The Spencerian

It's a Numbers Game Almost 2012 Edition

Gallup - Obama Job Approval: Approve 43%   Disapprove 49% (NOTE:  Approval up 3% from mid-September, Disapprove down from 53%)

Gallup - Americans Blame Both Sides for 'SuperCommittee' Failure

Gallup - Black Friday Spending up Despite Continued Pessimism

Gallup - Most Egyptians Believe Continued Protests are Bad for Country

Pew - Romney's Mormon Faith Likely a Factor in Primaries, Not in a General Election

Pew -- More Now Disagree with Tea Party -- Even in Tea Party Districts

Pew - The American-Western European Values Gap (American Exceptionalism Subsides)

Real Clear Politics - Florida Republican Presidential Primary: Gingrinch +2.4

Real Clear Politics - Iowa Republican Presidential Caucus: Gingrich +8.2

TPM - Obama Job Approval National: +13 Disapprove

TPM - Obama Job Approval North Carolina: +5 Disapprove

TPM - Florida Republican Presidential Primary: Gingrich +24

TPM - Obama vs. Gingrich Florida: Obama 45%   Gingrich 43%

The Label Maker Conundrum: Parents, Politics, and Why

I know.  You're tired of hearing me talk about my child and the one on the way.

To be fair, this isn't really about that.  It's kind of about that.  But in a broader context.  

Go read Amy Reiter's post at the Daily Beast entitled Don't Call Me A Mom: Why It's Time for Women to Drop That Identity.

Okay, first of all, she never explains why women should "drop that identity" except, I guess, maybe she doesn't like it so no one should.  I know I'm as bad an offender as anybody, but I hate it when the title of a piece is misleading, and that one is.  Reiter doesn't give any reason for women who have children to discount an entire identifying marker -- she just doesn't like being called a mom herself:

Every once in a while, life throws at you a moment that shifts your perspective as if someone has bumped your viewfinder, leaving you scrambling to refocus. These moments, by definition, happen when you least expect them. I had one while sitting in my hairdresser’s chair.

I was making conversation, as one does, with this woman who’d been cutting my hair for a few years, and she started rattling off the reasons she loved the location of her Brooklyn storefront shop. “I get all sorts of different kinds of customers,” she said. “Artists, writers, dancers, actresses, lawyers, businesswomen …”

When I replay this part in my mind, as I often do, I always pause for a split-second to prepare for what I was unprepared for at the time.

“… moms.”

On that word, with a tilt of her head and a gesture with her scissors, she indicated me.

Never mind that I had spent almost two decades building a career as a writer, that I took pains to engage in the world as a person with interests that went way beyond diapers and sleep schedules and preschools (parenting topics that, as far as I knew, I’d never discussed with my single, childless hairdresser), and that I was right then thinking not of my two small kids (whom my husband was watching), but of all the projects I’d slipped away from in order to get a quick midweek trim. As far as this woman—who I paid, after all, to help shape the image I presented to the world—was concerned, I was defined by none of this.

Regardless of how many angles and dimensions I saw in that mirror, she looked at me and simply saw a mother.

...as if "simply" seeing a mother is the worst thing that could have happened to her.  I find it curious that Reiter sort of expected her hairdresser to be reading her mind: "...I was right then thinking not of my two small kids... but of all the projects I'd slipped away from in order to get a quick midweek trim."  Doesn't it seem far more likely that though she never agenda-ed "parenting topics" with her hairdresser, than perhaps she did at least mention she had kids to the person who cuts her hair.  Would it be too much of a stretch to think that maybe your hairdresser might recall this fact about a person with whom their vaguely familiar first, versus whether or not you might have had a byline in the Times, the Post, Wine Spectator and -- heaven forbid -- Time Out New York Kids.  Sorry the person more familiar with your shampoo and conditioner preference didn't gush over your MADD Media Award.  

Reiter could have taken it in a couple of directions after the initial, disastrous opening.  She started to riff a little more on the whole I hate being a mom thing...

I’m sure there are women who would have embraced the image—frumpy hairdo, mom jeans, under-eye bags and all—as if they had been handed the cuddliest of crib toys. Me, I felt gut-punched. Hot steam shot into my cheeks. I was not only angry, but embarrassed. How could I have been so naive as to imagine that, as soon as the doctor had placed my first delicious pink newborn on my chest in that delivery room years prior, the world would define me in any other way?

...but she took a kind of hard right turn, complaining that dads have it all too easy.  Get ready for the old double-standard card.  Here it comes:

I might be more inclined to accept this image if it weren’t for the double standard. Men have long been allowed to wear their “dad” label much more loosely than women are expected to wear their “mom” tag. When they have kids, men generally tuck their “dad” persona wherever they like on the long list of things that define them, usually somewhere under their professional identities.

That last sentence there may be one of the most offensive I've ever read.  And I'm a straight, white, middle-class American male.  I'm pretty hard to offend, as you might expect.  

But I'm a dad first.  Always.  Not always a good one, but always.

I'm a husband, a brother, a son, a friend.  Always.  Not always a good one, but always.  I'm a communications professional, nine or so hours a day.  Not always a good one, either.  I am a Democrat.  A political junkie.  I'm a writer, too.  Definitely not always a good one, as this post (indeed, this blog) may attest.

But even in all of those things, I am a dad first.  Always.  And proudly.

You can ask anyone involved in any of those aspects of my life and I could only hope that they would say he's a father when they spoke of me.  We "generally tuck [our] 'dad' person wheverer [we] like"?

Horse shit.  It's possible Ms. Reiter either needs to examine her own husband, get out of work-centric New York City, or both.  The dads I know aren't that cowardly.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m in love and obsessed with my children, now 6 and 8, although I’ll do you the favor of not parading evidence of my love and obsession before you. My life has, of course, changed dramatically to accommodate them.

Seriously?

