From the low on substance, big on image campaign of Barack Obama, to a second tier comedian with a chance to win a Senate seat in Minnesota - and now a Kennedy, whose name equals celebrity, ever if her public profile hasn't up til now, we seem to be having a fit of the politics of celebrity to some degree. One could argue it started as many trends do in California with governor Arnold, who seems to be something of a bust these days.
Of course some will claim that Reagan was an actor and a few other celebrities have pursued and won office in the past, but most of them also had a long track record of involvement in organized politics. This trend also runs up against one of wealthy individuals like Bloomberg and Corzine who bought their way into politics. But today, wealth is a form of celebrity in itself.
With little focus on traditional civics education in our schools producing a growing population less interested in substantive issues and more focused on the next new American idol, perhaps it shouldn't be a big surprise. And it might be worth noting that these recent examples tend to be very liberal and may have had a better chance of being elected, or even appointed in one case, through celebrity, as opposed to long held and fought for positions or policies - to the extent we even really know what they'll advocate for once installed.
Is this good, or bad? Can they do any worse than a string of traditional hack politicians who have managed to bankrupt the country? Maybe not, but things can always be worse is another take on that.
If there's anything to be concerned about it's what will happen when celebrity crashes into hard reality that cares very little about "star" power. In Hollywood, by the time celebrities get around to doing reality fare, they're usually just out of their third rehab and their actual careers have long since gone south.
Let's hope America doesn't do just that under the leadership of a potentially new celebrity class. If nothing else, I imagine make-up manufacturers might provide a safe harbor investment strategy of sorts in otherwise tough economic times. If you aren't already invested in spam and guns, that is.


" Occupational background
Members of Congress come from a variety of occupational backgrounds. 215 members (159 in the House and 58 in the Senate) have worked in some aspect of law during their career, whether as an attorney, paralegal, policy analyst, or bureaucratic official, with 180 members of the House and 58 of the Senate holding Juris Doctor degrees. 189 members (162 in the House and 26 in the Senate) have worked in some segment of private sector business, with 18 members holding MBA degrees. 82 representatives and 14 senators have worked in education, whether as a teacher or school administrator. 109 Congress members have served as political aides at some level, including 10 working as congressional pages and 16 working as members of the White House staff.
24 members of Congress have worked in the medical field, including 12 M.D.s, 3 nurses, 2 dentists, 2 veterinarians, 1 psychologist, 1 psychiatrist, 1 optometrist, and 1 pharmacist. 15 members are former law enforcement specialists, including 5 sheriffs, 4 police officers, 2 state troopers, 2 probation officers, 1 FBI agent, and 1 border patrol agent. 9 scientists serve in Congress, including 4 chemists, 3 physicists, 1 biologist, and 1 biomedical engineer. 6 members of Congress are ordained ministers, while 5 are certified public accountants.
Several members of Congress were nationally famous prior to entering politics, namely Hall of Fame MLB pitcher Jim Bunning, and NFL quarterback Heath Shuler. Other congressmen have held a variety of jobs ranging from social worker to mortician to riverboat captain."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States_Congress#Occupational_background
5, yes, 5 certifed public accountants. (btw-larry craig was one of them...)
The good thing about the occupational listing is that should franken win, we can add comedian to the list of occupations, filling the 'sonny bono' gap.
The bright spot about Kennedy replacing clinton is that the numbers of lawyers will hold steady at 58 members of the senate.
Posted by: mark l. | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 01:07 AM
What is interesting off that list is the number of individuals that fit into the category of attending law school, lawyer, attorney, judge or otherwise involved with the law just from the House, alone: 82.
So, about 19% of the US population has attended law school, are lawyers, attorneys, judges, etc.?
Yes, we did have a surge of same and still do, but if 1 out of 5 of our population is in the legal profession at some level, this is not a good sign for the Nation. It points to having too many laws, too much legal overhead and an expectation that the law will solve problems. That gets you to the point where just going out for a bike ride probably contravenes a number of statutes, especially if you didn't make proper hand signals... who knows how many you go against on a simple shopping trip or a night out for dinner at a restaurant? Probably a host of local, state and a few federal ones... which means that at any time *you* can be picked up on the flimsiest of excuses for not doing absolutely everything by the book and, in this grand and glorious Nation where the Federal Regulations take up a bookshelf 6' long if you could get it in paper form and not multiple CDs, you are responsible for knowing each of them as they pertain to *you*.
We need fewer lawyers in High Office as they get to make the law, run the law, administer the law, judge the law and ultimately decide your fate by law made by lawyers for lawyers to keep lawyers in practice and expand those practices which produce nothing but time wasting litigation.
And, just in the House, you can find this stunning statistic:
Attended Harvard: 18
Attended MIT: 1
Remember, MIT is the top of the technical world just like Harvard is for being Harvard graduates and placing them in fine careers. Has to say something when one that looks the hardest at modern technology can't get grads interested in government. I do applaud the physicians, engineers and smattering of other technical folks in the House. They don't equal the lawyers. And I don't see some jobs that really should be in there... garbage collector, electrical lineman, fisherman, small business owner (although a few undoubtably have been), garage mechanic, electrician, carpenter, plumber... you know, the folks who keep civilization running?
Posted by: ajacksonian | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 07:22 AM
Yes celebrity is a growing, disturbing factor in our politics these days. I abhor it. Then again, I abhor lawyers as well. We have far too many lawyers and not enough engineers in this nation. Lawyers "non-economic rent seeking" - that is, they make money for usually doing nothing of import or substance. They create nothing but talk: talk, talk, talk.
The Oprahs, Kennedys, Arnolds, late night tv comics now influence much of our political discourse. Case in point, see how Hollyweird and various celebrities destroyed Gov Palin because she was not of their world - she was self-made, had a family, was a Christian, etc.
It's likely too late. Government has grown to the nth degree; it is out of control. 1984 is here, especially now under an unaccomplished lawywer like Barry Soetoro and his dreams of grandeur. The only growth industry in our country these days is government.
Posted by: RSSG | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 07:54 AM
I just had a great idea for a TV "reality" show for NBC.
They buy the Illinois senate seat for Paris Hilton and then follow her around as she gets to know the ropes in Washington DC. Guaranteed ratings hit!
Posted by: Steven Den Beste | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 07:56 AM
Mises wrote of the danger of a "Santa Claus government" where those who are elected are those that promise to give away the most (seized from those who have the least capacity to resist). The only credential for government office is that the candidate be the most convincing in assuring the masses which pay no taxes and rather receive gifts that the candidate will expand upon the promise. This is why redistribution fails, and why Obama will not "clean up" politics. There is nothing clean about redistribution; it's comprised of fraud, theft, violence (just try refusing to pay your property tax and keep it from being taken by force) and through these actions, corruption is unavoidable.
Lacking a constitutional amendment that prohibits redistribution and requires all citizens to pay for the government they ask for and the services they receive, the country will continue its spiral into totalitarianship.
Posted by: HatlessHessian | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 09:40 AM
Caroline Kennedy = Wow, willikers, goooolly, what class, Camelot, La France, the Olde Sod.
Caroline Schlossberg = ?
Whom should I vote for, Mum?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 10:21 AM
"Guaranteed ratings hit!"
I agree. But at least people would start paying attention to politics. I wonder if there's a House seat up for sale for Lindsey Lohan next go round??
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Now here is a celebrity, under the Comedian classification, who wants to forget the past but keeps talking about it. Who, they ask? Why Biden (from Yahoo News):
"The military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should close, and the U.S. reputation abroad has suffered as a result of the Bush administration's policies on surveillance and detainees. "To quote from a previous national security report put out by the intelligence community, we have created, not dissuaded, more terrorists as a consequence of this policy," Biden said.
_It's up to the Justice Department to determine if charges should be filed against any member of the Bush administration for prisoner abuse that occurred at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. "President-elect Obama and I are not sitting thinking about the past," he said."
Joe, first, the election is over, uh, ya know, uh, in the past, second, Bush wasn't running in it.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 10:31 AM
Blago's downfall
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQQ9fIqBgIQ&
Posted by: Lala | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Brainless twit who never worked a day in her life. Clueless about working Americans. Couldn't solve a problem if it bit her on the ass. America swoons over a useless waste of sperm like this while attacking strong women like Sarah Palin. America desperately grasping at straws - too bad they end up being the short ones.
Posted by: DaveinPhoenix | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 01:22 PM
it is funny that the tag of kennedy is her lack of experience, but the press hasn't made a peep about AlFranen's resume.
law school v. stuart smalley/satellite on head/bachelors from harvard-
the most qualified is...?
(of course we are talking about the state that had the other guy in Predator, as governor)
Posted by: mark l. | Sunday, December 21, 2008 at 09:31 PM