illegal about it. Why we'd want to spend a hundred million dollars on an investigation, only to then find out every member of Congress has also engaged in a similar type of situation sometime over the course of their political careers is beyond me.

But, please don't stop those calls for an impeachment hearing. :p
 
Re: Obama XII: The shine is off the glass slipper

From the article: For months, Sestak has repeatedly said without equivocation that the White House illegally offered him a federal job in exchange for dropping out of the race.

I don't see why a Democrat would falsely claim his own administration is breaking the law to move him out of the way. That sort of thing could kill a political career. I think there's something to this story, but until it is thoroughly investigated (or Sestak himself opens up and says who made the offer and what was said to him), we may never know.

1. Never, ever, underestimate the ability of a Democrat to torpedo his or her career. That's just basic American politics. :D

2. Sestak is ****ed that the Dem establishment tried to defeat him. He's not lacking in motive.

Neither of which exonerate anybody. A little more sunlight *would* be a good thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top