The Faculty Lounge

Random Thoughts on Election Evening

Sticking my head up from work on the constitutional arguments surrounding secession this evening, which I'll be talking about much more over the next couple of months....  Did anyone else notice that the Romney campaign headquarters played Randy Travis' "Forever and Ever Amen" as it was warming up the crowd before Governor Romney's address?!  Do you think this could have something to do with Newt Gingrich?    Looks like it may be time to dust off those posts about the use of songs by Senator McCain's campaign back in 2008 -- and by the Democrats, too.

The Road to Cooperstown

Baseball fans may be interested in reading this analysis of who will (and won't) receive an invitation on Wednesday to join baseball's elite in the Hall of Fame.

This topic is of great interest in the Houston area, as Jeff Bagwell (card #47 from the 2003 Upper Deck Classic Portraits set) makes his debut on the ballot.

 

Could "Dewey" Be Redone?

 
It’s great to return to The Lounge this month. Since today is Election Day, I thought I would begin with a discussion of a monumental event in election history. Today is the 62^nd anniversary of the legendary front page faux pas, “Dewey Defeats Truman,” which appeared on the first edition of the Chicago Tribune on November 2, 1948.  Incumbent President Harry S. Truman, who had been expected to lose to Republican challenger and Governor of New York Thomas E. Dewey in the 1948 presidential race, won the election. A delighted Truman (pictured) was photographed at Union Station in St. Louis, holding a copy of his prematurely-declared defeat. Only a few hundred copies of the paper were published before the Tribune issued a second edition that hedged from proclaiming a winner. Although a lot has changed since that time, media outlets continue to balance the desire to be first with the need to be accurate. A similar mistake (on a smaller scale) happened in 2000, but the value of those papers did not come close to that of a rare copy of the Tribune, which can fetch more than $600 from avid collectors. With the numerous methods of disseminating news in comparison to 62 years ago, is a “Dewey” do-over even possible to duplicate these days?

Has teaching affected my politics?

A friend of mine, who noticed that I had become less partisan (on the Republican side) and perhaps even a bit more liberal, speculated that maybe I had changed as a result of hanging around liberal faculty colleagues.  I suspect that the fiasco of the Bush Administration might have been more relevant- but at any rate, the exchange caused me to think about how my ten years as a teacher, and my years as a practitioner before then, might have affected my politics.

I’m not sure my job affects how I view issues- but I do think it affects how I view individual personalities.  For example, some of my nonlawyer acquaintances view President Obama as strange and exotic- inspriring to those that liked him, scary to the people who didn’t.

 But partially (I think) because of his background as a lawyer and law professor, Obama seemed to me more familiar and less exotic than most of his competitors.  I felt like I knew Obama after the first Democratic debate I saw: Mr. Generic Democratic Lawyer/Law Professor, a guy who could easily work three or four doors down from me, a man with conventionally liberal views who gets along by going along and rarely says anything surprising about issues. 

By contrast, Senator McCain, the former Navy pilot with a penchant for bold, unexpected (and sometimes stupid) decisions, struck me as the exotic, alien candidate.   There is nothing in my life that has prepared me to understand John McCain, or to predict what would happen in a McCain Administration.

Does this mean I was more likely to vote for Obama than I would have before entering teaching?  Maybe not- familiarity breeds contempt, and I felt like I understood Obama’s weaknesses as will as his strengths.  But it does mean that for me personally,  he inspires more apathy, and less fear or inspiration, than some other politicians.

Is Australia Really Ready for a Female Prime Minister?

Many readers will be aware that Australia's recent federal election (August 21) resulted in a hung parliament.  In other words, neither of the major parties managed to garner a sufficient majority in the lower house to form a government and leaders of each party are now busily negotiating with independents to try to form a minority government.

While this is an interesting constitutional moment in itself for Australia, I recently read an online article that considers the issue from a gender perspective.  In this article Madeleine Coorey argues that the election may demonstrate that Australia is not really ready for a female Prime Minister, particularly a female who is unmarried (although in a steady relationship) and has no children.  While Julia Gillard did become Australia's first female Prime Minister some months ago, she did it as a result of an internal coup in which she ousted the labor party's leader (and then Prime Minister), Kevin Rudd.  No woman has yet been popularly elected as Prime Minister while leading a major party in Australia.

Coorey's article focuses on narratives raised in the media during the election campaign that emphasized Gillard's family status and characterized her taking over the party leadership from the very unpopular Rudd as a bitchy, backstabbing act.