God, I hope those kids don't ever have to read your stuff.  Hey, I love you -- I won't express that in any real way, and oh, by the way, I've had to totally change everything because of you two...

Mother of the Year award, right here, people.

She continues, despite what I hope was the better advice of her editors:

At the same time, I have made sure not to rely on my role as their mother as my primary identity. Just as they are people in their own rights, with interests as diverse as baseball and baking, I consider myself a person separate and apart from them: a woman with a career, a born-again bike rider, a just-learning cook, a closet karaoke singer, an occasional watcher of crappy TV.

All those things define me just as much as my role as a mother, and yet we women, once we have children, are expected to shift not just those activities but also those identities to the deep background.

Men get to choose.

Interestingly, more men do appear to be choosing their “dad” personas of late—but that might just be an aftershock of the recession.

First of all, if "occasional watcher of crappy TV" is something that defines you as a person, then I just feel sorry for you.  I think you can watch crappy TV and not have that be part of your "primary identity."  You know, sometimes an episode of CSI: Miami is just an episode of CSI: Miami.

Second, men get to choose?  

Well, fuck you!  I don't know what kind of deal you cut with the father of your children, but I didn't get to choose jack shit.  Look, are you actually living in an episode of Mad Men, because I might like to try it out.  Except not really.  Your world sounds misogynistic and awful.  I live in a world where I happily welcome time spent with my daughter and look forward to time with my son.  I live in a world where my wife cooks dinner because she's a good cook and she likes it, and I happily and gratefully do the dishes and take out the trash.  I iron shirts.  I sweep and Swiffer.  I clean the kitty litter box and the bathroom.  I vacuum.  I'm not ashamed of any of those things.  None of it changed my life "dramatically" -- it is my life, and I love it.

By the way, super-shitty move hinting towards the facts that debunk your entire article, and then blaming it on the economy.  Men are "choosing" their dad persona -- Jesus, seriously, how is this something "chosen"? -- but who the fuck knows, maybe it's just the crap's ass economy.

Okay, here's why this bothers me from a political perspective: turning "mother" and "father," "mom and "dad" into labels that you can apply at will only divides us more.  It gives operatives something to build on, or actually, something to cleave.  It's articles like this which fuel that destructive fire.  

See, politicians should be appealing to broader masses, not narrower constituencies.  Remember NASCAR dads?  Remember "soccer moms" in 1996?  Hey, Bill Clinton and Bob Dole, reach middle-class white women with kids, and you'll win.  Can you look at that with any objectivity whatsoever and say it's any kind of way to run a campaign?  

Look, I get it: we have labels for a reason.  I don't really think "mother" is a label, but if it is, and if it offends you -- even if you do have kids -- then that's really too bad.

I suspect a lot of folks -- mothers, fathers, those without children and all kinds of people -- will look at Reiter's piece with a harsh eye.  They probably should.  It's bad for parents, and it's bad for politics.

Off the Radar Most Sensational, Inspirational Edition

image: here

First of all, go see the new Muppet Movie.  Just go do it.  

We saw it in Little Rock.  It was kind of Adam's birthday present -- he loves the Muppets, but then, who doesn't? 

It was also Emeline's first "real" movie.  

Sure, she slept through most of it, but it's almost like that doesn't even matter.  She's still talking about "the monsters" (in a good way, trust me; I know, it's weird.  Kids are weird, what can I say?).  

I cried no less than four times, maybe more like five.  I'm telling you, it grabbed me by the jacket and thrust me right back into the late 1970s (I am in solidarity with Kevin at Ghost in the Machine and his review of it, noting the issues with timing and eras.  Who cares, though.).

I always loved Fozzie Bear. 

# # # #

Herman Cain is putting the brakes on the Cainmentum: he is "reassessing" his campaign, which sounds an awful lot like give us some time while we work up an exit strategy.

We've all done a lot of talking about Herman Cain over the last several weeks.  I'm not too sure why.  To be sure, his problems weren't relegated to his "personal indiscretions" (whether it's the 13-year extramarital affair or the numerous women who came forward and said he acted inappropriately in the workplace A., hardly count as "indiscretions" and B., hardly posses differences that are politically relevant any longer*).   

The guy never held elected office.  I realize that through Republican eyes, this makes your curriculum vitae look fantastic.  In the real world, serving in the highest executive office in the land without prior governmental experience is beyond foolish.

His 9-9-9 tax plan was widely derided as insane.  And he's used the unpleasant language of slavery in inappropriate ways to try and sell it.  

He was a gaffe machine (Libya, delicious-in-Cuban, no Muslims in the cabinet, Declaration of Independence versus Constitution, not to mention the weird smoking ad, which wasn't a gaffe per se, but still... creepy.).  

Finally -- and this was one that really did it for me -- the guy never had any real campaign apparatus.  He didn't have any real staff (except for the smoking weirdo, I guess).  

Well, I think all of it -- the affairs, married, if you will, to all the other problems -- are finally catching up to Cain.  His poll numbers are headed towards Santorum levels.  Before you know it, he'll be in the company of Ron Paul and Rick Perry, within shouting distance of Michele Bachmann.  After that, it's just a matter of time before he goes Huntsman.   

# # # #

Indeed, I was just talking about political ads not that long ago.  Here's one from the Democratic Party on Mitt Romney.  

It is fantastic:

Excellent.  The DNC ought to use every single dollar they raise between now and Election Day and run that ad (assuming Romney's the nominee, which still looks mostly likely to me).

This is a really good ad, really well done.  The best ads take stuff that is true -- stuff that has already been said -- and frame it in a way that is accessible to most people.  Sounds like, you know, duh, but it's a lot harder than you think.  Romney has given the creative types at the DNC plenty to work with.  

# # # #

Of course, if the GOP nominee turns out to be Newt Gingrich, he could provide plenty of fodder as well.  And he's off to a good start with his latest idea: drug test welfare recipients!

