Archive for November, 2007
To many Republicans, Mayor Giuliani represents the perfect candidate for a campaign in which consumer confidence among conservatives is dangerously low. He’s the heroic veteran from 9/11 who can cut through Hillary’s calculating double-speak. And at the same time, he’s brought the party into the 21st century on social issues, proving himself quite alluring to much-needed independents and Reagan Democrats.
I’ll leave 9/11 missteps for another post. As for this “social liberal” the media keeps purporting to see, there are basically two issues on which that case is made: abortion and gay rights. In fact, that is all “social liberal” is ever used to mean, it seems. Not only does this help conveniently frame the debate by immediately denoting where a candidate stands on two over-emphasized wedge issues, it ignores all other aspects of true social liberalism.
On the federal level, abortion and gay rights are token issues. Barring an incredibly unlikely constitutional amendment, the only impact a President has on this dynamic duo will be through the judges he appoints. And Rudy has already promised to appoint conservative judges in the Scalia/Thomas mold. So his comparative tolerance is only skin deep, never highlighted unless it’s politically advantageous (i.e. when you’re running for mayor of New York).
On other social issues, Rudy fails even the appearances test. Just talk to a New Yorker. 41 shots ago, one might have asked Amadou Diallo how socially liberal Rudy’s racial profiling and crime-fighting policies were. If you are looking for an endorsement, I wouldn’t go interviewing any union members or welfare recipients either, as both constituencies got the short end of the Rudy stick during his time as mayor. Of course, the way he goes through wives, that stick might just be short all around. Actually, Rudy’s deeply held personal belief that one should be able to marry whoever (of the opposite sex), for however long (it takes her to find the lipstick smears), might be his most socially liberal position to date (no pun intended).
All cheap shots aside, it is time for the media to wise up to a man who flip-flops his social positions just as well as any Kerry or Romney on a windy day, and also happens to far outpace the other candidates on such key issues as Bushian authoritarianism and fear/war mongering. Rudy’s Machiavellian leanings seem much more noteworthy than which Democrat says yes or no faster every time Wolf Blitzer stomps his foot.
November 17th, 2007
Initially, I liked Mike Huckabee. He was a great American success story: poor boy makes it big, big boy gets slim. He didn’t believe in evolution, but at least he believed in talking like a human being. He’s the only Republican contender that has anywhere near the kind of personality and temperament I would want in a president. However, Huck has a fairly low ceiling of support among Republicans, despite boasting perhaps the best religious conservative bona-fides of the nominees. (He’s got prospects. He’s bona fide. What are you?)
His problem is that economic conservatives don’t like him. Because once or twice he didn’t veto a tax hike passed by the Democratic legislature in his state. Or something like that. And these are the guys in the party you really don’t want to mess with. The Club for Growth folk. These folks almost took down Arlen Specter in the 2004 Ohio primaries, despite the fact that Arlen had the support of the Prez and the RNC and he’s been a god damn senator since before I was born. So while theoretically Huck could win if Rudy and Mitt split the big states and he runs the table in the South, his best chance to make it on the Nov ballot is in the VP slot. He just has the wrong enemies.
But what Huck could do is make things real dicey for Mitt Romney. Giuliani is bypassing the first few primaries because he is above local politicking and that sort of thing. Thanks to millions and millions in ad buys, Mitt leads in Iowa and NH. But a recent Iowa poll shows Huckabee within two percent of Romney there. I have always felt that if Mitt takes the first two contests, Rudy’s national lead will evaporate and Romney can handily win the nomination. If Huck steals Mitt’s million dollar thunder, and/or Ron Paul does something similar in NH, Rudy’s strategy could pay off, because I don’t see Huckabee or Paul as nationally viable candidates. Almost as much as I would hate to endure the nightmare of a Giuliani nomination, I would hate to see some upstart redeem Rudy’s amazingly arrogant and idiotic campaign strategy. For past reference on skipping early states, ask Presidents Lieberman and Clark how well ignoring Iowa worked for them.
So the skinny of it is that some former fatty from Clinton’s hometown could be the Ralph Nader of 2008 and rough Mitt up enough to pave the way for a Giuliani victory. And Rudy won’t even put him on the ticket as a reward, because nice people make him sick to his stomach. As Naomi Watts would say, “Fuckabees”.
November 16th, 2007
‘Nuther Dem debate last night in Nevada. Wolf Blitzer did his best to one-up Russert as “worst moderator ever”. He and so many of his peers are fixated on asking yes or no gotcha questions to issues that are more nuanced than that, and not incredibly important in the grand scheme of things.
The one in particular that bothered me was about driver’s licenses for illegals. Obama gave a fairly clear “yes, but I don’t like your framing of the issue” answer which was immediately dubbed a waffle by Blitzer and CNN pundits. Obama also started to take on Hillary at the beginning of the debate. But then the audience booed because they want politicians to fix government without pointing out what needs to be fixed. You could see Obama get that deer in the headlights look when some heckler sapped his momentum mid-rebuttal. Obama & Ed got a couple more boos throughout the night when trying to criticize Clinton. As Howard Dean and Jack Nicholson will tell you, a lot of Americans may say they want the truth, but they can’t handle it.
The pundits are already saying Hil Dog won. But really, aside from a great answer to that stupid gender card question, she was just about as ho-hum as last debate. And if you accuse other candidates of mud-slinging and echoing Republican talking points, don’t go and say Obama wants to plop a trillion dollar tax on the middle class. Richardson was the only candidate to offer a new side of himself, giving some of the best answers of the night. Also noteworthy, several audience members were allowed to ask the candidates questions, all of which were more thoughtful and relevant than the one’s asked by Blitzer and Co. Makes you wonder what exactly journalists are doing to earn their paycheck these days. Can we please let Jim Lehrer moderate some debates?
Even after two terms of the worst president in our nation’s history, I’m not sure voters are ready for an angry, truthful candidate. So the game is who can be kind of sincere about the problems facing our country without getting tied down to any revolutionary solutions. Sounds just grand. Maybe four years of Giuliani and the crazy nut jobs who advise him on foreign policy will ripen people up for true change. And who knows, the substance and tenor of these debates is so far removed from the global realities of what a future president will face, we could elect a good candidate without even realizing it.
November 16th, 2007
Some things you might not know about Pelosi and Congress:
Nancy Pelosi is an incredible testament to modern medicine: she’s been dead for over twenty years, but refused to let that get in the way of ruining running Congress. Her secret? Botox, a platinum, solar-powered heart and tight, disdainful smiles that exert a minimum amount of energy.
Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton are the same corpse person.
It is against the Congressional Charter to pursue a sensible agenda as Speaker.
Passing legislation emboldens the terrorists.
Making dumb wordplays with the names of generals emboldens the terrorists.
Overriding the president to give children health care emboldens the terrorists.
Wow, seems like a lot of activities embolden the terrorists these days. It’s getting harder and harder for folks on the Hill to live Bush-approved lives. So, aside from heavy petting and hand-holding, what are some abstinence-only activities Congress can partake in? Fundraising is an old standby. Making endorsements is another good call.
Just remember to wait long enough to ensure you endorse a winner, no sense helping someone out who won’t be able to scratch your back, too! When photo-opping with your chosen candidate, be sure to let them stand in the center, it’s their moment after all, but wear inserts in your shoes so you look taller and more statesmanly than your new pal. Ideally, you want to endorse a woman — inserts are a hassle and how can a woman be statesmanly? — who is a shoo-in and who rewards faithful surrogates. Basically, endorse Hillary. Kucinich is also short, but he fails to meet many of the other requirements. I would only recommend endorsing him if it is proven that aliens exist, because he might have more pull with them than here on earth.
November 13th, 2007
Last night, the Democratic nominees gave speeches at the annual Jefferson Jackson Dinner in Des Moines, emceed by Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi, of course, is noted for being the first robot woman elected as Speaker. Anyway, every Iowa Party bigwig was in attendance, along with thousands of supporters. To quote Ron Burgundy, the JJ Dinner is “kind of a big deal”. Coming off a bad news week and a poor performance last debate, along with the revelation that her campaign was planting questions at her rallies, H-Dog needed to not suck. But oh did she ever. Edwards was pretty good. Obama gave his best speech of the year.
Edwards’ is currently trying to sell the narrative that while he was one of the more conservative candidates in 2004; losing to Bush, and subsequently seeing what Bush did to the country, has provided a catharsis for him, and now he’s seen the light. Now he wants to take the gloves off and fight for big change. Oh, and his wife got cancer and that makes him connect with suffering Americans and whatnot. Did he mention his pops worked in a mill? And he thinks about the life his parents fought for him to have, every time he takes a gander at his hedge fund profits. Well, my cynical heart only has room for one catharsis-after-agonizing-defeat story, and Al Gore snatched that up long ago.
Obama, on the other hand, has a unique, almost old-fashioned campaign style. While sometimes this appears indistinguishable from your average timid Dem, there is a principled pattern to how he goes about his business that, while not wear-white-to-the-wedding pure, to me is more stubbornly sincere than either Hillary or Johnny Ed. I could write a whole post on it, but I’ll spare you for today.
Of course, even truly selfless candidates have to deal with the mindfuck of thinking about appearing presidential and sincere 100 percent of the time. Many folks struggle to be themselves in normal situations, how do you show you are genuine through such a long, spotlighted, farcical campaign process? As the newest addition to the national stage, I think this adjustment has been the most difficult for that eloquent bookworm, Obama (as evidenced by his shaky performances in the debates and sometimes on the campaign trail). Fortunately, he seems to be getting more comfortable and more aggressive. With Edwards continuing to take the necessary stabs at Clinton and Obama finally on the rise again, it’s actually possible that we’ll keep a Bush or Clinton out of the White House for the first time since 1980. At least we’re mixing it up.
November 11th, 2007
Radiohead recently allowed fans to decide how much they wanted to pay for the band’s new album online. Not surprisingly, 62 percent of “buyers” decided to pay nothing at all. The remaining 38 percent pitched in an average of 6 dollars. This novel idea generated a lot of interest, with much of the blogosphere concluding it was not particularly successful.
I dunno. Bands only make about 1$ an album for CDs to begin with. I believe many of these online moochers wouldn’t have paid for an album anyway, and the marginal revenue lost will be recouped by all the publicity this has generated, as it leads to better ticket sales and positive hype for the CD’s eventual release. I like it. Paying a few bucks directly to the band beats paying 1 to the artist and 19 to the label.
November 8th, 2007
The elephant in the room is the real GOP. It’s the real George Bush. Why are we acting like the Republican leadership has decided on a sane course of action for this country that we just happen to disagree with? There are plenty of legitimate choices to be made about how government should run, how foreign policy should be conducted. But let’s stop pretending Republicans offer one of those choices. Let’s ditch the ludicrous notion that the only kind of politics we need is a coin with a D on one side and an R on the other.
The elephant in the room is the real Global Warming. The gradual warming that might eventually put our children at greater risk for skin cancer was 30 years ago. The one we’re facing now is more serious. At this late stage in the game, we shouldn’t still be talking about drafting a bill to send a hand-written thank you card to every company that voluntarily decides to cut CO2 emissions.
And why isn’t anyone talking about the elephant? Because the Bush Administration denies the existence of elephants. And the Bill of Rights that protects the freedoms of people who mention elephants.
November 8th, 2007
One of the cynically amusing aspects of all these ridiculous debates is the contrast between each party’s style. Republicans are all about saying the bold things they represent, the extremes to which they’ll go in order to protect the country. The Dems, on the other hand, are about saying what they’re not; trying to avoid boxing themselves into any position that isn’t popular or poll-tested.
I think there are several candidates on the Republican side (notably Giuliani and Thompson) who lack enough inquisitiveness into the wonky realm of policy to understand a few of the issues. So some of the frothy mouth is real because they genuinely don’t know what they’re talking about. Although, to the extent to which they do understand how government works — and Jesus, shouldn’t the president be well-versed in this? — they are willing to say fuck you to millions of Americans.
On the bride’s side of the aisle , most of the Dems (sans Richardson) have a pretty nuanced understanding of foreign and domestic policy, but lack faith in the public’s ability to connect the policy dots. And no one watches debates anyway, so the only thing that matters are the little snippets media outlets will show ad nauseum to “prove” who won and who lost. Thus, the Dems play to avoid making damaging gotcha clips, and Republicans shoot for fire-up-the-base clips.
History indicates voters are more likely to pick a leader boldly leading in the wrong direction than one timidly refusing to lead.
November 8th, 2007
Interestingly enough, I am currently attending Bunker Hill Community College as well as the Harvard Extension. They are pretty much the best representatives for each end of the spectrum of universities in Boston. BHCC has a lot of kids from city high schools, as well as over 600 international students. It has joint admissions programs with the state schools in Massachusetts (UMass Amherst, UMass Boston, etc.), and is considered one of the better options for students looking to move on to a four-year university after their stay at the Bunk. The community colleges and state schools in Massachusetts pale in comparison to their counterparts in California, say, but they provide a decent and affordable education.
Harvard, by contrast, is the most prestigious college in the United States. As a disclaimer, I should note that the extension is open to all, so I can’t claim any accomplishment for treading the “hallowed grounds” of Harvard Yard. Decent and affordable are two words long absent from the Harvard dictionary. I think it is quite likely I’m the first individual to be attending both of these institutions concurrently, and it should provide the opportunity for numerous societal and academic observations; or at the very least, the opportunity to make clichéd class contrasts, jokes and soap box declarations. Stay tuned. At least it’s not politics, right?
November 6th, 2007
I added all my favorite political blogs to the link section on the right. I can’t imagine you all will want to visit them, since I’ve already been getting requests to write less about politics, but here they are anyway. They are organized alphabetically, definitely not in order of preference. I will probably expand the links section to include other types of useful websites. How exciting!
November 6th, 2007