Patterico's Pontifications

1/26/2009

Blago Considered Appointing Oprah As Illinois Senator

Filed under: Buffoons,General — Patterico @ 8:05 pm

ABC News reports:

Illinois’ beleaguered Gov. Rod Blagojevich said today that when he was deciding who would take President Obama’s Senate seat he considered appointing talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, a suggestion that Winfrey says left her “amused.”

It makes sense to me. Who has more money than Oprah?

P.S. I heard a guy on the radio today mocking this as ridiculous. Of course, it is. But what’s more ridiculous is that, if she ran, she’d probably win.

Laugh if you like . . . but then explain to me why anyone took Caroline Kennedy seriously as a possible Senator.

19 Responses to “Blago Considered Appointing Oprah As Illinois Senator”

  1. Wouldn’t be any more ridiculous than Arnie or what’s his face in Minnesota. Or Kucinich for that matter.

    Kevin (0f9223)

  2. I wouldn’t vote for Kucinich if he were running for dog warden… unopposed.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  3. Here is Blago’s appearance on The View today. Oh, my. Too bad the clip ends before Nancy Grace shows up.
    YouTube: Blago on The View

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  4. Wouldn’t be any more ridiculous than Arnie or what’s his face in Minnesota.

    Actually, it would. At least Arnie and Al Franken (or maybe Jesse Ventura?) went through an election to get to their offices. Oprah being appointed to an office is way more ridiculous.

    Steverino (b12c49)

  5. What’s so bizarre about Oprah holding elective office? She has the same qualifications as Mike Bloomberg, success at the media business. That has always been considered sufficient to hold elective office. Her status as a talk show host is no more disqualifying than Ronald Reagan’s career as an actor.

    She is also 1,000 times more qualified than Caroline Kennedy to be a Senator. Oprah is 100% personal achievement, while Kennedy’s sole qualification is her geneology.

    Cyrus Sanai (4df861)

  6. CS, your initial question holds an “understood” premise that is not valid. The discussion is not whether Ms. Winfrey can get elected to office. The discussion is about the suggestion she was considered a candidate to be appointed to that elective office. There is a huge difference there.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  7. Bloomberg was a partner at Salomon Brothers before founding his information technology company.

    It would have been entertaining to have Oprah in the Senate and have the MSM worry about her weight along with her loyal viewers.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  8. Oprah is qualified, she would make a better senator than many other democrats (and certainly better than Sweet Princess Caroline). But this is all about Blago, not Oprah.

    Still, he did what he had to do, avoid a special election and allow the GOP the chance to pick up a seat.

    Joe (17aeff)

  9. What’s laughable is the idea that Oprah would have accepted the appointment.

    Nels (3e56d7)

  10. What is risible is that Oprah is not only better qualified than Caroline but behind the veneer as an astute businesswoman she is better qualified than Obama. As for Blago, I’m rooting for the shameless S.O.B, the comedy value alone is better than Steward, Maher and the rest of the lib comics combined. Plus soon enough he will sing against his former friends and patrons. It’s going to be a hoot.

    cubanbob (409ac2)

  11. I don’t think anyone can seriously dispute that Oprah has a greater record of accomplishment than Caroline Kennedy. Ms. Kennedy’s modest accomplishments don’t particularly suit her, in my judgment, to be a high-level public servant, and neither do Ms. Winfrey’s. But at least there’s a strong argument to be made with respect to Ms. Winfrey that she’s been very, very successful at something (other than choosing her parents).

    Beldar (ad70fd)

  12. Once all is said and done, how big an advance do you think Blago is going to get for his book?

    Pablo (99243e)

  13. As for Blago, I’m rooting for the shameless S.O.B, the comedy value alone is better than Steward, Maher and the rest of the lib comics combined.

    I’m with you. For sheer entertainment value this cannot be beat. Sort of like listening to Pelosi suggest that non-aborted fetuses from poor families are a drain on the economy. So we need to, you know, abort them. For the country, you know.

    In the eight years since Clintoon I had forgotten the hilarity of having the Democrats front-and-center. If laughter is indeed the best medicine then my life expectancy has increased dramatically in the past several months.

    KB (5a6552)

  14. Her status as a talk show host is no more disqualifying than Ronald Reagan’s career as an actor.

    Yet another red herring. Reagan ran for his offices. If Oprah throws her hat into the ring and gets elected, that’s great. But being appointed to a seat, where the voters don’t have a say in whether her qualifications are sufficient, is wrong.

    Steverino (b12c49)

  15. I’m sure the Oprah revelation occurred while Blago was waiting backstage at GMA. He’s quite the name dropper, Ghandi, King, God.

    Dan F (a67de7)

  16. “Her status as a talk show host is no more disqualifying than Ronald Reagan’s career as an actor. – Yet another red herring.”

    No, this is exactly correct. It’s not red herring. “Running for office” is not a qualification for any office. Neither is holding it-victory in an election isn’t a qualification either.

    “where the voters don’t have a say in whether her qualifications are sufficient.”

    This is better. But then the comparison should be to Ford, not Reagan. Ford never ran for the vice-presidency. Voters were unable to consider him qualified or unqualified for that office.

    tehag

    Legislature after legislature filled with lawyers leads me to conclude that a law degree should be a disqualification for office.

    tehag (862f4d)

  17. No, this is exactly correct. It’s not red herring. “Running for office” is not a qualification for any office. Neither is holding it-victory in an election isn’t a qualification either.

    I never said running for office is a qualification, that’s a silly interpretation on your part.

    Holding an office isn’t a qualification? Are you serious? So, experience at the job isn’t a qualification? I need to change my resume next time I go job hunting.

    This is better. But then the comparison should be to Ford, not Reagan. Ford never ran for the vice-presidency. Voters were unable to consider him qualified or unqualified for that office.

    I’m not the one who compared Oprah to Reagan. My point is that if she ran for office and the voters decided she was a good candidate, that wouldn’t get my ire up so much as being handed a high-ranking politcal office simply because of her name.

    Steverino (69d941)

  18. Oprah is working what 5 jobs now? (laughable to think she can take on the senate).

    Kennedy is the Daughter of a past president, niece of a past Senator, and niece of a standing Senator.

    While we’re comparing apples to oranges…….explain to me why anyone took George W. Bush seriously as a candidate for governor of Texas in 1994.

    Oiram (983921)

  19. That’s right Oiram, no one should have taken George W. Bush seriously for governor as only the Democrats believe in hereditary office.

    SPQR (72771e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6705 secs.