quality headline.

Whatever. He's just trying to draw attention away from his obvious and illegal involvement with blagowhatsits!

Whew, an Obama appointment the "Independents" won't have to complain about.

Mordant: Whew, an Obama appointment the "Independents" won't have to complain about.

You might think so, but this could be Obama's sleaziest appointment, and may raise more legitimate questions than the rest of his appointments combined.

Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

Welcome to the Illinois Combine, America.

Dupa: You might think so, but this could be Obama's sleaziest appointment, and may raise more legitimate questions than the rest of his appointments combined.

Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

Welcome to the Illinois Combine, America.

Your tinfoil hat's crooked. Leans really far to the right.

Dupa: Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

I saw Radley Balko making the case that Fitzgerald should be asked to reclaim his old Senate seat. I'm not really familiar enough with him to comment either way, but Balko makes a good argument. And since it's only for two years, and the Republicans can filibuster regardless, the Dems wouldn't be giving up much.

cameroncrazy1984: Dupa: You might think so, but this could be Obama's sleaziest appointment, and may raise more legitimate questions than the rest of his appointments combined.

Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

Welcome to the Illinois Combine, America.

Your tinfoil hat's crooked. Leans really far to the right.

What he was saying isn't anywhere near tinfoil hat territory, but I do think it's unlikely that LaHood intended the seat to go to Obama at the time. That doesn't necessarily mean that his role in pushing out Fitzgerald- and/or any other number of favors traded while they were both on the Illinois delegation- didn't play a role in his selection. It's certainly not beyond the realm of plausibility in the same way 9/11 Troofers or Roswell aficionados are.

cameroncrazy1984: Dupa: You might think so, but this could be Obama's sleaziest appointment, and may raise more legitimate questions than the rest of his appointments combined.

Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

Welcome to the Illinois Combine, America.

Your tinfoil hat's crooked. Leans really far to the right.

I'm not claiming that there was some big conspiracy going on, but what I laid out is absolutley the way things have gone. For what it is worth, Peter Fitzgerald was too socially conservative for my taste, but he was HONEST, and he worked to root out corruption in my state.

In Illinois politics it isn't so much what party you belong to, it's more important that you get invited to the party.

When I think about Illinois and transportation I think:

1. Corruption
2. Incompetently run toll authorities
3. Speed cameras

but this particular man might not be at fault for any of those.

Churchill2004: Dupa: Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

I saw Radley Balko making the case that Fitzgerald should be asked to reclaim his old Senate seat. I'm not really familiar enough with him to comment either way, but Balko makes a good argument. And since it's only for two years, and the Republicans can filibuster regardless, the Dems wouldn't be giving up much.

Thanks for the Reason link. That story sums it all up rather nicely.

ZAZ: When I think about Illinois and transportation I think:

1. Corruption
2. Incompetently run toll authorities
3. Speed cameras

but this particular man might not be at fault for any of those.

I doubt he's overmuch responsible for the state's transportation authorities as a US Congressman, but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

/changetastic!

Mordant: Whew, an Obama appointment the "Independents" won't have to complain about will have to rationalize with extreme prejudice.

They have not exactly been honest about the rest of the appointments. They hate that they like a lot of the appointments.

Churchill2004: ZAZ: When I think about Illinois and transportation I think:

1. Corruption
2. Incompetently run toll authorities
3. Speed cameras

but this particular man might not be at fault for any of those.

I doubt he's overmuch responsible for the state's transportation authorities as a US Congressman, but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

/changetastic!

Exhibit #1

Churchill2004: ... but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

TFA: LaHood is well-respected by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Sounds about right.

ZAZ: When I think about Illinois and transportation I think:

1. Corruption
2. Incompetently run toll authorities
3. Speed cameras

but this particular man might not be at fault for any of those.

4. delays at O'Hare

Horrible choice.

The scoop: Peoria Chronicle (new window)

Comrade438: Churchill2004: ... but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

TFA: LaHood is well-respected by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Sounds about right.

I agree, probably the worst thing that could be said about someone is that they other Congresscritters think highly of them.

Sabyen91: Exhibit #1

Conflating nonsense fringe arguments with any criticism is the same intellectually dishonest bullshiat we saw from the Republicans the past eight years. "Obama appointed someone who is guilty of the same politics-as-usual Obama supposedly opposes" is not the same as "Barack HUSSEIN Obama can't be President because he ain't a real 'Murican", any more than George Soros is Howard Dean. Grouping everyone who disagrees with you into a single strawman monolithic bloc is childish and intellectually lazy, and it's something it's something that's depressingly common among partisans on both sides.

mahkno: Horrible choice.