I know what you're thinking: Hey, didn't you already write about that?  I did -- only it wasn't Newt's idea.  It was hospital grifter Governor Rick Scott's campaign "promise" that sailed through our pathetic legislature which he then signed into law.  And it was blocked by a federal judge just last month:

A federal judge temporarily blocked Florida's new law that requires welfare applicants to pass a drug test before receiving benefits on Monday, saying it may violate the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.

You know, Gingrich fancies himself a serious historian and student of the Constitution and our nation's founding (though certainly not everyone does).  He ought to be more familiar with unreasonable search and seizure than he appears to be. 

And if he's not, he damn well ought to be caught up on what happened here in Florida.  Whether with respect to what happened to Scott's doomed, inhumane law, or with respect to the kinds of people he'd be persecuting.

Of course, it's not really about policy, is it?  It's not about the practical implications of policy proposals turned legislation turned laws.  It is about red meat to the base -- especialy at a time when the front runner is slipping and the guy posing as the default nominee is getting slammed by the other side.

I'd call on him to feel shame, blah, blah.  

This guy is at the front of the pack right now, people.

# # # #

The Vice President is in Baghdad to "commemorate the sacrifices and accomplishments of U.S. and Iraqi troops."  I hope he -- and the rest of those U.S. troops -- get home safe.

# # # #

Interesting: hospital grifter Governor Rick Scott's approval ratings here in Florida are not so hot.  Also, the numbers show Obama besting Gingrich here in Florida by a little and Cain by a lot.  He loses to Romney, but it's pretty close.

A new It's a Numbers Game up soon.

# # # #

If you haven't yet, check out Bill Nobles who is running for Florida State House in District 52.  He's a good guy and could use your support.

# # # #

When you've done that, sign up for Keith Fitzgerald's stuff.  It's still a little early yet, but this could well be the race to watch in the state.

 -- more later -- 

*To be clear, I do believe there is a clear difference between the sexual assault Cain was accused of by more than one woman and the consensual 13-year affair.  There's an obvious difference.  I didn't mean to blur those very clear lines.  I was just saying that politically, the line is a lot less clear. 

Sunshine Sadness and What You Can Do About It

According to Men's Health Magazine, St. Petersburg is America's saddest city.  Heh, thank god I live in Gulfport.  

I'd link to the actual Men's Health Magazine article, but they don't have the story up on their site yet that I can see.  However, if you're interested in a review of the six worst exercise machines, "bar brawl hot zones," whether or not your chair is giving you cancer, or an almost impossibly beautiful topless woman enticing you to "last longer, stay stronger" (I can only assume they're referencing the same issue every man must face in his lifetime: marathon gaming sessions with the Wii, where with all that moving, it really is a challenge to last a long time and keep your strength up!  I'll click the beautiful lady link later and see...), then I encourage you to visit their site.

On a slightly more serious note, it does look like they used some real data to make this determination.  From the Times piece linked at the top:

The magazine based its rankings on suicide rates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and unemployment rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It also compiled information from a website called SimplyMap to determine the percentage of households using antidepressants and the number of people who say they feel sad all or most of the time.

Sure, antidepressants.  Unemployment.  Suicide.  

Could probably ask folks if living out of cars sucked, too.

You're going to think this is a non sequitur, but Saint Petersblog featured a little piece this morning that I found interesting:  In one of the most consequential years in a half-century, the most searched story of 2011 was…

Only click that link if you want to be, well, depressed.  

Hey, for my money, the story of the year ought to be one in four kids is homeless.  Instead, what did we get?  

…the Casey Anthony story.  That’s right, in one of the most consequential years of, at least, my lifetime – the economic meltdown, the Arab Spring, the death of Osama bin Laden, the earthquake in Japan, the tumultuous GOP primary, etc., etc. – the Casey Anthony story was the most searched term on Bing, which has released rankings of its most searched terms this year.

Peter's right, and I'd go so far as to say it's one of the most consequential times (if not years) in American history, maybe even world history.  And the best we could do for ourselves was the Casey Anthony trial.  

Is our collective caring about the Casey Anthony trial a symptom of something more?  Is it simply a side-effect of our depression as a state (Tampa was not far behind St. Petersburg, by the way)?  Or is it the disease itself?  

I don't know.  My gut tells me it is the nasty side-effect -- our collective desire to get away from the bad news.  Look at some of the other stories on the most-searched list:  Hurricane Irene.  Joplin tornadoes.  Haiti anniversary.  Japan disaster.

That stuff is genuinely depressing.  And we care about it.  We just don't care care.  

But we're living in a time when we are feeling a bit helpless -- a bit like we can't even help ourselves.  So what real harm could following a little murder trial really cause?  After all, it's sort of like a real-life 'Law & Order' or 'CSI' (though I doubt Caylee Anthony would agree).  

That being said, if I'm right, it's a symptom we need to treat.  I will link once again to the piece at DailyKos which broke down TIME Magazine covers domestically and internationally.  In Europe, Asia and the South Pacific, the cover for December 2011 was of the revolution in Egypt.  In America, a cartoon made the bold statement, "Why anxiety is good for you."  (Perhaps, in a twist of fate, this bodes well for us, the St. Petersburg depressive coalition.)  In August of this year, the cover featured on those three international editions of TIME was "Travels through Islam" with a wind-swept dune, a couple of camels and someone in flowing garb leading them across the sandy desolation.  In America, we got a man holding a baby facing off with a woman holding a mop and the too-sassy headline, "Chore Wars".  They go on and on ("Why mom liked you best!" "Who needs marriage!").  

It's easy to say, "Well, there are an awful lot of foreclosures, there are an awful lot of people taking medication... we must be depressed!"  But what's not so easy to tease out is how much of this we've brought upon ourselves, how much we ask for by virtue of our broken media establishment (and no, it's not just TIME Magazine).  

Have we actually asked for the blue pill?  Or has it been forced upon us?  

