(Boston) Here in America's original "Shining City on a Hill" local politics while a little tawdry at least pays homage to the cardinal virtue of diversity.
The state's first Italian-American Speaker of the House (or General Court as it's been known for nearly four centuries) – Salvatore DiMasi- has just been convicted of bribery and sentenced to eight years in prison. He is the third consecutive Massachusetts Speaker to be convicted in Federal Court- a dubious record no state will likely surpass. Inclusively the two previous felonious speakers were Irish-Americans (Finneran and Flaherty).
Meanwhile the Bay State's first African-American Governor-Deval Patrick- is busy packing the state's education boards with political cronies and jetting about the country campaigning for his good friend Barrack Obama.
Speaking of Obama even the ultra-liberal New York Times and Boston Globe have given only tepid reviews to his big "Jobs Speech" recently delivered before a joint session of Congress. The Times even dared to refer to Obama's plan as a "stimulus" a word officially banned by the White House and Nancy Pelosi. The Globe rather timidly insisted that the "American Jobs Act" was being praised by "some economists", but a quick flip to the paper's business section found praise to be a distinctly minority opinion.
Worse still both papers were prominently reporting on Democrats beginning to harbor doubts about Obama's chances for re-election. A major story on the front page of the Sunday Times was titled "Nervous Democrats Fret Aloud about Obama's Electability".
After delaying the unveiling of his jobs plan until he completed his Martha's Vineyard vacation Obama's people began lowering expectations even before he gave the speech. Given its' substance (or lack thereof) Obama's plan would more appropriately have been compassed in an e-mail to Reid and Boehner, rather than the August setting of a Joint Session.
Obama's economic record at least definitively proves that Keynesian economics simply doesn't work, and that Milton Friedman was right in insisting that recovering from any Recession must be driven by the private and not the public sector. Obama deserves further credit for not asserting that the economy would be A-OK if not for tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural calamities that he can't be blamed for.
What is abundantly clear, however, is that everything bad from now on will be blamed on "obstructionist" Congressional Republicans, or at least until the GOP finally settles on a Presidential candidate who will then quickly be defined as the greatest threat to peace and Western Civilization since Attila the Hun.
So who is that GOP candidate likely to be? Like Druids of old the chattering classes are busily "casting the runes" for clues that emerged from the first two Republican Debates to include Texas Governor Rick Perry.
The predictions of this chatterer are as follows:
Santorum: His strategy to win on the social issues failed; too much competition. His lack of an economic message, money, and his crushing defeat(18 points) in his 2006 Senate re-election bid portend imminent departure.
Huntsman: Stuck in the polls at 1% he must realize that the liberal media is keeping him alive merely as a wonderful tool to portray all other GOP candidates as "too extreme". Absent a break-out in these September debates he will soon tire of spending his own money.
Cain: Despite a refreshing directness and impressive oratorical skills, he's persistently polling in single digits because GOP voters know he can't win.
Gingrich: As the author of the "Gingrich Revolution", Newt's place in GOP history is secure, but that was then, and this is now. Today he is 68 year old man who knows this is his last Rodeo. Unfortunately for him stunning lapses in judgment, inability to hold a staff together and general laziness on the campaign trail mean that when he leaves on his next vacation no one will know or care.
Bachmann: Her narrow victory at the Ames Straw Poll was her high water mark. The sudden rise of Rick Perry in the polls was greatly at her expense. A feisty lady, capable fundraiser, and no quitter, she will linger, but to no avail.
Paul: His image is somewhere between Harold Stassen and Ralph Nader. He can rightly claim that the mainstream has moved closer to his Libertarian positions, and if intensity of following were the only test he would be the nominee. His purity dooms his viability, but he will go the distance because what he really wants is influence on the party's direction.
Romney: In the Age of Bob Dole he would probably be the nominee simply because its' "his turn". However in 2012 he could end up as Hilary did in 2008: The presumptive nominee until blindsided by a relative unknown who excited the base.
Perry: His first two debates suggest he is no flash in the pan. Unlike early Romney he wisely and strongly stood by this established positions on hot button issues like Social Security, Immigration, and Global Warming- albeit skillfully reshaping them to fit current needs. Unless it emerges that he is secretly dating Madonna or some similar No-No Perry will be slugging it out with Romney at least through the Spring Primaries. This extended combat will certainly benefit the winner.
Come November 2012 undecided American voters may be uncertain whether the GOP candidate is up to the test of being President in these perilous times. However they will have abundant evidence that Obama has already failed that test.
William Moloney is a Fellow at the Centennial Institute in Colorado. His columns have appeared in the Wall St. Journal, USA Today, Philadelphia Inquirer, Baltimore Sun, Washington Post, Denver Post, and Human Events.
