What we’re hearing from many people is that the fact that Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin accepted a call from a clearly pretty hilarious and smart reporter pretending to be billionaire industrialist David Koch tells us something important about the Walker administration. (What saddens me is that I suspect Ian Murphy is already plotting his escape from Buffalo as I type this, but perhaps he’s a true Buffalo loyalist.) It’s an interesting theory. What it definitely tells us is that Walker doesn’t know Koch, and that he’s willing to talk to a campaign donor.
I hate to tell you this, but I’m pretty sure that virtually all elected officials are willing to talk to campaign donors, rich people, and celebrities. Think about it. You’re basically the kind of person who ran for student body president, and suddenly really, really important people want to talk to you. Imagine how thrilling that must be! It should go without saying that this is completely pathetic. This is a big part of why we right-wingers think that politicians should have very narrow, circumscribed powers. They’re not an attractive bunch. Speaking only for myself, the politicians I come closest to admiring are the bona fide nerds who’d rather hang out at a diner in rural Indiana than talk to billionaires or celebrities.
My guess is that, say, Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York, is more likely to talk a call from Barbra Streisand than a Republican assemblyman from Oswego County. We have a bit of a problem here — attention Heisenberg fans! — in that no governor is going to so cavalierly take phone calls from people claiming to be billionaires or celebrities ever again, so this is a hard proposition to test.
But here’s a question: Might a president of the United States who ordered a two-year wage freeze and imposed it on public workers who don’t have any say in the matter actually travel across the country to have dinner in the house of a prominent venture capitalist who has solicited federal funds for green technology (including at least some of his own investments)? And do you think said president might invite celebrity CEOs to join in the fun? The president’s time is pretty precious.
Given the extraordinary wealth Al Gore has amassed since leaving office, it is easy to imagine any president, and indeed any elected official, leaping at the chance to surround herself with such prominent figures. It might help secure a more prosperous and more glamorous post-presidential future, flying around the world in high style, founding global initiatives, and generally being awesome.
Or we could choose to be a little less cynical. I’m cool either way.
Yes.
The Governor refuses to take the calls of elected Democratic leaders to discuss the legislation.
But takes a call from a right wing billionaire from New York to discuss the legislation.
And you think that is OK?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAwesome post, Reihan!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTake calls from the Dem Wisconsin legislators?
Well, I'm absolutely sure that Gov. Walker would be happy do discuss all this in person. Wait- in fact he already has, and when things weren't going the way they liked, the Dems went away pouting. Never mind what the majority of Wisconsin citizens want, nevermind what job you were elected to do. Don't like a piece of legislation- then debate it on the floor, offer ammendments, offer research and reasoned arguments, alternative solutions, fillibuster if that helps, make commercials, hold rallys (please, not on school days during class hours), all that and then vote NAY. You'll have done your job, and all that you were elected to do. ELECTED.. GET IT? DEMOCRATIC PROCESSES- House Rules, that sort of thing.
Gov. Walker, You have my utmost respect and I am fully convinced you and the supporters of this legislation are doing the right thing. Thank you, in case you haven't heard that lately.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought the prank call put Walker in a positive light. The caller kept baiting him to get nasty and Walker never did. He just laid out his plan for success in a professional tone.
Funny what passes for journalism these days.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy would he accept a call in lieu of having them drop by, jharptoo?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseReihan,
Do you actually believe that the controversy surrounding Walker's chat with the ersatz Koch has anything--anything--to do with his willingness to accept the call in the first place?
I'm not familiar with your work, but at first read it appears that you're probably a typical apologist for all things conservative and republican. Even so, the most abject apologist should have his limits!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is a non-issue. It is idle gossip masquerading as relevant fact. For perspective, consider the regular audiences union special interests are granted with the Annointed One.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm sure that Governor Walker takes many calls from many people, every day. What he has chosen not to do is take calls from the runaway Dem legislators because it would give legitimacy to their cowardly act.
After the national elections of 2008 all we heard from the libs was "elections have consequences" and similar crowing. From The One himself we heard "the election is over - I won", and "The Republicans are welcome to join us, but they'll have to sit in the back", etc, etc.