Finding good, reliable --and true -- sources of information and news is hard to do.  But I don't think it's too deep a rabbit hole.

Finally, let me say that I don't think St. Petersburg is depressing.  I don't think it's a depressing city.  It may be full of people who are having a lot of problems right now.  But that doesn't mean it's not a vibrant, colorful, exciting place to be.

Viva St. Petersburg.   

Update:  via my friend Michael, here's the link to their online piece.  Guess I just didn't look hard enough.

Baby Update: Pony Boy, Carry Me Home

Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man.
 -- Benjamin Franklin 

When you look at the post announcing the good news of our second child, due April 27, you'd almost think we already knew what we know now, which is that this...

...is a boy.  (I started to post one of the ultrasound pictures which clearly verified this news beyond any reasonable doubt, but I decided to afford the young man a slight measure of dignity.  What you see above is his profile.)

Duncan and I are thrilled, of course.  Scared a bit, too, because we've seen little boys who are mortal terrors, tiny living tornadoes leaving a path of destruction in their merciless wake.  

 Well, we're not that worried.  

What I do worry about is the kind of world I'll be leaving for my son, for my children.  In a number of critical areas, things seem to be getting worse, not better.  It's one thing to blog about the decline of the American Empire and bloviate about American exceptionalism.  It is another thing entirely to navigate those treacherous waters day in, day out as a parent.  

I'm forty years old, and I've spent most of my entire working life trying to make the world a little bit better place to live.  I realize virtually none of it is really up to me, but that doesn't lessen the sense of disappointment I feel all too often in our global community and certainly our country.  And it certainly hasn't stopped me from pushing onward.

Of course, I've always toiled in government service and non-profit kinds of jobs because I thought it was the right thing to do, and that sort of work has always married well with my philosophy of politics and the world (whether anyone agrees with it or not).  

Now, my reasons to keep fighting the demons -- in whatever form they take, and whether they be my own or those that plague society -- or to make peace with my neighbors have been born anew.  Or will be some time in late April.  

And I will be a better man for it.  

Of course, it's my hope to one day stand with my son and have him tell me we are better men for it.

Emeline, by the way, is doing well.  She's at a great age, and she is doing a lot of talking, now.  

I love it when she says her brother's name: "Finn".  We're working with her on the pronunciation of the full name: Finnegan Fawkes.  Fawkes, by the way, is from Duncan's side of the family.  She is a direct descendant of Guy Fawkes, of Guy Fawkes Night in England (Remember, remember the Fifth of November...).  It's a name from her mother's side of the family.  You might be familiar with the more relevant reference to the weird masks everyone wears at Occupy Wall Street events and from the movie V for Vendetta. 

Finnegan is just a name we really love.

American Exceptionalism: Unexceptionally False

Every election is about something, every election has a theme.  Not unlike a story.  

The theme for Election 2012 will almost assuredly be something called American exceptionalism.  

American exceptionalism refers to the theory that the United States is qualitatively different from other countries. In this view, America's exceptionalism stems from its emergence from a revolution, becoming "the first new nation," and developing a uniquely American ideology, based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire. This observation can be traced to Alexis de Tocqueville, the first writer to describe the United States as "exceptional" in 1831 and 1840. Historian Gordon Wood has argued, "Our beliefs in liberty, equality, constitutionalism, and the well-being of ordinary people came out of the Revolutionary era. So too did our idea that we Americans are a special people with a special destiny to lead the world toward liberty and democracy."

"...qualitatively different from other countries."  

In other words, to believe in the concept of American exceptionalism is to believe we're better than everyone else on the globe. 

You go ahead and watch this piece from '60 Minutes' and you tell me if we're better than everyone else.

Exceptional?  

Those kids Scott Pelley is interviewing are exceptional despite a broken system that allows them to sleeep in a step van. 

We're the country that can allow this...

and this:

image: Michael Egger/Tampa Tribune

...to exist in the very same state.

One is an eight year-old who spent three weeks living in her car.  The other is the testament to self-indulgence embodied in a house a baseball player built for himself on Davis Island near Tampa.  

I'm not much interested in hearing how uniquely great our country is when we can produce a ball player who builds a 30,875 square-foot house (slightly smaller than a Best Buy, ironically where the parking lots of which homeless families living in cars can sleep), but the very best we can do for a homeless eight year-old girl is take up a community collection, put her up in a friggin' hotel room, and then have her whole family paint all the rooms so she can stay there.

Are we an exceptional country because Derek Jeter can take a dump in one of nine bathrooms in his own home?  It must, because I can't imagine it says much for us as a society that nearly one in four children are homeless, having to do the same thing in a gas station bathroom day in and day out.

So that's what we're going to hear about this time around.  America, fuck yeah!  We're awesome and you suck.  We can build this unimaginable wealth and we can build great personal fortunes and we can kick asses around the world.  

I don't know which deficient bozo the Republicans will nominate.  I really don't.  But that'll be the mantra of whoever we have the misfortune of listening to for another eleven months or so: we're great, and Obama hates us.  

Now I'm going to get the inevitable Ben hates America crap, which just isn't the case.  In fact, I think it is, in a weird sort of way, worse to say that America is exceptional and can do no wrong -- closing your eyes to the wrong -- than to say we can do better than this.

Well, we can do better than this.  We have to.  We're America.  And I won't believe we're exceptional until we can prevent children from sleeping in a goddam car in a hospital parking lot.

We are not exceptional -- and until you see the plan to help homeless kids from the Republican nominee (don't hold your breath), don't you believe it.  And if you do see it, well, it'd certainly be the exception to the rule.

Another Titan Out: Congressman Barney Frank Will Not Seek Re-Election

BREAKING:

Well, if confirmed, this will be more than just a loss for the Massachusetts 4th Congressional District.  However, as of right now, several media sources are saying that Congressman Barney Frank will not seek re-election.  The Democrat has been serving since 1981.