The scoop: Peoria Chronicle (new window)

I see the article making claims but stating nothing. They don't explain why Amtrak would have been good for Peoria, they don't say why the rail system was more beneficial than the upgrade for I-74. The article really doesn't say much.

/Don't know much about him. Don't know if I like the choice.
//Article was weak

Churchill2004: Comrade438: Churchill2004: ... but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

TFA: LaHood is well-respected by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Sounds about right.

I agree, probably the worst thing that could be said about someone is that they other Congresscritters think highly of them.

Sabyen91: Exhibit #1

Conflating nonsense fringe arguments with any criticism is the same intellectually dishonest bullshiat we saw from the Republicans the past eight years. "Obama appointed someone who is guilty of the same politics-as-usual Obama supposedly opposes" is not the same as "Barack HUSSEIN Obama can't be President because he ain't a real 'Murican", any more than George Soros is Howard Dean. Grouping everyone who disagrees with you into a single strawman monolithic bloc is childish and intellectually lazy, and it's something it's something that's depressingly common among partisans on both sides.

You make a silly argument you get a silly answer.

Churchill2004: ZAZ: When I think about Illinois and transportation I think:

1. Corruption
2. Incompetently run toll authorities
3. Speed cameras

but this particular man might not be at fault for any of those.

I doubt he's overmuch responsible for the state's transportation authorities as a US Congressman, but he does unrepentantly typify some of the worst things about Congress.

/changetastic!

You realize most the stuff in that link makes him a GOOD congressman for IL under the system, right?

I'm just saying anybody who doesn't play that game isn't bring home the money.

chemical_angel: Whatever. He's just trying to draw attention away from his obvious and illegal involvement with blagowhatsits!

Ugh, this troll bait tastes like stupid!
(spits)

Churchill2004


Wait a minute, and I am serious:

FTFA:

For refusing to recognize the need for sacrifice in an emergency, for making empty and hypocritical statements in favor of fiscal responsibility, and for opposing sensible and cost-saving reforms, CAGW names Rep. Ray LaHood Porker of the Month for October 2005.


You point me to ONE Republican in the last 8 years who doesn't fit this statement. ONE

cameroncrazy1984: Dupa: You might think so, but this could be Obama's sleaziest appointment, and may raise more legitimate questions than the rest of his appointments combined.

Interesting that LaHood lead the drive that pushed former Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) out of politics. This cleared the way for Barack Obama to get elected to the senate. Sen. Fitzgerald's crime? He had Patrick Fitgerald (not related) named U.S. Attorney, who then got Governor George Ryan (R) sent to jail. The same Patrick Fitzgerald that is now after Blago (and may he succeed).

Welcome to the Illinois Combine, America.

Your tinfoil hat's crooked. Leans really far to the right.

no, you must not be from IL. His point rasies valid issues. LaHood/Sam the Eagle is part of the combin (bi-partisan corruption machine that is in it to get rich) coined by Tribune columnist John Kass

Mordant: Whew, an Obama appointment the "Independents" won't have to complain about.

Oh, they'll find something. That train's never late.

For example: "LaHood is from Illinois like Barack Obama. Chicago politics and looking out for your friends as usual."

Love out to the headline.

Sabyen91: You make a silly argument you get a silly answer

You be an arrogant dick and you destroy the nation's intelligent political discourse.

PascalsGhost: You realize most the stuff in that link makes him a GOOD congressman for IL under the system, right?

I'm just saying anybody who doesn't play that game isn't bring home the money

That was sorta my point though- this guy is the exact opposite of a reformer, in a supposedly reform-centered administration.

PascalsGhost: You point me to ONE Republican in the last 8 years who doesn't fit this statement. ONE

In Congress? There are a handful who take fiscal conservatism relatively seriously- Jeff Flake, Ron Paul, Tom Coburn- though I don't know of any who really manage to avoid entanglement in the pork-earmark system, though some are certainly much worse than others. That's really the whole issue- the problem is systemic, not merely a matter of finding "the right people". Which is in large part why I don't think Obama will be brining any real, systemic reform in this regard.

+1 headline.

Lets see more political headlines like this instead of flame war ones.

Churchill2004: Sabyen91: You make a silly argument you get a silly answer

You be an arrogant dick and you destroy the nation's intelligent political discourse.





Meh, you are telling me this?

Churchill2004: Sabyen91: You make a silly argument you get a silly answer

You be an arrogant dick and you destroy the nation's intelligent political discourse.

PascalsGhost: You realize most the stuff in that link makes him a GOOD congressman for IL under the system, right?

