411 Politics Fact or Fiction: Week 120 - Rush Limbaugh, Gary Locke as Commerce Secretary, More

Posted by Brandon Crow on 03.03.2009

Did Jim Cornyn show irresponsibility when he skipped the vote on the stimulus package? Is Rush Limbaugh the de facto new leader of the Republican Party? Would Howard Dean be better than Kathleen Sibelius for Secretary of HHS? Should Obama go with a "safe" pick for Commerce to avoid further bad publicity? All this, AND a bonus question this week!

It's Monday again and that means Week 120 of Politics Fact or Fiction. This week, we have Pat Shepard and Mark Radulich, two conservatives, duking it out. Let's see how the conservative camp is faring today.

As a side note, for too many reasons I won't go into, the questions in this column may be somewhat outdated due to the time lapse for it's been two weeks since I've had a chance to post this column. What you are reading today, has been in progress for at least that long.

Ok, here we go with Pat and Mark.

Ding! Ding!

1. Republican Senator Jim Cornyn of Texas missed the preliminary but crucial senate vote on the stimulus package. Instead, Cornyn went to New York, to meet with wealthy Republicans who could potentially become donors to his campaign. This is completely irresponsible.

Pat Shepard: FICTION. I'm a bit pained to say fiction here, because I like to believe in the Myth of the Great Legislator, whereby every politician carefully studies for every vote and votes their conscience each time, avoiding bombs and hailstorms and heart attacks if need be to make it to the vote, even if that vote is only to make Feb. 12 Honorary Prairie Dog Back Scratcher Day. But though it's a happy myth, a myth it is.

From the point of view of a Republican Senator, the stimulus package vote might as well have been an "Honorary Prairie Dog Back Scratcher Day" vote. Senator Cornyn knew that there wasn't going to be a filibuster and that the package was going to pass. So staying to vote wasn't going to make any real world difference, it was just going to be a tally on the no side. Had there been real doubt about the outcome of the vote, I'd call him completely irresponsible. As it is, I'll just call him mildly irresponsible and rather stupid when it comes to analyzing appearances. Even a neophyte politician running for their first job as a county judge would know how that would look... IN

Mark Radulich: FICTION. I'm going to have to agree with my debate partner on this one. Now I tend to be a bit of a cynic so you'll have to forgive me when I say that Cornyn wasn't being irresponsible so much as he was employing forward thinking. His is not the party in charge and frankly, there isn't much the GOP can do to stop Congressional Democrats or the Senate, as the final vote count for the stimulus showed. Had the three GOP Senators opted not to vote for the bill maybe then ditching out on the vote would have been irresponsible but when it's a forgone conclusion, why not shore up some for yourself down the line when you might be in a better position of power?

1 for 1.

2. Rush Limbaugh has become the unofficial leader of the Republican Party.

Pat Shepard: FACT. The only reason not to say Fact here is that Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly might object and claim that *they* are the unofficial leaders of the party. But they'd be wrong, Rush still has more pull, as shown by the media headlines over his statement (taken out of context) "I hope he fails." Hannity, Beck and O'Reilly would kill for their words to be taken out of context to create an artificial media storm. (How far the Liberal Media Elite have fallen if they have to take RUSH LIMBAUGH out of context to find shocking statements!)

I'm pretty confident that the official leader of the Republican party, Michael Steele, isn't leading the party. TWO Nor is John McCain or any of their House or Senate leaders. Usually I'm the sort that snickers a bit when my compatriots on the left describe Republicans as obstructionist or out of ideas. But right now they really do look that way. I'm a news nut, doubly so for political news, and I can't tell you what their agenda is if I take out the obstruction.

And when the elected officials in the Republican party completely fail to demonstrate a positive agenda and lead, even a blowhard like Limbaugh begins to look like a leader. You might, like me, despise what he stands for and where he wants us to go, but there's no denying he stands for something and he has a vision for the future of the country. Which, when combined with the fact he has real media access, puts him, embarrassingly for the GOP, at the helm.

Maybe I'm being overly cynical here. A case can be made that Snow, Specter and Collins are currently exercising the most power of any Republicans out there, since they made a significant impact on the stimulus package. Or perhaps the Republicans who are members of Obama's administration...

Naw, I'm going with Rush. I'm betting I never say *that* again.

Mark Radulich: FICTION. Rush Limbaugh is a cartoon character. His purpose (much like Ann Coulter) is to throw bombs and produce revenue for his given media. When Ann has a new book to sell she says something outlandish to get people to pay attention to her again.

We in the therapy field call that negative attention seeking behavior. Rush was attempting to steal thunder from the new president with his comments and build listenership, not from the conservative base but from his real bread and butter, liberals who listen to his show just so they can argue against him (or blog against him). People listen to Limbaugh for the same reason they listened to Howard Stern, to see what he will say next.