Frank, a Democrat who has been serving in Congress since 1981, is widely acknowledged to be the most powerful openly gay person serving in government today.  Of course, this has made his a pretty frequent target of the innately homophobic right wing.  

But Barney Frank has long been more than just a powerful gay man in Congress.  In governmental and political circles, he's also widely acknowledged as the expert on financial and banking issues.  Right now he is the Ranking Member on the House Financial Services Committee.  He was previously the Chair.  In fact, it's important to note that he was the Chair of that powerful committee when the House passed the Dodd-Frank financial reforms.

Whatever you think of Dodd-Frank, you have to acknowledge that Barney Frank has been a powerful player in one of the most critical times in the financial history of our nation (or maybe just history, period).

I've only got one Barney Frank story from the old Clinton days.  I think I was still working in the Presidential Personnel Office, so it was early.  Say, spring of 1993.  March, April, maybe.  Anyway, I was walking the halls of what we then called the Old Executive Office Building, or OEOB (it's the Eisenhower Executive Office Building now).  

I really don't know what I was doing, or what mission I was on, but I was marching through the halls -- this place is really quite something, huge pillars and high ceilings and crazy tile floors; it's gorgeous, really -- and came around a corner, and there was Congressman Frank.  And he was really yelling at this guy.  I mean, it was some poor staffer -- not just a whole lot older than me -- and Frank was leaning in and wagging his finger and his voice just echoed through these cavernous halls.  

He glanced and me and didn't even break stride.  This kid was sweating it out, too.  And I was in a position where I had to keep walking past them.  It was awkward, to say the least.  

Honestly, I have no idea what the Congressman was pissed about.  Who knows.  Doesn't even matter.  But after that, I always thought of Congressman Frank in very serious, very business-like terms.  A kind of no-shit guy.

We need more no-shit guys like him on Capitol Hill, not fewer.  We sure will miss his leadership.

Hot Mess

A guy unplugs from the blog for a few days, and the whole deal goes to hell.  The whole thing is a hot mess.

First of all, I kind of thought the Gingrich boom was a goof.  Apparently not.

Look, I get it: the Republicans are still looking for the not-Romney.  But you have to think that most Republicans are, like, really?  Gingrich?  

Quite honestly, I don't know what Newt Gingrich has to offer.  He's a washed up former Speaker of the House who was politically bested by President Clinton.  What's he got?  At least Herman Cain has the nutty 9-9-9 tax plan to flog.  Gingrich is just a nasty old philandering grump.  

Well, there's that.

But on my radar for this week is the rift that started with Naomi Wolf writing in the United Kingdom's Guardian that (basically) President Obama is sitting in his high-back chair, stroking a white cat and ordering faceless jack-booted thugs to crack down on Occupy Wall Street protesters. 

In other words, for the DHS to be on a call with mayors, the logic of its chain of command and accountability implies that congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces – pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS – to make war on peaceful citizens.

...make war on peaceful citizens!

Now, I am as likely to post a picture of the police shamefully overdoing it at the OWS events as anyone.  But to suggest this is the direct handiwork of President Obama is simply foolishness (and to do it in an overseas publication only adds insult to injury.  However, I shall concede that overseas is apparently the place to talk about such serious things.).

I'm reading more about how, well, perhaps Ms. Wolf got it wrong (not that hard to imagine).

But if you really think about it, she's highlighting a vague rift that has unsettled the Democratic Party for some time, now.  Really since Obama v. Clinton in '08, a wound that never really healed.  But don't take my word for it.  I'm just a half-assed blogger who occassionally cuts out for several days to go on turkey eating binges and hayrides with his daughter (posts for a later time).  Listen to former Labor Secretary and author of one of my favorite political books, Locked in the Cabinet, Robert Reich, via Twitter:

 

@RBReich  Robert Reich

2012 race: Romney/Rubio vs. Obama/Clinton.

1 hour ago via web

 

What?  What?  

Seriously, Mr. Secretary, what?  

Don't just leave us hangin' like that, man!  

Look, I don't know what he knows, but I'm fairly confident this is not going to happen.  I dunno.  Maybe somebody cracked into Secretary Reich's account.  Who could say.

Still, I'll take some time to re-think that this week.

If politics is just too depressing, then, I hope you're following along on my other blog as I post, chapter by chapter, the story I tweaked for nearly twenty years.  It's called The Deal, and it's a love story set in the criminal underworld.  It involves hot cars, guns, and lots of improbable action, so check it out.  I just posted two chapters today, but I usually post them on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. 

If you're not reading that, then at least go read the work of my friend Daphne Taylor Street, called The Book of Carver.  It's good stuff.

Happy Thanksgiving, Friends and Neighbors

Happy Thanksgiving.  

I am thankful for my wonderful family who manage to see something in me to love.  I'm thankful for my friends, who are all better than I deserve.  I am thankful for my health, the roof over my head.  I'm thankful not just for having good things in my life, but for the ability to recognize that I should be thankful for them to begin with.

And I'm thankful for you, readers.  You are all the best as far as I'm concerned.  

Now stop looking at the computer and go shovel in some more turkey.  You know you want it.

Off the Radar I've Been Down Before Edition

Remember the "Super Congress"?  They were going to come up with this fantastic, bi-partisan plan to cut the hell out of the federal budget and reduce the deficit.  

Didn't happen.

This shouldn't surprise you that much.  It didn't really surprise anyone else (including me).  

I am always skeptical when someone puts foward these perfect, bi-partisan solutions that will fix every ill in the world.  They don't and they can't.... because they are bi-partisan.  

See, the purpose of bi-partisanship isn't to fix everything to everyone's satisfaction.  It is to ensure everyone has a voice.  And do you know what happens when everyone has a voice?  That's right: things move slowly, if they move at all.  

That's exactly what happened here.  Republicans wouldn't budge on making the rich pay their fair share.  Democrats wouldn't budge on gutting critical social service programs and sacrosanct social compacts with the American people (Social Security, Medicare).  And so nothing happened.

Before you get too far in my griddle about the deficit, I actually do believe we need to do something about it.  But the answers, from my perspective, are make government more efficient, and make the wealthiest Americans pay a bit more in taxes.  

The second part is simple math.  More money coming in means the deficit shrinks.  The best thing that can happen on this score is to let the Bush tax cuts expire, which, now that this so-called Supercommittee has failed, may well happen.  

For the record, I do believe that government can be run more efficiently.  I've been there.  I've seen it.  There is waste, there is overlap, there is stuff that can simply be done better.  

You know, here's one theory on this whole Supercommittee deal: that it was the distraction, the ruse -- the cover Congress (and to a large extent, the president) used for -- gasp! -- political gain.  

Not to say that's all bad.  I think there are reasonable Republicans in Congress (I really do), and I think they may deny a bunch of stuff in public -- like, say, the fact that 2 plus 2 actually equals 4 -- but they know the score.  And they know that more revenue is required, and the best way to get this, short of voting on a bill that would proactively increase taxes on the wealthy, is to let those tax cuts expire.  They can blame it on the failure of the Supercommittee.  Their hands are tied!  

In the shorter term, Democrats can point to the insane Republican orthodoxy of self-destruction.  Who knows, maybe it'll be enough to make the elections of 2012 worthwhile.

# # # #

Here's a fascinating thing I discovered over at The Reid Report: What Chris Matthews actually said about the Obamas.

The short version is, MSNBC's Alex Witt is interviewing Chris Matthews (by the way, what's with all the weird angles and stuff?), and he says a couple of things which amount to 1.) the Obamas don't appear to be "grateful" to be in the White House, and 2.) President Obama hasn't rallied the American people in any significant way.

I'll let you read Joy-Ann's excellent post to see her take on it.  There are racial aspects involved -- ie, was Matthews saying the Obamas should be grateful to white people for the privilege of serving in the White House?  I tend to agree with Joy-Ann that the race piece is elusive on this one, but I'm willing to listen, I suppose.

With respect to Obama rallying the American people, well, that's a different story.  And it's complicated, because you have to remember we hired the guy to fix a broken country.  Joy-Ann:

You can argue, and I do, that that’s because he came into office in the midst of an ongoing crisis, and facing unprecedented obstruction, even to the point where the opposition party seemed more interested in taking down Barack Obama than in coming together for the good of the country.

Obama had a window of opportunity to rally the country behind him in 2009, but as a pragmatist, he chose — and it was a choice — to turn the nation’s attention to healthcare reform, to achieve that historic feat, and then he chose to step back from the process and turn the grunt work largely over to Congress. There were no big, sweeping speeches making healthcare reform the modern moon landing. Obama worked behind the scenes, but Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the “Gang of Six” were the face of the negotiations. You don’t have to be a racist to consider that to have been a mistake. It was a choice, and history will judge whether getting healthcare done ultimately cost Obama more than it gained, by birthing town hall hooliganism and the tea party, though he will go down in history as achieving an historic accomplishment.

That's right.  Look, the thing that kills me is that something like health care reform should have been our moon landing.  It even could have been.  But as a people, as a society, we've been so disconnected from our politics and the process for so long, that the whole process lacked any real meaning.  It was an epic, historic feat... and it totally lacked any sort of positive narrative.  

This is a lot of recent history to chew on.  Of course, it has more practical implications, ie, the 2012 elections.  The guy can get shit done.  

But can he sell it to a populace so out of touch, we produced the tea party?

# # # #

I was negligent in noting this a few days ago, but congratulations to Kevin Murphy and Ghost in the Machine on twelve years. 

Kevin's venerable blog is the one that really got me going at all.  Check it out, and you'll see that I still have a lot to strive for. 

# # # #

God, I love Tom Tomorrow.

# # # #

Why was I never informed of this, the original version of 'Jet Airliner' by Paul Pena?  

You're all fired.

Boycott NASCAR

...and hire a veteran, if you can.  

This is just unconscionable.

Look, I know we're in polarized political times, but we have to do better than this as a society.

I've never been a big sports fan -- everyone knows that already.  I'll root for the Rays when they're doing well, and beyond that, not much intrigues me or inspires me in the world of sports.  It doesn't mean much for me to boycott NASCAR.  I wasn't watching it to begin with.

But if you were in to it, you should think twice.  Would you want to be associated with the kinds of fans who boo not only the First Lady of the United States, but the cause she is representing: the hiring of and training of veterans. 

I guess we should credit the pre-event with the drivers, who gave Dr. Biden and Mrs. Obama a standing ovation.

God, what do you tell those kids who where there?

UPDATE: As somone rightly pointed out to me, if it's a choice between a bunch of red-in-the neck mostly drunk a-holes who get their jollies watching cars turn left booing the First Lady, or the disgraceful, horrific police brutality like we've seen at UC-Davis and elsewhere, then you should clearly worry more about the latter as a commentary on the state of our nation rather than the former.

What the hell is happening to this country?

Finally Friday Harder Than November Rain Edition

A quick programming note.  As you know, next week is Thanksgiving, my favorite holiday.  Can't wait. 

Duncan and Emmy and I are packing up and headed to Little Rock starting on Tuesday, back on Saturday.  We'll be staying with my brother, and hanging out with the family.  It'll be a blast.  

However, it also means extremely light posting around here next week.  Sorry.  I'll try to set up some easy things for the old auto-poster, but no promises.

I figure you'll be stuffing your face with a turkey leg in one hand and a fishbowl glass of pinot in the other.  Enjoy it.  You've earned it.

# # # #

Onetime GOP presidential contender Rick Perry -- now flailing in the polls -- challenged House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to a debate.  For some reason.   

As was said, he already lost.

# # # #

Well, this is good news: Florida unemployment numbers fell. 

Florida's unemployment rate fell sharply to 10.3 percent in October, reaching the lowest level in 28 months, state officials reported Friday.

Over the month, Florida gained a net 9,500 jobs, pushing the state up 106,900 jobs since January and 93,900 jobs compared to a year ago.

The jobless rate, down from 10.6 percent in September, represents about 955,000 unemployed Floridians out of a labor force of 9.2 million.

# # # #

An excellent video clip of Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) commenting on new GOP presidential flavor of the week front-runner Newt Gingrich.

You know, Gingrich was the Speaker of the House during the Clinton Administration.  In fact, it was him and his "Republican Revolution" cronies who oversaw the disastrous effort to impeach Clinton, which ultimately failed in the then vaguely more sane U.S. Senate.  It is that experience which has forever ruined Gingrich for me as anything even remotely resembling a public servant.

Well, that and the Air Force One story.  From 1995:

President Clinton said today he was "sorry and surprised" if House Speaker Newt Gingrich took offense at the way he had been treated on Air Force One.

Gingrich complained yesterday that in 24 hours of flying to and from the Jerusalem funeral of slain Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin last week Clinton failed to discuss their budget differences - and made Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, R-Kan., sit in the back of the plane and leave by the rear exit.

The speaker said his personal pique helped prompt the partial shutdown of the federal government.

The alleged "snub," the Georgia Republican told reporters, was "part of why you ended up with us sending down a tougher continuing resolution" - the stopgap spending bill that Clinton vetoed Monday, leading to the shutdown.

"It's petty, but I think it's human," Gingrich said of his reaction.

It's petty, but I think it's human.  What does that even mean?  And who would say that?  About themselves?  Look, I think most normal people get that there is a certainly level of self-centerdness about most politicians.  "Down to earth" is not the phrase that immediately springs to mind when you think of most folks who run for office or are elected to office.

But Gingrich, as they say, took it to a whole 'nother level.  I mean, with such nonsense, you're not only tarnishing of Speakership itself, you're kind of pissing on the funeral of a beloved international figure (they were coming back from Yitzhak Rabin's funeral after his assassination).

I guess I'm a little surprised that candidate du jour in the GOP presidential primary is going to be (or already is) Newt Gingrich.  I mean, I'm not that suprised.  After the likes of Michele Bachmann, Mister Debate himself, Rick "Hunting Lodge" Perry, and Herman "Hot Slice" Cain, nothing really surprises me.

Video link via Mustang Bobby.

# # # #

Obama is outpacing them all on fundraising.  

# # # #

My friends at Progress Florida have seen fit to once again honor me with a Best of the Blogs for this past week (my post from Wednesday, specifically).  I sincerely thank them.  And please be sure to check out the work of the other bloggers, too: Greg Mellowe, Inkberries from Beach Peanuts, and Daniel Tilson.  Feels good to be in such good company.  

They do remarkable work, by the way, over at Progress Florida.  Make them a regular stop in your daily online wanderings, if you're not already.

# # # #

Follow me on Twitter @bkirby816.  Be a part of the magic already shared by three hundred and eleven other people.

And by "magic," I mean sporadic tweeting which is frequently just re-tweets, or me saying "ugh" about some horrible thing. 

# # # #

It's finally Friday.

Blam! Blam! Ka-blooey!

What in the hell is the deal with the violent language and imagery which seems to seep and ooze out of the political right like a festering sore that never heals, abetted by our pathetic media apparatus?

I want you to look at this image I found at John Cole's Balloon Juice, originally from the AP:

Now, when you see that image of the New York City Police Officer and the Occupy Wall Street protestor, what kind of caption do you suppose it would earn?

Police officer subdues unruly protestor

Police fight back against ravaging mob of looters

Police come to blows to subdue meth-addled zombies...

Maybe the last one is over the top.  But no more over the top, really, than the real caption:

An Occupy Wall Street protestor draws contact from a police officer near Zuccotti Park after being ordered to leave the longtime encampment in New York, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2011, in New York, after police ordered demonstrators to leave their encampment in Zuccotti Park. At about 1 a.m. Tuesday, police handed out notices from the park’s owner, Brookfield Office Properties, and the city saying that the park had to be cleared because it had become…

There were a couple of vague defenses of the publication in the comments of John's post -- something legal, maybe? -- but in general, most folks get it ("Abner Louima wasn't sodomized, he just drew contact with a plunger!" a better retort, nearly, than John's "Amadou Diallo wasn’t shot! He just drew contact with a lot of police bullets!").  

What really got me going on this was the terrible even where shots were fired at the White House by a disturbed man with a rifle.  That article in the link is a little old -- they found a bullet in ballistic glass and lodged in wall in the White House later.  Thankfully, no one was hurt.  The man in custody appears to be infatuated with the White House and maybe with President Obama.

Which almost unsurprisingly lead to this from the president of the Texas College Republicans, in a tweet:

At 2:29 p.m. ET, UT’s Lauren E. Pierce wrote: “Y’all as tempting as it may be, don’t shoot Obama. We need him to go down in history as the WORST president we’ve EVER had! #2012.”

You know what's tempting?  For me to never, ever go to Texas ever again.  They gave us George W. Bush, Rick Perry, and now Lauren E. Pierce.  The only delight I can take in this story is that Ms. Pierce is likely having a fairly uncomfortable sit-down with the United States Secret Service right about now.  

What is it about these people and violence, and then cowering behind the First Amendment?

Pierce, the president of the College Republicans at UT Austin, told ABC News the comment was a “joke” and that the “whole [shooting incident] was stupid.” Giggling, she said that an attempted assassination would “only make the situation worse.”

“Insofar as she’s a representative [of the College Republicans], maybe it shouldn’t be said, but she’s made a positive statement in a way, ” said Cassie Wright, the group’s vice president.

“I don’t really see anything wrong with it,” Wright added. “It’s just a personal comment, not representative of any group. Just freedom of speech, you know?”

What do you say to that?  

