The Chutzpah Factor

by Libby Hellmann

For me one of the joys of writing fiction is creating larger-than-life characters -- brash, colorful people whose personality and behavior jump off the page and stay with you long after the story ends. Think Emma Bovary, Willy Stark, Jay Gatsby. Some prevailed. Some didn’t. Some prevailed temporarily. But all of them had certain qualities in common. Boldness. Nerve. Chutzpah.

These days though, you don’t have to go into fiction to find characters with chutzpah. And while people in public life aren't known to be shy and retiring, the things some are doing and saying are so out there you can't even label them clichés. I continue to be amazed and shocked– shocked -- at their antics. I suspect some of you do as well.

So, I thought a vote might be in order. Who do you think has the most chutzpah these days? And why? I’ll offer up a few candidates to start.

First he didn’t. Then he did. Maybe a little. Well, more than a little. A lot. But it was all legal. He has nothing to hide. You can believe him.



Suspected of killing wives #3 and #4, ex-cop Drew Peterson crowed to reporters last week about his 23-year old girlfriend moving back in: “Looks like the Devil won this round.”




Wore out his welcome in Illinois. Wearing out his welcome on National TV. Likely to be welcomed into a federal correctional institution with open arms.





He stole billions and didn’t buy a single stock with the cash. Then had his wife withdraw $15 million from the brokerage days before he was arrested. Pocket change.




GOP Congressmen:
The ones who gave thumbs down to the Stimulus package are now climbing all over it to make sure they get their share. Let’s throw Bobby Jindal in too, for refusing $90 million for Louisiana. Good way to build your 2012 platform, Bobby.




Mortgage lenders. Also the Big 3 Automaker CEOs who flew into DC the first time on corporate jets. Enough said.



Finally, it wasn’t enough that she spent $150,000 on clothes. Now she’s charging the state of Alaska a $60 for a phone call.


The polls are open. Vote early and often.


BTW, those of you who want to see Pay-to-Play/Chicago style might enjoy this. (Thanks for the heads-up, Sara)

Sex in the White House

by Libby Hellmann

Those of you who read The Huffington Post might have come across this article about Barack and Michelle Obama’s relationship. It is the Huffington Post, of course, so it was highly complimentary. It talked about how they touch each other in public, how you can see their obvious love and respect for each other, etc.

My reaction? B-O-R-I-N-G. In fact, the Obamas may become the first Democratic occupants of the White House in years who are as boring as the Republicans in the bedroom.

Think about it. How many times did we see Nancy Reagan’s adoring gaze when she looked at Ronnie? Do we really want more of that? Remember all those love letters with the saccharine nicknames?

Excuse me, let me out.


What about Bush 41 and Barb? Be honest -- can you imagine them .. well.. you know? Or Nixon and Pat? Please. George and Laura? Well, maybe, when they were young. And yes, there was Eisenhower and Kay Summersby, but that happened During The War.

It’s much more fun to gossip about what went on behind the Clintons’ closed doors: the temper tantrums… the lamps being thrown… the Monica problem. And what about Jack Kennedy? Everyone knew he was a philanderer. Even LBJ was known to be a stud, when he wasn’t revealing his scars or his dogs’ ears. Okay, admittedly, Jimmy Carter and Harry Truman were boring, but what about FDR?
We still read all sorts of stories about his escapades, and, occasionally, even Eleanor’s.

Frankly, up until recently, the Democrats’ sex lives have just been more colorful. Maybe they took the call to “go to the mattresses” more seriously.

But now everything’s changing. First there were allegations that John McCain had an affair (in addition to the one with Cindy which broke up his first marriage). Then the National Enquirer claimed Sarah Palin had an affair with her husband’s business partner. Are the Republicans trying to play catch up, libido-wise?

Democrats acting like Republicans...Republicans acting like Democrats... And if Obama wins, he and Michelle may bring something approaching stability... even (gasp) love... into the White House.

B-O-R-I-N-G.

Actually, given everything else that's going on in the world, boring's probably not so bad.

What do you think?

And Tango Makes Three

This past Saturday, September 20th, Mary Dempsey received the Harry Kalven award from the ACLU for her commitment to books and free speech. Ms. Dempsey is the Commissioner of the Chicago Public Library, and no one deserves such an honor more. In her remarks, Ms. Dempsey said that our library is open to everyone. You don't need a passport. You don't need a job. You don't need to be tall enough, short enough, blonde enough, black enough, or anything else enough to use the library. When you walk through those doors, you walk in to the world of words, and the words you choose to read are your private business. No one else gets to know about them.

The Chicago Public Library is one of the great city library systems in America. It's open every day of the week, which isn't true in a lot of places. Public library budgets in real dollars are thirty percent of what they were twenty-five years ago, so a lot of cities have trouble keeping the doors open, let alone keeping the shelves stocked. That's why we feel exceptionally fortunate in Chicago to have Commissioner Dempsey and the strong support of the Mayor for our library system (see, Guys, I did think of something good to say about this town. And since the impetus for the library comes from the Mayor, I can even say something good about him on this page).

