Las Vegas Gleaner

Nutjob governor to call it a day

  Alas, not our nutjob governor.

 

And please, people, observe proper flag etiquette

This Independence Day holiday finds your Gleaner's thoughts turning to the opinion held by many founders that a republic's success depended on a virtuous citizenry and that a virtuous citizenry, in turn, could only flourish and survive under a particular stage of economic and social development.

Nutshell: Once a society advances, as it inevitably will, beyond an agriculture-based economy to an economy dominated by commerce, your republic is screwed.

More than two centuries later, America and most of the rest of the world is pretty much dedicated to the proposition that a republic, and the democratic components thereof, can and must survive and thrive in a post-agrarian economy.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the likes of Franklin and Jefferson were wrong. It just underscores a point that is stupidly obvious but that also is too often conveniently ignored or glossed over: they were products of the eighteenth century.

Newt Gingrich, William Bennett, Rush Limbaugh and other conservative "thinkers" often natter on about how shocked the founders would be by modern America, usually in the context of big government. Maybe so. The list of things that would shock eighteenth century people, even eighteenth century people of uncommon brilliance and imagination, is a long one that includes but certainly is not limited to: the cut and paste feature on the new iPhone, frozen veggie burgers, grass lawns, the flat screen TV, learning that the black man speaking on the flat screen TV is the president of the Untied States, etc...

But if the size and scope of government would surprise the declaration's signers, they would be equally surprised -- and arguably even more dismayed -- by the power and influence wielded over society by big business.

*   *   *

Meantime in other revolution news, please enjoy this video of Franklin and Adams coming to the realization that this Jefferson slacker really and truly can throw the high cheese.

 

Finally, remember everyone, no flag code violations.

Anyone who appeals to Nevada's most sought-after group of swing voters can't be totally written off

So in this week's CityLife column, your Gleaner considers one of the state's many politicians whose aspirations for higher office hinge on that all-important bloc of the Nevada electorate, "morons who like to vote for charlatans, demagogues and flakes because they're 'different.'"

This person is the official editor of a metropolitan daily newspaper

This very disturbing video was voluntarily and deliberately put up on on the internets by Las Vegas Review-Journal Editor Thomas Mitchell in conjunction with a blog post he wrote about clean energy (long story short: he's against it).

"They looked at me with blank stares, like the addled uncle who was supposed to be kept in the attic..."  Mitchell writes.

I've nothing to add.

No longer satisfied with interviewing people on the street, reporters now shoving them around

For decades, the American media has operated under the delusion that asking random passers-by how they feel is a wise use of newsroom resources. Now the media's historical abuse of "the man on the street" has been taken to new heights by a Las Vegas TV station. (via Sebelius)

This tourist seems to present exactly the sort of thing that the TV station might have been looking for -- a unique and colorful yet representative reaction to the stunning news that Michael Jackson is still dead.

But instead of thanking the tourist for his frank and free opinion on this important topic, our strapping young broadcast journalist on the scene, thinking out of the box, as it were, opted for a more novel approach and assaulted the tourist physically.

To be fair, the reporter may have been frustrated because he was relegated to getting reactions to the Michael Jackson story from Las Vegas drunks when he would rather be reporting in, say, Iran or Iraq. After all, Iranians and Iraqis loved Michael too.

Still, 'tis a sad day for America when a man can't get totally shitfaced and act like an idiot in front of a camera in public without getting pushed around and slapped by a Las Vegas TV reporter.

Pulitzer package editor takes job at free weekly with sex ads in the back

But not one of our free weeklies with sex ads in the back.

LAWeekly announced that it has hired a new editor, Las Vegas Sun Deputy Managing Editor Drex Heikes.

Its Pulitzer punctuated the distance that the Sun has put between itself and its wrapper, quality wise, over the last few years. Heikes was the editor on the Pulitzer stories and by all accounts has had a whole lot to do with the Sun's overall progress.

Heikes once e-mailed to complain because your lowly Gleaner had suggested that the Sun's improvements were despite the influence of upper-level poohbahs Brian Greenspun and Mike Kelley, not because of them. Unfair, Heikes objected.

Now maybe we'll find out.

John Ensign is the most interesting man in the world!

He's a family man, a businessman, an animal lover and a free spirit -- a "consistently popular" "golden boy" who is not only "handsome" but "savvy" and, no doubt because he is so "exceptionally hard-working," he was able to overcome adversity to become a "self-made" "rising star."

