By Kristen Hamilton, RP Staff, on Tue Jun 7, 2011 at 10:00 AM ET Inspired by Michelle Obama’s simple but sophisticated black Ralph Lauren gown that she donned in her recent visit to England (and how can I forget about the breathtaking white Tom Ford gown – oh my gosh!), I was moved to write about one of the most strenuous responsibilities that come with being the First Lady: being fashionable. It may sound vain, but America has an obsession with the First Lady’s wardrobe. Don’t believe me?
Read the rest of…
The Politics of Fashion: The Pressure of Being the First Lady AND a Fashion Icon
By Artur Davis, on Tue Jun 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM ET  Let’s stipulate that John Edwards’ misdeeds are already legendary. Whatever your view of the linkage between sexual misconduct and public life, Edwards picked an usually sordid path to travel–the betrayal of a dying spouse, the failure to own up to a pregnancy, and a political cover-up that traded on the loyalty of people who believed in him deeply.
But sin is still not criminal, and I am in the camp that thinks the prosecution of Edwards last week is misguided.
These are the basic facts around the case: in 2007 and 2008, several major Edwards donors funneled just under a million dollars to Edwards for the purpose of paying off Realle Hunter, Edwards’ mistress, in the hope that she would remain silent about the affair. The Edwards campaign did not disclose the money in its quarterly FEC filings, and there has been much subsequent wrangling over whether they should have.
Whether the money should have been revealed turns largely on how it is classified: gifts need not be reported to the FEC, campaign contributions must be. If the funds had a political purpose like preserving Edwards’ candidacy from scandal, they are arguably campaign contributions. If they were political, they also might be what campaign law calls independent expenditures, and in that case, it would be a campaign finance law violation if Edwards “coordinated” the expenditures in any way.
 The Edwards camp responds that the money, which came from two longtime friends of the former Senator, was a personal gift meant to help Edwards by shielding his wife and family from finding out about the affair. In its charging, the Department of Justice contends that the Edwards team is wrong and that its receipt of the money, which is way outside the legal limits for individual contributions, and its subsequent failure to disclose it, are criminal violations. Edwards alone has been charged.
Again, a concession is in order: a candidate’s receipt of sizable amounts of money from a few sources is not a good thing for those of us who worry about the sway big money donors have on politics. Moreover, the idea that money has either a “political” or a “personal” purpose is a rather obvious fiction: keeping an extramarital affair out of view helps save both a marriage and a political career.
But imagine a scenario that is slightly less salacious. Let’s say a major cable television network pays a potential presidential candidate a significant salary to host a program on public affairs, and regularly features that candidate as a commentator on its other programming. The candidate has no previous experience as a journalist and the show performs poorly enough in the ratings that the network derives little benefit. Is this generosity a campaign contribution, on the grounds that the free time and the salary boost the candidate’s presidential interests in obvious ways, and spares him the inconvenience of a day job? Or is it just an act of kindness meant to sustain a figure whose views are shared by the network’s management?
Read the rest of…
Artur Davis: Former Fed. Prosecutor Calls Edwards Prosecution “Misguided”
By RP Staff, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM ET The RP started the discussion this afternoon, and the battle is engaged.
Jonathan’s piece opposing John Edwards’ prosecution has stirred a real debate at The Recovering Politician. Tomorrow, you will hear from a few more contributing RPs, including a former federal prosecutor and a former federal prisoner. (Hmmm… I wonder who that is?)
In addition, our own RP staffer, Kristen Hamilton, debuts her first full essay on her pet passion — the politics of fashion. Read how Michelle Obama makes the careful balance between political leader and fashion icon.
We will see you tomorrow!
By Robert Kahne, RP Staff, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 3:30 PM ET
I love Quintin Tarantino. If you like movies, you probably do too. His last film, Inglourious Basterds, was the first film in which Michael Fassbender really shined. Fassbender is in the new X-Men film out now, and is fantastic in the film. Rumor has it that he will join up with Tarantino again in Tarantino’s next picture: Django Unchained. Color me excited. [The Movie Blog]
The blog Film Junk has a nice rundown of the box office from last weekend with a few interesting insights: The Hangover: Part II, dropped off more than 60% in the second weekend, and X-Men: Origins grossed less than any of the previous four X-Men films on its opening weekend (after inflation is taken into account). What does all this mean? [Film Junk]
Here is an interesting article from The Guardian about documentary film making. With fewer and fewer people going out to see documentaries, it is harder and harder to profit from making these important works. Read this to see how film makers are coping with this new reality. [The Guardian]
Don’t text in the movies. It’s super distracting to see a bright screen in the corner of one’s eye while trying to watch a film. The Austin theater Alamo Drafthouse has a simple rule: if you text in the theater, they kick you out. This happened to somebody, and they got upset, and left a voice mail. The Alamo Drafthouse is now running that voice mail as a PSA before their R-Rated films. Be careful if you watch the video, though, its certainly R-Rated. [/Film]
By Zack Adams, RP Staff, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 3:00 PM ET
Lets start off with a bit of fun, shall we? Apple is currently constructing one of the largest Apple stores in the world in Hamburg, Germany. Things seemed to be going according to plan until a few pranksters decided to do a bit of trolling. [OS News]
Ladies and gentlemen, I’m pleased to introduce Windows 8. Or at least a sneak peek of the future iteration of Microsoft’s 25-year-old operating system. [All Things D]
Are you using an old browser? Specifically IE7, Safari 3, Firefox 3.5 or older? Well stop it! Mainly because you are severely limiting yourself, but also because at the beginning of August Google will cease supporting those browsers. [BBC]
Three banks are responsible for 95% of spam transactions. Surprised? I don’t blame you. However, this is revealed in a study conducted by the University of California-San Diego, the University of California-Berkeley, and the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. [ars technica]
By Jonathan Miller, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 2:15 PM ET John Edwards’ indictment last week is an issue that will occupy the blogosphere and the political chattering class for months.
And it’s one to which we will be devoting considerable attention here at The Recovering Politician.
For the Edwards affair touches on a significant number of issues that are of primary concern and interest to our contributors and our readership: the privacy rights of public figures; the criminalization of politics; the special responsibilities of our state and national leaders.
My take on the issue is fairly simple. While I have never been much of a fan or supporter of Edwards, and while I find the cover-up scheme for which he was charged to be reckless, irresponsible, and farcical; I oppose his prosecution, and I am hoping that he will escape criminal punishment.
I published an essay on my views in today’s Huffington Post. Here is an excerpt:
I really wanted to like John Edwards. I just couldn’t help myself.
From the time of his first presidential bid, Edwards’ focus on poverty reduction and his sublimely poetic identification of “two Americas” perfectly captured my own communitarian vision of politics and public service.
But I couldn’t support him. There was just something about him.
I wish I could say it was because I suspected the arrogance and recklessness that led him to risk the Democratic Party’s fortunes – indeed, the fate of the country — on an implausible scheme to cover-up the paternity of his child. But I wasn’t that insightful.
Only recently, upon reflecting on my own political career, did I understand what it was.
To read my complete essay, please click here.
And please stay tuned to The Recovering Politician for a wide variety of different opinions on the Edwards scandal.
By Sandra Moon, RP Staff, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 1:30 PM ET
Paul Ryan, Congressman from Wisconsin, draws criticism from a broad coalition of religious voices for his praise of Ayn Rand, the philosopher who once said she “promote[d] the ethic of selfishness.” The coalition questions the morality of the choices reflected in budget cuts and tax policy supported by the GOP. [Time]
Progressive Muslim-American feminist Amanda Quraishi creates 365muslim, an app providing daily facts about Islam, passages from the Quran, sayings from the prophet Muhammad, and other information about Islam. [Statesman.com]
Issues concerning the separation between Church and State were hot last week– In Texas, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that prayer at a public high school graduation is not unconstitutional. Supporters of the previous prayer ban argue that “[a]ll children should feel welcome at this important event in their lives regardless of their opinions about religion.” [Huffington Post]
Up north, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that New York City can keep religious services out of its schools without violating worshippers’ free speech or free exercise of religion rights. [International Business Times]
Who says faith can’t be fun? Check out this blog–Food, Faith and Being Fabulous: A Foodie’s Guide to Life, or A Seminarian’s Guide to Food, and Other Things. [www.reverendchef.com]
By Grant Smith, RP Staff, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 10:00 AM ET
Why Google won’t survive the Facebook threat. [The Atlantic]
A great old article to reread: The web is dead, long live the internet [Wired]
What we know about the lastest Apple OS, and why it may be the last one. [Gizmodo]
Sony takes first steps to release its next machine: read about it here. [Engadet]
By Jonathan Miller, on Mon Jun 6, 2011 at 8:30 AM ET Yesterday, June 5, marked the 43rd anniversary of the tragic assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy.
His daughter, our very own contributing RP, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, spent the weekend paying tribute to the virtue of public service. In a speech before the The Women’s Network, Townsend shared her thoughts on the meaning of her father’s legacy:
In 1968, as you all remember, my father was running for president. David Frost asked Ronald Reagan and my father a question. I’m going to ask you that same question and give you thirty seconds of silence to think about how you’d answer that question, okay? The question is, “What is the purpose of life?” Think about how you would have answered it, okay?
Both Ronald Reagan and my father came up with good answers, and answers that rooted in the American tradition. Ronald Reagan said “The first thing is you have to reproduce yourself. Of course my mother [of ten] did a really good job on that one. And then he said what we really need in this country is individual freedom. We’re based on a belief in the Judeo-Christian belief of individual salvation and so what we need is individual freedom within the extent of the law. That was his answer. That makes a certain amount of sense. We talk about freedoms, we’re clelebrating Franklin Roosevelt’s four freedoms.
But I think Ronald Reagan missed something. My father said the first thing you do, you need enough food, clothing and shelter. If you don’t have that, that’s not a worthwhile life. But after you do that, you have to help others. You may have no shoes, but there’s always somebody else who has no feet. Our responsibility is to help others.
What had happened in 1968 when my father lost the election is we moved away from a sense that we’re all in this together, we’re part of a larger community, and we have to help one another. [We moved to] A belief only in ourselves, individualism. That started to dominate our economic system, which wasn’t there before. Milton Friedman, Allen Greenspan, who only thought: “What can we do for me?” Ayn Rand. And that has been a destructive economic system. We hear the rhetoric: “We want to cut taxes to create wealth”. Well, wealth for whom? Wealth for the top two percent of Americans. Wealth for the rest of Americans has not gone up in thirty years. What we’ve done is focused on wealth and not on worth. It means our country is weaker of this bad ideology which we have to change, and that’s what Democrats need to do.
For the entire speech, transcribed by Blue Bluegrass blogger Bob Layton, click here.
– – –
Coincidentally (?) , Townsend entered the patheon of the American intellectual zeitgeist yesterday as well. She was featured as a clue in the New York Times Sunday crossword puzzle:
106 Down: “Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, to J.F.K.” Five letters.
I didn’t say it was a remarkably difficult clue…
By Grant Smith, RP Staff, on Fri Jun 3, 2011 at 3:00 PM ET
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s Summer of discontent. [CNN]
He’s baaaaack: Trump announces his purchase of a “new used plane.” [Forbes]
Boy sells a kidney in order to buy an iPad. [Fortune]
Steve Forbes argues for a new gold standard for the modern era. [The Street]
As World’s Millionaires multiply; Singapore holds its lead. [Business Week]
|
The Recovering Politician Bookstore
|
