CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
Dec. 11, 2008 – 5:04 a.m.
Blagojevich Story: So What’s the Surprise?
By Richard Connor, CQ Guest Columnist
You need an angle if you are a columnist joining the chorus of voices expressing outrage over Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s arrest this week. Otherwise you wind up sounding like just another political writer talking with other writers about the same old things.
What might give someone an opportunity to stand out and be read is to point out that few of us living in many areas of the country are surprised or stunned by the Blagojevich saga.
He was arrested Tuesday on charges of an alleged conspiracy and bribery plan. He is accused of seeking favors, some monetary, in exchange for his appointment to fill the U.S. Senate seat about to be vacated by President-elect Barack Obama .
What many political writers – particularly those from major metropolitan areas – may not realize is that those of us living in the nooks and crannies of the United States are not surprised by these charges. They believe that politics is a shady business populated by con artists who regularly make crooked deals.
Transcripts of Blagojevich’s wiretapped conversations show him to be profane, brazen, greedy and, yes, stupid. The transcriptions make for entertaining reading, but that’s about it. Folks in Illinois, for example, have been numbed by political corruption that has been a way of life for decades, if not a century or two.
Those people are reading these stories, shrugging their shoulders and saying, “Tell me something I didn’t know.” Then they turn the page looking for the latest Chicago Bulls score.
There also should be a mandatory warning with every column and story about Gov. Blagojevich’s arrest that to this point there is no evidence that he actually received any favors or money. Maybe that comes later, but for now it appears he is guilty of planning to collect payoffs.
Talking and thinking about it are not the same as doing it.
It reminds me of the time then-President Jimmy Carter came dangerously close to crossing the lines between church and state by implying that thinking lustfully made one guilty of a sin even if nothing actually happened.
Whether or not anything happened in Blagojevich’s case, his is just another story about sleaze in government. It’s the latest version of the last political corruption story that had everyone aghast: Former New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer’s tryst with a hooker. You do remember Gov. Spitzer, don’t you? If not, that is understandable; stories about politicians who behave badly are too commonplace.
Many of those in the heartland of the country probably paused briefly at lunch the day the Blagojevich news broke and said naively, “Well, how else you would get an appointment to the U.S. Senate?”
If there is any genuine surprise, it might be that Gov. Blagojevich appears to have been so callous and thought himself so protected that he was not more discreet and circumspect. After all, it had been rumored for months that his administration was under scrutiny by investigators.
What ever happened to folks conspiring in phone booth conversations and underground parking garages? Have our politicians lost all sense of creativity? We know that propriety has been on the downslide for many years, but we did not know that being sneaky and discreet was out, too.
Actually, there is reason for optimism and hope in this story.
One quote says this about the attitude of Sen. Obama and those working with him: “They’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. (Expletive) them.”
Let’s hope and pray this is true, not only in this case but for Obama’s career in Illinois politics. The same hope goes for his staff. This is a state that has been challenging at best for a politician to succeed in and remain honest.
Many years ago, I edited a newspaper in a small city in Illinois. We uncovered what we believed to be crimes in the county auditor’s office. We wrote stories. We won many journalism awards. He was charged and brought to trial. The evidence against him was substantial.
He walked.
The jury simply did not believe that what he appeared to have done was criminal, let alone anything out of the ordinary.
Our lead reporter was more discouraged by the verdict than by hearing in court one day that a hit had been ordered on him. The fact that there was a plot to kill him bothered him less than learning the price on his head was just five dollars.
So, he walked, as well. He walked away from digging for news and reporting on corrupt politicians.
He is among those today reading about Blagojevich and asking, “So what?”
Over 25 years later politics in Illinois all that’s changed is the cost of doing business. The prices have just gone up.
Richard L. Connor is the chief executive officer and ownership partner of the Wilkes-Barre, Pa., Publishing Co.,, which owns a group of daily and weekly newspapers. A newspaperman for 40 years, he previously was president and publisher of the Fort Worth, Texas, Star-Telegram. He has written a column for most of his career, and has served on two Pulitzer Prize for Journalism nominating committees.



Comments
It just seems abnormal that he was so blatant about pricing it. Usually something like honoring the president's wishes in some matter is done for the sake of the good will it generates on the part of the president. No one would expect him to appoint, for example, a non-political expert to the Senate seat. There's the expectation that the president's good will or whoever else he would favor might turn into a tangible favo down the road. Blagojovich is just crude, grasping and dumb as a post to want to sell his "friendship".
The writer said it: it's the brazenness of RB's crime/not crime that captures American's attention. And a hubris RB is himself blind to. It doesn't matter if he is able to skate these allegations/non-allegations legally; his political career is toast. Probably any career actually. His wife will have to be the breadwinner.
Actually, Mr. Connor, President Carter was correct in stating he sinned with "mere" lustful thoughts. One of Jesus' contributions to our Judeo-Christian ethic is to establish that one's sin begins with the thought, regardless of whether or not it is fulfilled in deed. Furthermore, you are wrong that President Carter approached the line between church and state. "Sin" is a moral and religious concept; "crime" is governmental. Most, if not all, crimes may be sins, but there are many sins that are not crimes. Murder is an example of the former; adultery is an example of the latter. It is disturbing that you don't appear to know the difference
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: