Posted on January 31, 2009 - by Venik

Blago’s Predicament

Just finished watching Larry’s interview with Blagoyevich. What can I say… Before his arrest in early December I never heard of Blago. Well, maybe I did come across his name a few times while reading the news, but the name just didn’t stick. I had no idea who the governor of Illinois is, or if Illinois even had a governor. In fact, when I hear the name of this state, the only thing that comes to my mind is my favorite American movie: The Blues Brothers.

Having said that, I was surprised by how rapidly the situation around Blago has developed. I barely finished reading the original December 8 Reuters reports and certain characters in DC and in Illinois senate were already calling for his resignation. Why just his resignation, why not his head? Blindfold the motherfucker, face against the wall, line up some National Guard riflemen and get it over with.

But no, the goddamned Americans have their, what you call them, rights and liberties. This means they have to gather, what you call it, evidence, bring the guilty bastard to trial, have him wear a suit and a tie and look all presentable and innocent. Who came up with this “innocent until proven guilty” shit anyway? I would change this to “guilty until executed”. Guantanamo was a good start, but a bit skimpy on executions.

But since we like to pretend to play by the rules, lets assume for a moment that Blago is innocent. Why would he be innocent? I don’t know, maybe his parents loved him too much; maybe he has some kind of condition or takes some medication; or perhaps he drinks filtered water. It doesn’t matter: let’s just assume that he is innocent, since that’s what our inane criminal law dictates.

Why would a state congress or senate try to impeach a duly elected and completely innocent (until proven otherwise) Governor, based on nothing but media reports, hearsay and incomplete and patchy evidence selectively released by the prosecutors? Isn’t this a bit, what’s the word, Stalinist? It is important to clarify something here: “innocent until proven guilty” means literally that and not “innocent” until proven guilty.

Blago strikes me as intelligent and articulate. This is an unusual combination in American politics and its bad news for Blago, as it makes him look guilty. That and his hair due are not doing him any favors. However, Blago has a point: record enough of anyone’s personal conversations and you will always find snippets to support any allegation. Case in point: just the other week I was telling my brother that I will shove my foot so far up my boss’ ass, he’d be able to tie my shoelaces with with his teeth.

And yet nobody is accusing me of having intent to start an unlicensed surgery practice. Not to mention that my enthusiastic proposal completely ignored some well known aspects of human anatomy. Last summer I told my neighbor that, should his dober or his wife’s chihuahua take another shit on my lawn, I will take the small dog and plug the big dog’s ass with it. Obviously, I had no intention of actually combining the two dogs into one, but its easy to see how my intentions could have been misunderstood, especially when taken out of context (comprised mainly of big steaming dog turds on my new expensive lawn).

I am not saying that Blago is a good guy. He’s a politician, so he’s probably a very bad guy. But lets not set any precedents here of governors being removed by state congressmen based on some patchy evidence coming from a prosecutor once considered for the second lead alongside Jim Kerry in “Dumb and Dumber”. Well, no, not really, but I heard he considered a career as an actor once. And that alone makes him as guilty as Blago. Guiltier, in fact.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Related posts:

1. Olympic Bones