WSYX: you know, stop pushing this garbage about how people are turning this into a moral thing; this isn’t about whether the infidelity was “right or wrong;” this is about how an elected official abused the power gained from the voters’ trust on a scale that any human human would recognize as impermissibly violative of that trust and requiring resignation.
Columbus Dispatch delves into the “why do they do it” thing which I’ve linked to before from other sources; here’s a tease (check out how the URL includes the smirk-worthy fragment “polisex”):
Sensational sex scandals involving politicians over the years have prompted experts in psychology and politics to study whether there are common traits among those who engage in risky behavior. Turns out, there are.
“Politicians tend to be higher in the need for power or dominance, are more prone to social desirability pressures, for example to present positive images of themselves, and are more self-confident,” said Kathleen McGray, an expert in political psychology at Ohio State University.
“The higher self-confidence may account for engaging in stupid behavior when they have so much to lose, because they are confident they will get away with it. Dann still seems confident he will survive all of this.”
I adore John Michael Spinelli, but I do disagree with his approach as outlined in this very good Opeditude on ePluribus Media.
The Dispatch’s Mike Hardin says that Dann will be delivering pizza within a month.
Lisa Renee has a worthwhile thread going here debating what can be done to craft the impeachment resolution.
Modern Esquire suggests that the onion layers around the AG’s office are continuing to peel and reveal.
Marion County weights in for resignation.
The Plain Dealer’s Tom Suddes shows over the top cynicism with little support beyond a 20 year old example.
Vindy.com on Crime Town, USA – has anyone spoken with Youngstown Mayor Jay Williams or city council or some of the other hard-working folks there who’ve tried like the devil to improve the image of Youngstown and how they feel about AG situation?
The Third Rail session was last week (5/7/08) but isn’t posted yet. We covered many topics, pretty much all political.
The BBC piece is today on Five Live. I think it’s actually supposed to be happening within a few minutes.
Can you believe that no one’s contacted me?
Great opportunity! White Hat Management, Ohios premier charter school management company, is currently recruiting for an Internet Coordinator. We are seeking a team player to oversee all internet marketing and advertisement campaigns including developing leads via banner and search engine ads and e-mail campaigns: coordinating link exchange programs and link networking: analyzing site traffic: managing Pay Per Click campaigns and reporting: and working to ensure optimal customer satisfaction with our websites. BA/BS degree required along with at least 3+ years of online marketing experience. We offer a competitive salary and full benefits package including medical, dental, vision, 401(k), tuition reimbursement, and paid time off. For further details, and to apply online, please visit www.whitehat
This piece was written by Ellen Bravo, who spoke in NE Ohio last month about her latest book, Taking on the Big Boys. Sounds like a common theme in Ohio for some of us lately. I love this quote from the Amazon page, “Enough about “breaking the glass ceiling.” Here are blueprints for a redesign of the entire building, ground up, to benefit women and men-and even the bottom line.”
Here’s an interview with her earlier this year, also about her work and the book. An excerpt that Ohio needs to read right now in relation to what’s happening in our Attorney General’s office [bold emphasis is mine]:
Casey: In your title, Taking on the Big Boys, who are the “big boys”? How do they operate?
Bravo: The “big boys” are the powers that be. They are the people who control how and when we do our work, influence public policy, and often have a stake in maintaining the status quo, as they benefit from it. Some of the “big boys” are women, but the majority of men are not “big boys.” “Big boys” often maintain the status quo in place by using approaches that trivialize, patronize, “catastrophize,” demonize, and compartmentalize. When talking about the problems people face in managing work and family, they say things like “Well, women can do whatever they want! If they’re not represented in the best jobs, it’s because they have chosen not to pursue those jobs!” or “Men want to take leaves because they want to go hunting and fishing! They don’t care about their babies.” Another common response is “You don’t understand how business works, so you suggest these pie-in-the-sky ideas.” Finally, rather than addressing problems with the way work is structured, they suggest that if, mothers are unhappy with their lives, they should fight each other in the so-called “mommy wars,” as opposed to fighting for changes within the workplace and the home. My purpose in writing this book was to expose these tactics, explain how they work, and show that with the right analysis and organization, it is possible to take them on. The “big boys” try to imply that there is no need to take them on, that if workers are upset they need to change themselves, and even if you did attempt to take the big boys on, you can’t win. Giving concrete examples of how people have made changes in the workplace can inspire others to take action.
The good news is that some of the “big boys” get it and will be won over by an analysis of adjustments to today’s work arrangements and environments. The more we can expand that group, the better it is for us all. I want people to understand the consequences that come from leaving the world the way it is now and stake we all have in changing it.
Casey: Why do you think so few have so much power?
Bravo: I think it has to do with the way profit has developed as a driver. I make the case again and again that changing the way that businesses are run is not a favor to women; the changes are a better way to do business. However, this is only true if you care about the business itself. If individuals only care only about their own profit and don’t even consider the short term interests of the company, let alone the long term interests, they will fail. Unfortunately, lots of people with that mindset have lots of power. They are not only controlling businesses, they also play a role in who runs for office and how politicians conduct themselves. This affects public policy as well as the private sector. Therefore, the more we can make business about the entity itself rather than the personal needs of the higher-ups within companies, the better we all will be.
Casey: What are some of the negative consequences of the “big boys’” behavior?
Bravo: For women, it obviously costs jobs, income, and opportunities. However, it isn’t just women that are hurt by this behavior; many men are hurt by it, and there are many men who want to integrate their work and family lives, just as women do. Studies show that men are favored when they’re fathers—that’s what “normal” is—but if they start to act like mothers and are invested in their families and want to organize their work to take this into account, they, too, suffer penalties. So, the behavior certainly harms families.
I think the behavior also harms businesses by hurting workers’ productivity and, causing more money to go into areas like turnover costs. It also harms the quality of work, workers’ health and well-being as well as income. If we judged workplace policy, and public policy, for that matter, on outcomes such as child well-being, family well-being, and social well-being, we’d have very different policies. Many countries do this—they say “If we do x, what will the impact be on y?” “Y” can be children, families, fiscal solvency, the environment, et cetera. Of course, we don’t do this—those who do just look at profits, and that is a problem. We talk a lot about family values, but in the United States, family values often end at the workplace door.
On Saturday afternoon, the Hager family hosted wedding guests at a barbecue in Salado. The wedding, which began at 7:30 p.m., took place on the Bush ranch, before a white limestone altar erected next to a man-made lake. The Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell of Windsor Village United Methodist Church in Houston officiated at the ceremony. Mr. Caldwell, a longtime religious adviser to Mr. Bush, has endorsed Senator Barack Obama.
Here’s more on Rev. Caldwell.
Here’s an interview with the Reverend that asks him “why a spiritual advisor to President Bush supports Obama.”
Close-in supporters of Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign are convinced he never will offer the vice presidential nomination to Sen. Hillary Clinton for one overriding reason: Michelle Obama.
The Democratic front-runner’s wife did not comment on other rival candidates for the party’s nomination, but she has been sniping at Clinton since last summer. According to Obama sources, those public utterances do not reveal the extent of her hostility.
A footnote: Support is growing in Democratic ranks for Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland as vice president. He would bring to the ticket maturity (66 years old), experience (six terms in Congress) and moderation (rated “A” by the National Rifle Association). He is very popular in Ohio, a state Republicans must carry to elect a president.
What’s Ohio Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher thinking about these days?
Sigh. Come January 2009, the Ohio statewide offices could look a whole lot different than they did in January 2007.
But better or worse?