While I missed most of the election coverage, it is an intriguing way of looking at Australian politics where, as in the United States, women have typically not risen to high positions in government or, for that matter, in the High Court (at least until very recently).  When I practised law in Victoria in the 1990s, no women had ever been appointed to the bench of the Supreme Court of Victoria (although that has changed recently too).

Australia Appoints First Woman Prime Minister

Today (or really yesterday because of the time difference), Australia appointed its first female Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.  This was an internal change in the Labor Party ie it was not a popular election, but an internal switch of leaders of the party.  But Julia Gillard will run for PM in the forthcoming federal election and it will be interesting to see if the Australian population is ready to go to the ballots and vote for a woman as head of a major political party. 

Brits form New Coalition Government

It's just been reported on CNN that David Cameron has been named the new UK prime minister, having set up a coalition between his conservative party and the liberal democrats.  Nick Clegg, the leader of the liberal democrats will be deputy PM.

British Election Results: Interesting Times Ahead?

The British election results are rolling in and it looks like neither of the major parties garnered sufficient seats in Parliament to form a government.  Now they have to negotiate with the minor parties to see if they can form a coalition.  Interesting times ahead...

UPDATE:  There's an interesting story here about Queen Elizabeth II's potential role in forming a new British government in the event that the parties cannot form a coalition government by themselves.

British Election: First Ever Televised Debate

I blogged recently that the Brits are about to face the polls (May 6) for a general election.  For those election watchers who are really missing good old U.S.-style presidential elections, the Brits are apparently taking a leaf out of our book and are hosting the first ever televised debate on the issues between the leading candidates.  This perhaps makes less sense in Britain because in a parliamentary democracy, the electorate actually votes for the party rather than the candidate.  However, Australia (which is also a parliamentary democracy) toyed with televised debates some years ago and they were pretty entertaining - although  not necessarily all that illuminating.

Democracy rising

                     . . . what a beautiful sound

 

Kathleen Bergin

The Michael Steele Fallout

    So David Duke's a racist crack-pot, and I almost hate to give him any press, but his reaction to Michael Steele's election to run the RNC (hat tip Pandagon) does raise a question: how much can the party seriously re-tool its image without alienating a chunck of its core constituents?  

Surely the party front-liners vetted the costs and benefits of going with Steele, and Republicans of good conscience obviously have no use for the likes of David Duke.  But some of the party faithful are sure to revolt for no other reason but race, and it will be interesting to see how the Repubs try to ease the fallout.

From David Duke, after the jump:

Wasilla's 32 Black Folks

Several years ago an acquaintance argued against the benefits of  racial diversity in higher education because, in his view, an entering class of all White students admitted on the basis of "merit" alone could just as well "learn about race" from reading a book.

Haven't heard much from Palin on the issue of race. 

Wonder what she's been reading?

">

Of Clothing and "Caribou Barbie"

I am disgusted, but not terribly surprised, at the latest "news" story to pop up in the last few days:   that Sarah Palin spent $150K of Republican money upgrading her wardrobe for the national stage.  The mean-spirited glee and nasty condescending that this " breaking news" has elicited from the media--particularly the NYTimes, which ran not one but TWO stories on it today--is sadly typical for the MSM reporting on women running for office.  Let me expound on why this is so troubling.

1.  The obsession with how a female candidate dresses.  We saw this ad infinitum with Hillary Clinton, of course--the endless debates on her pantsuits!  The speculation on potential facelifts! The slide show of her hairstyles through the ages!  Yes, Virginia, people's style changes as their age and position in life changes!  Funny, though, how we never see such a retrospective on a male candidate, on either side of the aisle.  For example, I noticed Rudy Giuliani's suits upgraded dramatically when he ran for President earlier this year--suddently they were much higher quality, fitting better, etc.  But was there a NYTimes slide show and related article on that?  Of course not.

2.  The use of Republican funds to upgrade the wardrobe.  It's not illegal, right?  So what's the big fuss?  Joe Biden has been using his campaign funds and warchest for *years* to fund his fancy ACELA amtrak ride to and from Delaware and DC, and yet there have been few screams of outrage.   And Joe Biden is selling himself as a "man of the people," with his numerous trips to Scranton, Pa, as much as Sarah Palin is selling herself as a "woman of the people."  Yet because Palin bought clothing (though she spent far less on it that Biden's spent over the past 20 or so years), hysteria.