I'm just saying anybody who doesn't play that game isn't bring home the money

That was sorta my point though- this guy is the exact opposite of a reformer, in a supposedly reform-centered administration.

There are no reformers in government of the level you are looking for. Just not there.

PascalsGhost: You point me to ONE Republican in the last 8 years who doesn't fit this statement. ONE

In Congress? There are a handful who take fiscal conservatism relatively seriously- Jeff Flake, Ron Paul, Tom Coburn- though I don't know of any who really manage to avoid entanglement in the pork-earmark system, though some are certainly much worse than others.

All those guys are just as guilty. Look at their records. They talk a good game, but when it comes time to feed...

That's really the whole issue- the problem is systemic, not merely a matter of finding "the right people". Which is in large part why I don't think Obama will be brining any real, systemic reform in this regard.

There will be systematic change that fixes some of the damage that Bush has done, but the system will remain the same until we are dead.

Churchill2004: From your FL:

The reason (Peter) Fitzgerald's career in politics was so abbreviated is that Fitzgerald isn't your typical politician, and he's most certainly not your typical politician from Illinois. He's principled, he's frugal with taxpayer money, and he has no tolerance for public corruption. That's why he retired from the Senate after only one term. And it's why now would a good time to bring him back.

If that's true about him, that's actually a damned good idea. It's possibly the only thing that would restore public trust in this mess. Too bad the Democrats will never do it.

PascalsGhost: All those guys are just as guilty. Look at their records. They talk a good game, but when it comes time to feed...

As far as fiscal conservatism in general- as in wanting to seriously cut the overall level of spending- those guys are pretty good. When it comes to pork projects, they're ensnared by the same inescapable incentives that drive every other member of Congress. Even a Congressman who's outspoken against the earmark system- and all three that I named are- has no choice to go along with it or screw their own constituents because they still have to pay for everybody else's earmarks. I'm not necessarily saying they aren't sill somewhat hypocritical in that regard, but that doesn't mean a distinction can't be made between the people who openly admit they hold their nose and do it for lack of an alternative and those who are proud defenders and abusers of such an obscene process. LaHood is firmly in the latter camp.

PascalsGhost: There will be systematic change that fixes some of the damage that Bush has done, but the system will remain the same until we are dead

Almost all of our systemic problems precede Bush and are bipartisan. A systemic problem, pretty much by definition, is not associated with a single officeholder.

Churchill2004:
PascalsGhost: There will be systematic change that fixes some of the damage that Bush has done, but the system will remain the same until we are dead

Almost all of our systemic problems precede Bush and are bipartisan. A systemic problem, pretty much by definition, is not associated with a single officeholder.

No, this simply isn't true. Across the board, the executive stopped working for the country and started working for the party.

No, this will be fixed. Is the system a mess? Yes. Did Bush and Co. corrupt it FAR more? Yes.

WTF where's the change? I was promised change, not another insider hack.

So, when is Obama going to appoint a Progressive Democrat?

Let's face it, Obama has been a disappointment. Especially by bringing in a rabid right-wing preacher to do his invocation and his adoption of Bush's policies on Iraq.

PascalsGhost: No, this simply isn't true. Across the board, the executive stopped working for the country and started working for the party

That's a rather simplistic view. Very little of what Bush did wasn't built on precedents that preceded his administration. Were there examples of increased partisanship in mid-level policy positions? Sure. But simple partisanship is hardly the only systemic problem. Things like stretching the limits of executive power and the perpetual embarrassment that is the US Congress are thoroughly bipartisan phenomenon. And it's not like Obama isn't going to appoint vastly more people from his own party than from the other, just like every other President.

PascalsGhost: No, this will be fixed. Is the system a mess? Yes. Did Bush and Co. corrupt it FAR more? Yes

Bush has been something of an outlier with regards to blatant partisanship, but simple R-D partisanship is only a small part of the problem. Washington often inflicts its worst on us when the Republicans and Democrats work together.

McCainDemocrat: Let's face it, Obama has been a disappointment. Especially by bringing in a rabid right-wing preacher to do his invocation and his adoption of Bush's policies on Iraq.

you're funny when you aren't traveling

McCainDemocrat: So, when is Obama going to appoint a Progressive Democrat?

Let's face it, Obama has been a disappointment. Especially by bringing in a rabid right-wing preacher to do his invocation and his adoption of Bush's policies on Iraq.

McWho?

Churchill2004: PascalsGhost: No, this simply isn't true. Across the board, the executive stopped working for the country and started working for the party

That's a rather simplistic view. Very little of what Bush did wasn't built on precedents that preceded his administration.

