Political discussion lately has often made reference to “Chicago-Style Politics” and generally in a negative sense. I’m not sure ethical people can even perceive that phrase in a positive light. Politics has always been dirty business, even back to the days of Plunkett of Tammany Hall who drew a distinction between legal graft and illegal graft. Some political careers have appropriately been called dynasties. That’s not the way it was planned 235 years ago. They rejected kingship in favor of a Republic.
It was in a recent show on the History Channel about the gangster era of Chicago that it all started to make sense to me. From the time of prohibition and Al Capone, the criminals controlled the city. They controlled the drugs, the booze, and the prostitutes. They infiltrated the cops, judges, and city hall. They made the law what they wanted it to be and used strong-arm tactics to get their way. They excelled at intimidation and rewarded those who were “cooperative.” The cemetery was filled with the bodies of rivals. Seems remarkably similar to many inner cities today. The difference is that this form of corruption and intimidation became the norm and therefore acceptable. This is the political machine within which Obama earned his chops. It is the political temperament that is being exported throughout the Federal government, where ACORN tactics are acceptable, votes are to be bought with taxpayer money, and “no crisis should be wasted.”
Obama’s strong socialist upbringing is undeniable and many who supported his hope and change philosophy have suddenly gotten religion upon discovering the outcome of such policies. Larger government, beholden constituency, benefits for non-contributors, higher taxes to those who actually work for a living, and ballooning deficits. What I find most troubling today, however, is how these Chicago style antics have started to become mainstream. In two recent postings from the left the language is troubling.
According to Kristinn Taylor at biggovernment.com, a recent CNN published article concluded with:
Obama’s critics keep blasting him for Chicago-style politics. So, fine. Channel your inner Al Capone and go gangsta against your foes. Let ‘em know that if they aren’t with you, they are against you, and will pay the price.
There was similar language in the Huffington Post:
You’ve given it your best shot, you’ve tried numerous times to talk with the Republicans, to negotiate, to meet them halfway on every single matter before the American people. But they hate you for many reasons. It’s time you break kneecaps [bold in original]. It’s time to destroy the Republican Party. They don’t deserve a seat at the table when all they want to do is score political points by being the Party of No.
The posting included a picture of a baseball bat with Barack’s name on it.
I won’t begrudge the people of Chicago from putting in place whatever style of government they want. Our diversity of viewpoints and freedom to choose is part of what makes America great. But I will absolutely draw the line on threatening violence against a group of people SOLELY for their support of our constitution. I further object to the persistent lies and false characterizations (another hallmark of Chicago style politics) as seen in the example above, calling the Republicans “the Party of No.” Any rationally thinking person knows that the Republicans have been completely marginalized in Congress and even if they WERE the “party of no” (they are not; numerous republican proposals have been ignored by the democratic party leadership), blaming them when the Democrats could not get their agenda passed even with a super majority can clearly be seen as a typical temper tantrum. We failed and it couldn’t possibly be our own fault, so we have to find someone else to blame – yet another mantra of the morally deficient left.
Taylor also noted that the Obama White House has consistently allowed such rhetoric. This certainly implies endorsement. After all – to a Chicago politician there is nothing abnormal about it. But there is. And we know it. There are reasons to be afraid. And we need to consistently call out such inappropriate language. It’s wrong in any political system and especially ours.
Joe McGrenra 8:31 am on February 21, 2010 Permalink
Tom,
“…We also got no new comments. So I’ve come to the conclusion that these are my own private musings….” Please don’t assume few are reading. Might just mean you have expressed our (i.e. the readers) thoughts no additional comments could improve on your writing.