3.  "Caribou Barbie."  Can I just comment on how insulting this is?  Why it is that a young, attractive, put-together woman is punished for her style and looks, yet a woman who is older, less stylish, less traditionally handsome is also punished?  Can we at least stop comparing every stylish successful woman to a Barbie doll?  I mean, Obama is tall, thin, muscled, attractive, but we don't compare him to a Ken doll, do we?  The only male who ever got that treatment was John Edwards, and his $400 haircuts and obsessive attendance to his appearance didn't exactly help matters.

4.  Hello, we have TWO WEEKS until the election!  Mainstream media, are you seriously telling me that there are no more important issues than Palin's wardrobe upgrade?  Really??!!  Shame on you all.

Palin Meets the Media . . . Sort of

So Americans have been calling on McCain to show us why Sarah Palin's qualified to be VP.  Here's what we got today as she braved reporters in Manhattan after a visit to ground zero - and no, there's nothing after the jump - there is no  jump - this is it - the whole thing:

PALIN: Every American student needs to come through this area so that, especially this younger generation of Americans is, to be in a position of never forgetting what happened here and never repeating, never allowing a repeat of what happened here. I wish every American would come through here. I wish every world leader would come through here, and understand what it is that took place here and more importantly how America came together and united to commit to never allowing this to happen again. And just to hear and from and see these good New Yorkers who are rebuilding not just this are but helping to rebuild America has been very, very inspiring and encouraging. These are the good Americans who are committed to peace and security and its been an absolute honor getting to meet these folks today.

CNN: On the topic of never letting this happen again, do you agree with the way the Bush administration has handled the war on terrorism, is there anything you would do differently?

A: I agree with the Bush administration that we take the fight to them. We never again let them come onto our soil and try to destroy not only our democracy, but communities like the community of New York. Never again. So yes, I do agree with taking the fight to the terrorists and stopping them over there.

POLITICO: Do you think our presence in Iraq and afghan and our continued presence there is inflaming islamic extremists?

A: I think our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan will lead to further security of our nation, again, because the mission is to take the fight over there. do not let them come over here and attempt again what they accomplished here, and that was some destruction. terrible destruction on that day. but since September 11, Americans uniting and rebuilding and committing to never letting that happen again.

POLITICO: Do you support the reelection bids of embattled Alaska Republicans, Rep. Don Young and Sen. Ted Stevens?

A: Ted Stevens trial started a couple days ago. We’ll see where that goes.

POLITICO: Are you gong to vote for them?

[no answer.]

JERSEY JOURNAL: What do you think of bailout package before congress?

A: I don't support that until the provisions that Sen. McCain has offered are implemented in Paulson's proposals.

McCain - your insult to the American people is duly noted. 

-Kathleen A. Bergin

Thoughts on Palin: Religious Politics and Book Bans

Religious beliefs apparently played a significant role in shaping Sara Palin's political agenda as Mayor of Wassila, Alaska, including her attempt to ban library books that she considered socially or morally objectionable, or that contained "inappropriate language."  Politico, Time Magazine, and The New York Times each picked up the story this week. 

It is unclear which books she found so offensive, but she reportedly asked the local library director outright if she "could live with censorship of library books.”  Palin later dismissed the conversation as a "rhetorical exercise" and apparently did not push the ban from there.

I don't know . . . if all of this is true, wouldn't that make her both irrational and ineffective? 

-Kathleen A. Bergin

Amy Goodman Arrested at RNC

Free speech goddess and "Democracy Now" host Amy Goodman, along with the show's two producers, were among the 283 people arrested by police St. Paul police at the Republican National Convention this week.  Goodman was charged with interfering with a police officer.  The producers face felony riot charges.  No word yet on whether any of the charges will be dropped.    

More at Minn Post, along with this footage:">

-Kathleen Bergin

Missing From the Palin Debate . . .

An important addition to the Palin debate unfortunately neglected by the mainstream press:   (Posted with permission of Prof. Nareissa Smith)

Here are some choice quotes from conservatives regarding their thoughts on the unfortunate situation facing the teen daughter of the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Sarah Palin:

"Families have difficulties sometimes and lucky for her she has a supportive family."

"I have a 17-year-old daughter, and they start making choices without us.  I appreciate the choice she is making to have the baby, but it just makes her a real person. It happens every day in America.”

"I think, if anything, it shows the Republican Party is a real American party.  Every family has to deal with children, and sometimes children make decisions that parents wish they would not have been made, and things happen. But I think children are a blessing from God."

I have no problem with the charitable nature of the responses.  In fact, in my opinion, these are wonderful responses.  However, I can’t help but wonder, would this acceptance be tempered if the young lady were a woman of color?  It seems to be that the people who made these benevolent statements are part of the same party that has used unwed motherhood, particularly that of women of color, to argue that the poor deserve less care and less compassion.  Were Reagan’s so-called “welfare queens” any less deserving?  Can a young woman of color make the same mistakes and receive the same forgiveness?  Or will she be doomed to be the poster child for the downfall of the empire and the liberty for which it stands?

I wish Ms. Palin and her family well.  But after this election is over, I hope that those that are so supportive of her family at this time remember that other families in America are indeed going through the same thing.  Those families – regardless of color or economic status- need the same level of compassion.   Here’s hoping that this can be a “teachable moment,” as we say in the academy.

Kathleen Bergin

Nail . . . Meet Hammer

Tom Toles via the Washington Post on The New Yorker:

-Kathleen A. Bergin

Electioneering in the Wild West

So Tuesday was an exciting day for Oregon—the MSM actually focused their flickering and fickle attentions on our Democratic primary. Obama’s win was a surprise to no one—but here are some more subtle points that were lost in the general coverage:

1. It’s pronounced Or-i-GUN, not Or-e-gone.* There’s nothing that marks you as a sissified Easterner more than mispronouncing the state name. I’m talking to you, Chris Matthews! 

2. How cool is it that our new Attorney General is a lawprof?! Congratulations to Lewis and Clark’s John Kroger, who won despite televised smear ads muttering about his very recent     admission to the Oregon bar.

3. All of Oregon’s ballots are mail-ins; there are no voting booths or polling places. This may be the way of the future, but it does take a little of the fun away. I miss that satisfying clunk of the lever in old-fashioned voting booths. On the other hand, you don’t have to worry about rain depressing turnout, a real issue in the Pacific Northwest. 

4. This being Oregon, where quirkiness is prized, there are still serious pockets of Ron Paul     supporters. For some reason they feel the best way to support their candidate is to march up and down themain thoroughfare, waving signs and ringing bells. Perhaps they’re trying to collect gold? I wouldn’t be surprised if Ron Paul got a few percentage points in November through a write-in campaign.

5. Finally, it’s only appropriate that Portland, home to a substantial microbrewing culture, has just elected none other than Sam Adams as its new mayor. As a new Portland resident, I’ll drink to that!

*nb:  Another oft-mispronounced word, Willamette (as in the Valley, the wine, and the law school) rhymes with “dammit.” We’re thinking of making it part of our official motto….

The Ronald Reagan McDonalds! (Tuscaloosa, Alabama)

While reading this review of Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz' The Age of Reagan over at Slate this morning, I saw a picture of President Reagan eating a big mac at ... the McDonalds on route 82 in Northport!  You know what?  I eat there, too, sometimes.  (The building Reagan ate in was knocked down a few years ago and then rebuilt.)  Rather unrepresentative photo, though; as I understand the story, it was the only McDonalds he ever ate at.  Never can tell when Tuscaloosa will appear in the national news!

I enjoyed Wilentz' article on "1967" in Rolling Stone a while back, although as I said at propertyprof last summer:

Wilentz locates 1967 as the start of the culture wars: free love & drugs vs. stability.  Locating major trends in American culture in a single year is always hard--though there have been some really successful books built around years (Kenneth Stampp's 1857; Louis Mazur's 1819 immediately come to mind.)  And while I would have emphasized more of the counter-culture and less of the conservative response were I fortunate enough to be writing for Rolling Stone, the essay's well worth a read.

And, hey, writing for Rolling Stone's  a big deal for an academic (or anyone else, I'd imagine).

The review's worth a read.  The conclusion is:

[H]e's still, in some sense, with us. By Wilentz's reckoning, the Reagan era has lasted longer than "the ages of Jefferson and Jackson; longer than the 'gilded' age or the Progressive era; and virtually as long as the combined era of the New Deal, Fair Deal, New Frontier, and Great Society." Which means that the GOP's happiest warrior can now be spoken of in the same breath as Jefferson and Jackson, as Lincoln and the Roosevelts.

Alfred Brophy