Idaho is rocking with all sorts of political intrigue....
I absolutely cannot believe that after mentioning a RUMOR about a Vandersloot/Larry Craig/Wasden connection, that 43rd State Blues received a "take-down" order from Vandersloot (Melealeuca). Since when are bloggers not allowed to post rumors? What happened to the First Amendment? Does that mean we are not allowed to mention that most of Idaho government knows, and has known for years, about the rumor of Senator Craig's homosexuality? I know our governor has always opposed much, if not all, of the Patriot Act, but when did our first amendment rights disappear? Could someone from the ACLU give me a clue? This sounds more like a science fiction movie, or perhaps even an Orwell novel....
Then, it sounds as if Larry Craig might run, Larry Craig may not run, is some kind of Republican game. Well, it's true that one never knows what sort of mischief Karl Rove has in his Pandora's box.... First we learn over at The Mountain Goat Report that Larry Craig only has $270,000 cash at hand (information from Open Secrets) and that his primary opponent is Robert Vasquez. Other bloggers and news announcements also mention this in articles about former Congressman Larry LaRocco's announcement as a candidate in the upcoming senatorial race for Craig's seat. Then we learn that Craig may actually be considering running for re-election. And finally, we hear about his defense of a guestworker program even though Americans for Better Immigration give him a C- for his immigration voting record. His stance on immigration is more clearly described, vote-by-vote, here. So what will Larry Craig be doing about the 2008 election?
I think we can be more fully informed about Idaho, immigration, and perhaps even Craig's political role in all this, if we take a look at the prescient HBO movie, The Second Civil War. In order to appreciate even more the foresight of the movie, we must also remember the recent Idaho legislation making English Idaho's official language. So much for Idaho's Indian tribes who are having a difficult enough time as it is retaining their native tongues, and so much for our Hispanic communities, and so much for all the other immigrants we have brought into the state. But, as I said, HBO's movie is prescient. Although the plot summary doesn't exactly match current events, the behavior of the governor and the president seem especially apt, and Craig's yes/no stances on immigration fit right in with the movie's plot and its character motivation. Finally, the portrayal of the media couldn't be more appropriate. In short, the US president (Phil Hartman) announces that Pakistani orphans are going to live in Idaho. The Idaho governor (Beau Bridges) says no, and when the orphans arrive, Idaho declares war on the US. The News Media sensationalizes the entire ordeal. This is a comedy, and the writer, Martyn Burke, seemed (to me, anyway), to pick the right state as the setting for this satire. We all need a good laugh once in a while, and this will certainly get you laughing at Idaho's rocking politics....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Can't agree about the Vandersloot post being okay. It's true that bloggers are free to post what they want, but there is such a thing as libel, even in a free speech society. Without evidence to back up a serious charge like the one in the original Vandersloot post at 43rdstblues, it could be libelous. Put yourself in these shoes: Someone1 posts on their blog that Someone2 is a pedophile. There is no evidence, only rumor. That post gets forwarded around the blogosphere, and starts to sound like fact. A year later somebody Googles Someone2's name and up pops a bunch of posts about him being a pedophile. People don't read the posts; they just see the headlines. Libel and slander can ruin lives.
If someone suggests that someone else is a pedophile, with the intention of ruining an otherwise good reputation, that's one thing. But I subscribed to tompaine.com for several years and always found their research to be reputable and serious. 43sb only reported on a rumor; a rumor reported becomes open to investigation in order to decide the truth of the matter. I do not believe that he made a libelous statement. Furthermore, public representatives, large business companies, and Republicans in general, have chosen a path that leaves them open to rumor, investigation, and an ethical obligation to the public. Questioning the company and the people involved, especially any connection to Craig who not only maintains an influential position on the Appropriations Committee but also has to be questioned because of his two-faced positions, from immigration to, another "rumor," his personal life, is, to me, an appropriate reason to mention a rumor that comes from a legitimate source. Whether it pans out or not will then reflect back on the source of the rumor.
Post a Comment