I simply don't even know what to say to people like you at this point. I mean, this isn't based in reality.

NOBODY, democrat or republican, ever made torture policy. Nobody started a war for no valid reason whatsoever. I mean, even Vietnam, in context, could have been argued as necessary due to communism. Habeas, ect.

No. There have been horrible dems and reps in the past, but none of them had as little respect for law or the country as a whole.

Again, if you don't grasp this and just see it as systematic, well, I have nothing left to say.

McCainDemocrat:

There's some people lookin for you

Karma Curmudgeon: McCainDemocrat:

There's some people lookin for you

Who? Idiot harvesters?

let's face it, Obama scammed America. he lied constantly. He has no integrity. He has no leadership skills.

Obama is the beginning of the end of the Democratic party. All over America, Democrats are leaving their party due to the illegal nomination of Obama and his bizarre aimless agenda.

All over my home, people are leaving the party due to Obama.

Heh. Helluva guess but no. He knows who.

Did he get scared off already?

I spoke too soon.

Karma Curmudgeon: Heh. Helluva guess but no. He knows who.

Did he get scared off already?

Bounty hunters?

Asian lesbian twins, actually. *wink*

PascalsGhost: NOBODY, democrat or republican, ever made torture policy. Nobody started a war for no valid reason whatsoever. I mean, even Vietnam, in context, could have been argued as necessary due to communism. Habeas, ect.

Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, imprisoned suspected Confederate sympathizers without trial, and shut down newspapers that supported the Confederacy. Granted there was a civil war going on, but it still happened.

The actual severity of the Gulf of Tonkin is in question as it relates to giving LBJ the authority to start wars in Southeast Asia.

Henry Clay supported John Quincy Adams for President in the House of Representatives after Andrew Jackson won the most popular votes and a plurality of electoral votes. Adams then appointed Clay Secretary of State.

Now, Bush may have rolled some of those things all up in to one package, but it has happened in the past. And, some of it more severely. This is just the most recent case.

Bush is/was an awful President, but we've had them before and we'll have them again.

I would say Bush's worst fault is the seemingly consistent leadership void that brings with it the appearance of indifference and an absence of caring.

McCainDemocrat: All over my home, people are leaving the party due to Obama.

Do you ever wonder if your time could be best spent doing other things? Or is being a laughable troll on an internet forum the best you got?

McCainDemocrat: let's face it, Obama scammed America. he lied constantly. He has no integrity. He has no leadership skills.

Obama is the beginning of the end of the Democratic party. All over America, Democrats are leaving their party due to the illegal nomination of Obama and his bizarre aimless agenda.

All over my home, people are leaving the party due to Obama.

And then you woke up in a warm puddle of jizz and had to change the sheets. That's change I can believe in.
Please, eat some cheesecake, you'll feel better.

bulldg4life: PascalsGhost: NOBODY, democrat or republican, ever made torture policy. Nobody started a war for no valid reason whatsoever. I mean, even Vietnam, in context, could have been argued as necessary due to communism. Habeas, ect.

Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, imprisoned suspected Confederate sympathizers without trial, and shut down newspapers that supported the Confederacy. Granted there was a civil war going on, but it still happened.

There was active war and the battlefield was our country.

Again, I simply don't know what to say to people who can equate these two things.


The actual severity of the Gulf of Tonkin is in question as it relates to giving LBJ the authority to start wars in Southeast Asia.

It was a joke. Nothing happened.
Again, Vietnam and communism made this not near the complete war of choice Iraq was.


Henry Clay supported John Quincy Adams for President in the House of Representatives after Andrew Jackson won the most popular votes and a plurality of electoral votes. Adams then appointed Clay Secretary of State.

So what? What does this equate to?

Now, Bush may have rolled some of those things all up in to one package, but it has happened in the past. And, some of it more severely. This is just the most recent case.

No.

Bush is/was an awful President, but we've had them before and we'll have them again.

I don't know what to say. Bush is on a level like no other. His damage is only now beginning.

Zaphod B.: McCainDemocrat: let's face it, Obama scammed America. he lied constantly. He has no integrity. He has no leadership skills.

Obama is the beginning of the end of the Democratic party. All over America, Democrats are leaving their party due to the illegal nomination of Obama and his bizarre aimless agenda.

All over my home, people are leaving the party due to Obama.

And then you woke up in a warm puddle of jizz and had to change the sheets. That's change I can believe in.
Please, eat some cheesecake, you'll feel better.

Heh, I miss that meme. Does anyone have the fat chick pic that goes along with it?

/stupid mens world