This week is banned books week where libraries all over the country, in support of our First Amendment freedoms, celebrate and read from banned or challenged books. In Chicago, we'll be doing this on Saturday, September 27th, in the big plaza outside the Tribune Tower on Michigan Avenue. My favorite banned book of recent years is And Tango Makes Three. This is the lovely -- and true -- story of two male penguins at the Central Park Zoo who fell in love with each other, built a nest together, and hatched and raised a chick from an egg abandoned by its (heterosexual) birth mother. The book has been challenged more than any other recent children's book because it's -- you can't believe how hard it is to type these words without falling off your chair in either laughter or disbelief -- anti-family. Go figure. The authors, Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson, are going to be at the Tribune Plaza reading the book around 2:30 on Saturday. I love this book! If you're anywhere near downtown Chicago on Saturday, stop by and listen to the authors tell this wonderful heart-warming anti-family story.

Sara Paretsky

Guns don't kill people, books do

Sarah Palin wanted to fire her town librarian when she was mayor, because the librarian wouldn't help her ban books. Bringing up this fact has the Palindrone blogosphere furious: it's a smear campaign to mention the mayor's effort to fire her librarian. But Palindrones should be pleased and proud: Palin stands in the Ashcroft-Gonzalez tradition, after all: everyone should have the right to own many guns, and gun ownership should be completely unregulated. But we need to know who is reading what and we need to have the full force of law to investigate readers and even imprison them for reading.
I think this proves conclusively that if the pen is not mightier than the sword, the word processor is at least more threatening to the Republic than the gun.

And the failure to read is a big threat to the Republic as well. I'm not talking just about an informed citizenry, but what happens to us when the citizens are illiterate. 85 percent of juvenile offenders are functionally illiterate. And in many states, such as California, the department of corrections projects the number of prison beds it will need ten years down the road based on how many kids entering fourth grade CANNOT READ at grade level. Read or go to jail, if you are an inner-city youth. Read and go to jail if you live under the Patriot Act. I have no answers, only a deep sense of outrage. If you know what to do, go do it. As Mario Savio said, there are times when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, that you must put your body on the gears. Are we at that point?





Sara Paretsky

Gender Politics Piss Marcus Off

by Marcus Sakey

I'm a diehard feminist.

Because that's a trigger-word these days, I guess I better tell you what it means to me. Simply put, it's the belief that men and women should be afforded the same rights and opportunities. Everybody gets an equal shot, everybody gets treated with basic respect and dignity. Period.

What the word does not mean is that men and women are the same, that our differences are something we should ignore. I understand the ideological basis for the argument, the idea that we are people first and gender second, and that acknowledging gender gives rise to hierarchy. But that's rhetoric, and it's crap. We aren't people first. Our identities are inextricably linked to our gender, with all the biological and sociological differences that entails.

And I think that's great.

The reason I bring that up is that I gotta say, I've been startled by the sexism I've witnessed lately. The topic? Sarah Palin, of course.

Sean raised a number of interesting points about her selection as McCain's running mate. I tend to agree with him; I can't imagine why someone who supported Clinton would vote for McCain, and I'm stunned at the suggestion that a significant portion of America is so fevered in their enthusiasm for having a woman in the White House that they will vote for a uterus instead of a policy. To me, that's as sexist as it comes.

Maybe I'm missing something, and if you feel like I am, I hope you'll try to explain it to me. But the idea of voting for someone primarily because of their gender seems the equivalent of being friends with someone because they're black. The idea is offensive. You don't pick your friends by skin color, and you don't pick your leaders by gender.

I have posted before about my frustration with the campaign Clinton ran. But it would never have occurred to me, had she won, to vote for McCain because of his gender. So why is the opposite an okay sentiment?

Hell, why is it even okay to say in public? Imagine the reverse.

And while we're on the topic of sexism, how about the media coverage of Palin? Yeah, I get that she's a little thin on credentials, that there isn't a lot of political backstory to dig into. But is anyone else offended that every news story seems to mention, within the first two paragraphs, that she's a wife and a mother of five?

So what?

Should that information be in the story somewhere? I suppose. But stories about Obama don't generally mention his wife and daughters above the fold. More like the last paragraph, which is where that kind of information belongs.

Worse, I've seen a number of opinion pieces that suggest that the fact that she is a mother has some bearing on her job performance. Some think it a positive thing, some a negative. Me, I gotta wonder--when she's on a diplomatic mission to Iran, how do her children come into the equation? And if they do, do Obama's as well? Should we vote based on whose are better dressed, better behaved?

What do you think, folks? Am I crazy to be wound up by all of this? Am I looking at it the wrong way?