There's no WEEKS leadership here; for goodness sakes he's a DJ not a politician (and he'll be the first one to tell you that). If the GOP leadership appears to be walking in lock step with Limbaugh it's only because maybe some of his ideas aren't so bad. This is where Limbaugh is different than Coulter; Limbaugh occasionally makes a valid point and the GOP would be loathe to ignore him when he does. That doesn't make him a leader; that makes him editorialist.

1 or 2. Looks like Rush's got a little more work to do…

Switch!

3. For the Health and Human Services cabinet post, former Vermont Governor and DNC Chair Howard Dean would be a better choice than Kansas Governor Kathleen Sibelius.

Mark Radulich: FACT. I'm a big fan of having actual credentials for a job and Governor Dean has them in spades. He was a practicing doctor in the late 70's before investing himself into his local political machines. He's also been (as his title would indicate) the governor of Vermont. Being an executive, either in business or government, THINGS generally lends itself to being able to manage large, complex institutions one would assume with relative ease.

When he ran for President in 2004 he seemed to be most comfortable talking about health care and although I am a political conservative, any fair-minded person could see that in this area, he made a lot of sense. By contrast, Kathleen Sibelius has a Masters in Public Administration but does not appear to have practical experience in the health and human service field. The closest that she comes is having experience as a health insurance regulator, which is not the same has having been a doctor, obviously. She's apparently a popular governor and all so I imagine she would serve fairly well in any position but I would say that her talents would be better utilized elsewhere.

Pat Shepard: FACT. I think Mark hit the nail on the head here. Governor Dean knows health care backwards and forwards, both as an issue and as a vocation. While Governor Sibelius would likely bring greater administrative skill to the table and would definitely have less of a Republican target on her forehead, I've seen nothing to indicate that health care issues are ARE terribly important to her.

Besides, I wanted Dean as our president. I'd like to see him in national service.

2 for 3. I think Dean would have been a better candidate/opponent than Kerry, who seemed as if he had no fight in him whatsoever.

4. Judd Gregg just withdrew from his nomination as Commerce Secretary. First, Bill Richardson and now Gregg. On top of this, add Tom Daschle's withdrawal from HHS two weeks ago. What President Obama needs to do now to fill the Commerce Secretary post is to forget bipartisanship, forget seeking out the most qualified, but just to go to someone in his trusted circle who will not cause any more bad publicity.

Mark Radulich: FICTION. I understand what is behind this statement and sympathize
with the author's position, but no matter how many embarrassments this
administration has put forward, it's never good policy to fill a
position with someone patently unqualified for the job (Harriet Myers),
but is someone you trust, just because you want to avoid bad press.


The answer here is simple; fully vet all of your nominees before
incidents like this occur. The Federal Government should not be
scooped by either the mainstream media or the Pajama Media. No matter
who Obama wants for the job, you make sure that no stone has been left
unturned and if someone unsavory turns up then that person goes off
the list. Anything less than that sets a terrible precedent for
future appointees.

Pat Shepard: FICTION. I was tempted to say "fact" because I took "will not cause any more bad publicity" to mean something a little stronger than Mark does. Someone "patently unqualified for the job" would definitely cause bad publicity, after all. But in the end, I think that any President is morally obligated to pick the best person for the job even if doing so has political costs. For Obama to settle on someone who will simply fill the spot without embarrassment would be abdicating some of his responsibility as commander in chief and, besides, would be GETTING far outside of President Obama's governing style.

Obama has shown a propensity for picking the best people to serve in his administration, even if they were strong willed people who were likely to forcefully disagree with him on select issues and even if they were politically opposed to him, so long as they could recognize they serve under him. That's something I find quite admirable in the president, and I'd hate to see him abandon that policy simply to avoid some bad press.

3 for 4.

And here's the special bonus question for the week:

5. Former Governor of Washington, Gary Locke was an excellent selection for Commerce Secretary.

Mark Radulich: FACT. He seems like a competent administrator. All I could find on the guy after doing some cursory research was that he was linked to a political scandal involving the Clinton's and he was summarily cleared. Assuming he's paid his taxes, doesn't employ illegal immigrants and is not a terrorist, I suppose he's as good as any other pick Obama would have went with.

Pat Shepard: FACT. Governor Locke left office both popular and well respected. He's shown a real ability to be bipartisan when it fits his values and to fight the right wing when it doesn't. He seems to be scandal free as well, which is important to SPOOKY... Obama right now. I expect he will do a fine job.

4 for 5. Locke is a lock!

That's it for Week 120. Next week, two more participants and four more questions! And remember, if you want in, just shoot me an email and I'll schedule you. [e-mail]. See you all in seven.