The lengthy profile of holy roller John Ensign in Sunday's R-J must have only heightened Nevadans' outrage over the revelation that the senator slept with his friend's wife and tried to hush it up with cash and and crony-supplied prizes: What a shame that such a talented, wonderful, able, unique and simply magnificent man has been laid low by the taint of tawdry scandal. Boo hoo, no?

It is of course impossible to do a politician's biography justice in the confines of a single newspaper article. There are bound to be omissions. Still, Ensign's achievements as a lawmaker were given curiously short shrift in the R-J piece. After all, John Ensign, and only John Ensign, can fairly claim as the crowning accomplishment of his legislative record a law that makes it a crime to carry a rooster across state lines for a cockfight.

Having no impact whatsoever on the Yucca Mountain issue, putting petty partisan gamesmanship ahead of the interest of his own constituents, demonstrating profound ignorance of and/or cavalier disregard for his own state's financial crisis, flat-out making stuff up to discredit the hotel-gambling labor force that has done so much to enrich him and his family, openly crowing about Katrina's forced displacement of tens of thousands of Democratic voters as a political silver lining for the GOP -- those are merely some of the entries that might be used as starters on a list of items highlighting Ensign's political career.

But while the R-J didn't mention any of those things, patient readers who lasted deep, deep into the gentle profile of their junior senator were rewarded with this item about Ensign's sleeping around:

"This has been an ongoing situation in their marriage," said one old friend who spoke on condition of anonymity. "He always had this proclivity..."

That of course dovetails with the AP report that Ensign's 2002 disappearance "followed an earlier affair," and is yet another reason why the press must continue to well, press Ensign to address the charges that Cindy Hampton was not, as he put it in his public confession, the worst thing he's ever done, but merely the worst thing he's ever done lately. Get him on the record -- hopefully denying any earlier affairs of course. Then when the evidence to the contrary comes out, he can be truly toasted and duly ousted, and Nevada can rid itself of the boy senator once and for all.

Yes, but as a Politico headline might ask, Will Obama's risky sanity strategy backfire?

In a week featuring more 'Do fallout, the Sultry Saga of Sparky Sanford and continued, incessant whiny-butt pussy-footing around on health care from spineless, er, centrist Democratic senators who still seem to think it's 2003, the smartest, sanest thing that anybody said might have come from the podium during the president's meeting with a pissy press:

"I know everybody here is on a 24-hour news cycle. I'm not."

Safe!

A fresh batch of "Republicans for Reid" has come out of the oven and this round of luminaries includes one Greg Maddux, who apparently played baseball or some damned thing and might have been the one person out of everyone on this whole doomed planet who Reid absolutely positively did not want to see coming out of the woodwork to challenge him.

Oh, and the CEO for the local electricity monopoly is in there too. Maybe he'll keep his vendors/brethren in the coal/CO2 industry from launching independent attack ads on Reid for spilling the beans that one time about how coal is going to kill everyone everywhere.

Mark Sanford's magnificent international love life does not change the fact that John Ensign is a peen

John Ensign's lips are sealed in the hope that his whole hush money/crony/sex scandal thingy will just blow over, because that strategy worked for David Vitter, or so says one beltway analysis. Eh, Vitter, Schmitter. Keeping your mouth shut and hoping a problem goes away on its own has long been Plan A in the Greater Las Vegas Area Handbook of Public Relations, Crisis Management and Negligent Governance.

Meantime in other Ensignania, the Sun reports that Fox News had Doug Hampton's allegations of Ensign schtupping the man's wife in their fair and balanced possession even earlier than thought. But a Fox guy still swears that the network was not sitting on the story to protect a wingnut in distress and as always the word of a Fox News journalist is good enough for me.

The Sun also gently informs its readers that "Hushed talks continue about Ensign’s sudden absence in 2002, which the Associated Press has reported involved his marriage."

Close, admittedly. But just to recap, here's what the AP actually reported:

The disclosure resurrected questions about a two-week period in 2002, when Ensign abruptly dropped from public view. A person familiar with that episode, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said Tuesday the senator told a close associate the absence followed an earlier affair.

Why the Sun's oh-so delicately phrased circumspection, wherein "followed an earlier affair" becomes "involved his marriage"? If it is because the Ensignites are disputing the AP's report, fair enough, s'pose, but shouldn't there be a headline that says "Ensign denies earlier affair"?

It just goes to show that the Vitter/Vegas strategy is probably the way to go ... Ensign can sit quietly and do what he does best -- look pretty -- and eventually the media will get bored and start paying attention to the next shiny object.

Oh whatever. The real purpose of this post was to thank the enterprising and helpful Gleaner reader who provided the latest fun photo of Ensign looking all dorky (apologies to dorks) as if he's thinking "I'm not talking and the media can't make me so neener neener neener" (thanks, enterprising and helpful reader).

UPDATE: I see Sebelius at CityLife has been trying to get Ensign's staff to say whether the senator is disputing the AP report, but so far Ensign and Co. are -- surprise, surprise -- clamming up.

Nevada Republican Party proudly welcomes South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford as an honorary member

All South Carolina's wingnut governor does is go a-whoring in Buenos Aires and in one fell swoop a) Jim Gibbons has competition in the race to see whose governor is the most batshit crazy and b) holy roller John Ensign's hush money/crony/sex scandal is wiped from the consciousness of Washington's ADD-addled liberal media. Mark Sanford is by far the Nevada Republican Party's most valuable asset.

UPDATE: Good TV.

Why does the Nevada Democratic Party have to be so low-down, dirty and mean?

Inspired by the heartwarming reports of Sen. Harry Reid wishing his fine and good friend John Ensign the very best in these troubled times, I decided to send an email to Reid's office, because that's something I like to do about, oh, once every three or four months or whatever anyway. It went like this:

In a June 22 Nevada Democratic Party release, the party listed some questions that are "still hanging over Ensign's head" such as whether Ensign violated FEC regs when paying money to Cindy Hampton out of his own pocket or whether he violated Senate rules when the Hamptons were dismissed from his employ.

"It's time for John Ensign to answers these questions so Nevadans can put this matter behind them, and so that their senator can move on and focus on the work he was elected to do," the release said.

Does Sen. Reid agree with the Nevada Democratic Party that Ensign needs to answer these questions? Why or why not? Does Sen. Reid think the Nevada Democratic Party out of line? Why or why not?

Reid spokester Jon Summers responded ever so promptly/briefly:

Sen. Reid's thoughts are with his family and he hopes he works his way through this situation.

Most grown-up, no?

But why oh why have the firebrands at state Democratic Party headquarters -- long a hotbed of radical leftist activism, as everyone knows -- gone so far out of their way to antagonize Ensign at this sensitive moment? Why aren't their thoughts with Ensign's family, like Reid's? Why aren't they, like Reid, hoping Ensign works his way through this situation?

Darn, if only Sen. Reid had enough influence with the state party to make sure that there was some process set up whereby the party didn't issue any official statements or releases concerning John Ensign unless and until they were approved by Reid's staff. Then awkward moments like these could be avoided, and everyone could just join with Jim Gibbons and Harry Reid in wishing the Do well.

Oh, and here's the long-anticipated picture of whatsherface

John, Darlene, Cindy and Doug all dressed up for ... church? Probably. Anyway, thank you, America's newsmagazine. Kind of anti-climactic, perhaps, but then all Republican women of a certain socio-economic status look alike to me.

Philandering fop greeted warmly at club

Lord Hairdo McWedgeshot, the Earl of Pantene, delivered a stirring apology, for which he received in return a heartfelt ovation from his peers Tuesday at luncheon.

His Lordship confided that, though he had taken rather inordinate trouble and expense to hush a commoner whom he had bedded, in a show of bad form contrasting inexplicably from the customary behavior of such trollops, tarts and middling men's wives, the infernal  woman would not be quieted. Thusly she forced him to feign contrition before the ignorant rabble, subject himself to the vulgar scorn and vile humor of the great unwashed and withstand scurrilous and ungentlemanly barbs from the wretched vermine who eke out a dishonorable living in the gutter press.

His terrible tale told, a saddened 'Do entreated his fellow patricians to find it in their noble hearts to forgive him for suffering the dastardly, mean and callous misfortune of getting caught.

Alas, any concerns that the gentlepersons before him assembled would forsake Our Hero were soon allayed by hearty cheers of "All Hail Hairdo, Huzzah!" Verily, the atmosphere duly lightened, all sat at table to await a noontime feast of rare sweetmeats, intoxicating nectars and other delights delivered by comely maidens and sprightly lads adorned in naught but colorful garlands fashioned from delicate flowers and plump ripe berries.

Carnival barker says Ensign should call it a day

Filthy Fox News demagogue Sean Hannity conditions his call for the Hairdo's resignation on it being in point of fact the actual case that Nevada's junior senator is a sanctimonious churchy prick. As for Hannity himself, well, he wouldn't know -- he contends, all weasel-like, that "I don't know where he stands on the issues."

If true, that would mean that a) Ensign is even more obscure and has been even less effective as a senator than earlier thought, or b) Hannity is an uninformed cynical huckster who is thoughtlessly going through the motions, blithely spewing talking points fed him by his staff and then just merrily strutting like the "great American" he is all the way to the bank. As is often the case, a and b are not mutually exclusive.

Although Hannity is (or pretends to be) ignorant of Ensign's penchant for fooling the hapless rubes by playing the churchy values card, the same can't be said for the host's colleagues at Fox News, who of course know a fellow traveler when they see one and sat on the Ensign scandal long enough to let Ensign win favor with some sycophantic yokels by coming clean on his own.

Question, though: When Hannity says "if you're going to be a family values candidate and a family values politician and you don't live up to that, I think you should resign," does that mean that Newt Gingrich has to resign as Hannity's favorite guest/sidekick/pet presidential candidate?

Time on their hands, after all...

If they're going to wuss out on health care reform no matter what an overwhelming majority of Americans want, Harry Reid's Democrats in the Senate might as well take CREW up on its ethics complaint and cast a gander at the suspicious cash flow, tawdry cronyism and other sordid behavioral patterns of the Silvery Coiffed Trysting Hairdo in its native habitat.

'Mission creep' settles in on creep's mission

John Ensign's "hypocrisy is hard to overstate, to the point that commenting on it at all seems somewhat banal."

Of course it's also hard to ignore so I comment on it at least a bit in my latest Guardian piece anyway. But mostly the article is about how Ensign's little scandal has developed "mission creep" -- and is certainly bigger than what Ensign bargained for when he made the "crass, self-serving and coldly calculated" plan to come clean in the hope that "the sooner it's out there, the sooner he can get back on TV to huff and puff about those darned tax-and-spend liberals."

At one point I wonder "How many more televised apologies are in Ensign's future?" and that calls for a little elaboration: A "close associate" of the Do's told the AP last week that Ensign's mysterious 2002 disappearing act followed "an earlier affair." That charge is screaming for some follow-up from the local papers (or in the case of the Ensign-loving R-J, even some acknowledgment). Perhaps Ensign's staff can be interrupted from their busy schedule of trying to blame Douglas Hampton for their boss's blazing (if banal) hypocrisy to issue a clarifying statement: Does Ensign deny the AP's report that he had another affair?

What, are they impressed by his renewable energy strategy?

Yeah yeah yeah people think Ensign's a peen, whatever. Here's the fresh polling data that's nigh on inconceivable: Asked to rate the performance of the nation's creepiest, most unbalanced and worst governor -- "excellent, pretty good, only fair or poor" -- only 69 percent of Democrats said poor, and an astonishing 21 percent of Democrats said fair. (Another 5 percent said good but pollsters dismissed that as an anomaly that might be attributed to, say, the response of some Republican who thought he was still pretending to be a Democrat.)

Senator's behavior stuns NYT columnist

Perhaps echoing the sentiment of informed Iowa GOP activists, Gail Collins confesses that there is one element of the Sen. Hairdo McWedgeshot sex/hush money/cronyism scandal that she finds particularly shocking:

What struck me was that virtually every story about Ensign’s fall from grace included a reference to his having been considered a possible contender for his party’s presidential nomination in 2012.

Who knew?

Letter? What letter?

America's fair and balanced journalists at Fox News totally deny that they received any letter from Doug Hampton calling John Ensign a horndog five days before Ensign stood up in front of the cameras and had a sad.

Nope, they only got the letter the day before Ensign's performance. "I know there are people asking if we alerted the senator," Tom Lowell, a producer for the network's" America's Newsroom" show, told HuffPo. But:

"Definitely no one on our editorial team called anyone in Senator Ensign's office prior to the announcement. We just hadn't gotten to that point of confirming the story yet. Somehow, somebody told the Senator something and I don't know how that happened. But I categorically deny that we ever reached out to the senator in any way shape or form prior to him making his announcement."

I totally believe this guy because he works for Fox.