And yet the Republicans showed up and tried their best to do their jobs, despite large majorities for the opposition. No running away, no voting 'present'. Now that the shoe is on the other foot in some places the temper tantrums have begun, and the whiney babies have taken their ball and gone home - or at least to a safehouse in Illinois.
Democratic voters everywhere must again be so proud of what they've elected! Keep refusing their calls Governor, they know right where to find you if they really want to talk - at your desk, doing your job!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNow the journalist needs to call the White House, tell him that he is the head of the AFL/CIO and see if the call goes through. Oh wait, it probably won't because that fine fellow regularly has in-person meetings with Obama and probably has the direct line!
Ah, the good old days when the "batphone" originated in Commissioner Gordon's office and he used it to call Batman for help. Now it is a party line (pun intended) that originates on the AFL/CIO or SEIU's desk and it gets picked up to summon the President!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe call goes to show that Gov Walker is by nature a good person. Although the caller keeps baiting him to trash some people, he ignored it by introducing a different topic.
God Bless you Gov Walker
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt is my understanding that the Wisconsin State Senate Democrats are moving permanently to other states, and that is in violation of Wisconsin State Senate eligibility rules. If that was true, what method would be used to remove them from office?
If Rahm can violate Chicago eligibility rules, and then joke about it, perhaps Wisconsin can enforce the legitimate eligibility rules and do the people's work.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMslavik have you met jharptoo? You both have a lot in common. Perhaps you could have a latte together and have a genuine relationship pop up.
Heck I'd take a call from Soros so I could tell him, politely of course, I think he is a spooky dude.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDear JB in MS:
You describe how in 2008 "the Republicans showed up and tried their best to do their jobs, despite large majorities for the opposition".
You must not be including in your description the Republicans of the United States Senate. At Mitch Mc's command, those honorable men and women automatically voted "no" on anything non-Republican that came their way, even if they were staring at legislation that they themselves had proposed in the recent past.
Hmmm....is that what the voters really had in mind when they sent those august individuals to Washington?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMslavik can't be serious??
Trying to compare the run-away Wisconsin Dems to the US Congressional Reps, who actually were there to vote, is an equivalent comparison in what way? Mslavik can't possibly mean that because the Dems were in power the Reps were obligated to vote with them, can she? I hope not. If so, Mslavik is an example of why some libs should hesitate to speak their minds.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDear Dianna,
Sorry about all the confusion! Let's try it again.
Please re-read the message from "JB in MS" to which I responded. From what I can tell, JB in MS is offering a description of Republican legislators in general after the 2008 national election. I don't know where JB in MS gets his information, but in any case he does not appear to be offering a description of behavior that is exclusive to Wisconsin. Now that you've re-read the post, do you see that?
Now, please re-read, slowly this time, the post from me--the one to which you responded. Please let me know where I "compare the run-away Wisconsin Dems to the US Congressional Reps". Right, Dianna--I didn't even mention the Wisconsin Dems!
Once you've completed that step, please read my post once more and point out for my benefit where I opine that "because the Dems were in power the Reps were obligated to vote with them". It's kinda hard to find, isn't it?
JB in MS says that, "And yet the Republicans showed up and tried their best to do their jobs..." I suppose that he's correct in saying that they showed up. Again, I really don't know.
But if in the specific and only case to which I refer--the case of Senate Republicans post the 2008 election--automatically voting no on anything non-Republican and forcing even the most mundane legislation to chalk up 60 votes for passage is an example of anyone trying their best to do their jobs, well, I'm sorry, ma'am, but no sale.
Finally, thanks for your final remark, the one in which you say that I'm "an example of why some libs should hesitate to speak their minds." (BTW, how you can tell whether I'm a "lib" or a conservative is beyond me. Is it the case that expressing occasional dissatisfaction with specific behaviors of Republicans makes me a "lib"?) But back to the point, hesitating to speak one's mind is behavior common to the Middle East and other tyrannically governed regions, not the US. Please review the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is a joke, right?
The scandal is not so much that he talked to "Koch" but what he said in that conversation, such as his willingness to consider sending in agent provocateurs to stir up violence. That deserves a grand jury investigation to determine whether there was a criminal conspiracy afoot. To focus on the fact that he talked to "Koch" is a classic misdirection.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse