Standard of Conduct

Illinois Senator Roland Burris received a Public Letter of Qualified Admonition on Friday from the Senate Ethics Committee. The letter amounts to a slap on the wrist for an ever-changing story of how he didn’t try to play ball with Blago. An excerpt of the letter has me perplexed: “Senators must meet a much higher standard of conduct.”

Really? Let’s have a look at the lovely Senators who meet the Standard:

Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK): Bribery and Tax evasion.

Senator Robert Torricelli (D-NJ): Illegal campaign contributions.

Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL) Kept a $28,750 royalty check instead of reimbursing her mother’s Medicaid bill.

Senator David Durenberger (R-MN): Misuse of public funds.

Senator John McCain (R-AZ): Used poor judgment in Keating Five (questionable campaign funds).

Senator Alan Cranston (D-CA): Reprimanded for role in Keating Five.

Senator Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ): Acted improperly in Keating Five.

Senator Don Riegle (D-MI): Acted improperly in Keating Five.

Senator John Glenn (D-OH): Used poor judgement in Keating Five.

Senator David Durenberger (R-MN): Unethical financial transactions.

Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC): Election tampering.

Senator Harrison A. Williams (D-NJ): Accepted bribes.

Senator Herman Talmadge (D-GA): Accepted $43,435.83 in gifts.

Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA): One word for ya: Chappaquiddick.

Senator Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT): Financial misconduct.

Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI): McCarthy. Need I elaborate?

So, Burris doesn’t measure up with these folks? Really? If senators were really expected to measure up to a high standard of conduct, I think we’d lose half the lot (conservative estimate).

But while we’re talking about Burris, I want to bring up the Blagojevich thing here. I didn’t have my blog when it happened, so I want to get some questions out there. It all boils down to a measure of logic, but unless there’s a piece of the puzzle I’m missing (which my readers are encouraged to bring to my attention), I have a question for Obama. One big piece of evidence that Blago was trying to sell the seat is this quote from the federal complaint against him:
“c. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another
consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it
up” for two years and do nothing and give this “mothercensored [the President-elect] his
senator. Censored him. For nothing? Censored him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put
“[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give censored [Senate Candidate 1] a
censored Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of
the State of Illinois).“

Okay, so tell me this: If Obama, or someone on his staff, never told Blago, or someone on his staff, that Obama wouldn’t deal, how would Blago know that Obama wasn’t going to deal? He wouldn’t know. There would be no transcript of Blago being pissed at Obama if there was no communication between them. I think that establishes that someone in the Obama camp was in communication with someone in Blago’s camp. And even if the two never spoke directly, someone below them would have had to pass the messages along to the decision-makers (BlagObama). So I think that establishes that Obama was aware of what Blago was offering and asking. So, my question to Obama is this: If you knew what Blago was asking, why didn’t you report him to the authorities? It would have been a huge boon to your campaign. It would have quelled the fear in the hearts of many who believed that you were going to play Chicago politics with the whole nation. More importantly, it would have been the right thing to do. Now, if you didn’t know Blago was selling the seat, how did he know your answer was ‘no’, leading to his taped tirade? Did someone in your camp make the decision for you and keep you out of the loop? If so, who was it, and why didn’t they turn Blago in?

That’s what I want to know.

Related: Disappointments in My President

Advertisement