As always, a little context comes in handy - for example, Daniel Greenfield's article: "The Hellish Legacy of the Dingell Family".
A decade ago, Time Magazine unveiled an in-depth article on the death of Detroit. One of the politicians whom the article blamed for Detroit’s woes was Rep. John Dingell.
The Dingell clan has held a congressional seat outside Detroit since 1932. Their 87-year tenure has not coincidentally coincided with the decline of a thriving industrial city into a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
But it’s been good for the Dingells, three of whom have sat in their congressional seat since the days of Herbert Hoover, the rise of Hitler, and the radio age, and fattened their pockets on its sinecures.
10 comments:
Imagine if he similarly insulted the former Lion of the Senate, Ted Kennedy.
That these 'public servants' are so revered and regarded as above reproach is disgusting.
I agree. It's bad enough to be under the thumb of politicians, and particularly horrible when they are 7th-rate human beings.
I wonder if being constantly outraged at President Trump will shorten the lives of the members of the drive-by media, and the chattering classes of the Dimocrat party?
One can only hope.
I think we're definitely getting into "stroke" range.
Did the Time article blame the voters? Probably not. The people of Detroit who repeatedly cast votes for the Dingells are proof of the validity of Santayana's (often attributed to Einstein) definition of insanity.
This is how it has traditionally worked: The Dingell family-dominated party machine made deals and offered bribes to lower party officials, who offered some of that to still lower party operatives, who went out to the low-info masses and made promises, a few of which they'd keep just to keep some kind of credibility, and the low-info masses would outvote the people who had enough education and smarts to know what was really going on. And some of those smart, educated people didn't care what was going on as long as they could make their own deals with the Dingell machine (like GM). Thus Detroit, Chicago, and every other Democrat-dominated big city, because the Democrats are all about powerful dynasties and Strong Men.
Did the Time article blame the voters?
Just like with Maxine Waters' constituents, they know the Dingell clan is corrupt, but don't care. "Gettin' some of [their] own back" is how the voters see it.
Why are they a 'clan' and not a 'dynasty'?
I guess if there were ever a failure in the direct line of descent, there are plenty of collateral relatives (wives, cousins, half brothers, etc.) who could take over.
Good insights Rebecca. Son-in-law works here for Ford who he says are 'anti-Trump' so that figures.
Plain feudalism was so much simpler.
Post a Comment