I don't even know.  

Of course, leave it to whatever is left of the "leadership" of the GOP to come out and stand tall when it really matters.  

Hm, would someone in a leadership position -- unfettered by any campaign for president or any of that nonsense! -- say something with respect to the repression of actual First Amendment rights in New York City?  Would they speak out in support of the Secret Service and the safety of our President and Commander in Chief, no matter who he was, what party he was affiliated with, and scold goofball twits and their ditzy, heinous "temptations"?

Or would she come out and suggest hanging former University of Pennsylvania football coach Jerry Sandusky "from the highest tree"?  You betcha!  

This is Republican leadership.  Republicans of today, Republicans of tomorrow.  Good luck, America.  We're going to need it.

I asked a question at the beginning of this post.

You know what?  Never mind.  I think I know the answer.

Off the Radar Roundup Edition

The somewhat brutal eviction of Occupy Wall Street protesters in New York (and in other cities) while barring the media from reporting on it really is disgraceful.

Early Wednesday morning, New York police raided and evicted the Occupy Wall Street encampment in Zucotti Park in southern Manhattan. The behavior of the NYPD and the mayor’s office, in ordering this brazen action while blocking the press and the public from reporting on the eviction, is a disgraceful display of unnecessary force on a protest that for the most part has behaved lawfully and respectfully throughout its two-month existence.

Here's my ugly truth: I almost understand where any given mayor might be coming from on this deal.  When are those goddam kids going to get out of my park?  You're trying to manage a city, you want tourists to visit and families to come to your parks, especially in a tight economy (ironically enough), and it's the goddam drum line and protest songs.  

That being said, there is a better way to manage your city and allow people freedom of assembly and expression (one of those pesky inalienable rights).

The OWS folks have been ridiculed by many in the media as goofy kids without a message.  This did more to dispel the myth that we in America have an actual, effective media apparatus than anything else.  

Now the OWS protesters have been kicked out of public spaces by governmental leaders who were ostensibly elected and serve to uphold the rights of people in public spaces, if nothing else.  If a guy didn't know any better, he might start thinking that our government had become a myth as ineffective and trivial as our national media.

# # # #

Wow, you mean the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza and Groper-in-Chief of the National Restaurant Association doesn't have his shit together on foreign policy?  

I'd say that Herman Cain embarrassed himself on video (you'll find it in that link) when asked a question about President Obama and Libya.  John Dickerson of CBS News offers an interesting take, and maybe it's all true: Cain was operating on little sleep.  He's been trying to cram a ton of stuff into his head.

Guess what part of the job description is for President of the United States?

I happen to think that Cain was in a box because the real kiss of death is not knowing what the deal is with Libya.  The unforgivable sin in the Republican Party is to agree (or even appear to agree) with President Obama in any way, shape, or form.  My guess is he was stuck trying to figure out how to applaud the outcome of what happened in Libya while trashing Obama all at the same time.

# # # # 

The Beach Peanuts take-down of Allen West and military policy is a must-read.  Honestly, people, I can't believe we're stll talking about waterboarding as a viable thing to do to people.

(Demi Moore was on an episode of "Will & Grace"?)

# # # #

I genuinely love John Cole and Balloon-Juice, and this post is exactly why.  It's sexist, it's doesn't tell you much you don't already know, and it may well have been written in about a minute.  And it's perfect.  

To be fair to John, he corrected the sexist comment.  

I'm telling you, that blog is a must-read.

# # # #

Be sure to check out Days of Struggle, the new website and blog from Kelly Benjamin.  It'll go up in the list to the left soon.

# # # #

So the Supreme Court is going to take up the health care law before the 2012 elections.

The U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will review the constitutionality of President Obama's individual mandate that will require Americans to obtain health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty, Adam Liptak wrote in the New York Times. The Court will hear oral arguments in March 2012 and a decision is expected in June during the showdown of the presidential election.

If the Supreme Court defers to elected officials in the executive and legislative branches and determines that the individual mandate is constitutional, the decision then moves to the court of public opinion. That court will be divided based on those who have to pay for health insurance from their own pocket and those who don't.

I've said a lot on this blog that the driving force of Election 2012 will be the economy (so have a lot of other bloggers and media types).  That's still true, but you'd better believe this will be a factor, now, too -- no matter what the outcome.

# # # #

If you're looking for something uplifting, watch the Diane Sawyer interview of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly.  It's just great stuff.

-- More later -- 

...Coming Up Next, Cooking Tips From Presidential Daughters!

I've always worked really hard to give Chelsea Clinton -- and to be fair, all the children of Presidents -- a pass.  They don't ask for the glare of the largest spotlight in the world, and it can't be easy growing up in a place like the White House.  

Furthermore, I remember Chelsea because she is about my sister's age (a year or so younger), and they played in the same softball league together. 

I remember seeing her and meeting her once or twice during my time in the Clinton Administration, and she was always very nice, very polite, and pretty gracious for a person so young.  

I didn't say a word when she went to the elite Sidwell Friends in D.C.  I didn't say a word when she went to Stanford, and later, Oxford.  I didn't complain when she got the six-figure job at the massive consulting firm McKinsey.  I had a chance to call out Senator Clinton's presidential campaign on using Chelsea as a campaign spokesperson, and then complaining when the media fired questions her way.  I didn't (and a lot of folks did, and in hindsight, rightly so).   I didn't even say anything (much) when we endured the celebrity-esque wedding to Marc Mezvinsky, the son of two former Members of Congress (in fact, I wished her well). 

Look, she's the daughter of a former president -- one for whom I worked, for crying out loud -- and we just need to accept that because we don't have kings and queens and princes and princesses, this is what we get.

With that being said, I'm not so sure this new media gig Chelsea seems to have landed is really appropriate (for the record, I'm not a fan of Bush's daughter doing it, either).  

To be clear, I'm not really blaming Chelsea, here (though I do think she could do something else worthwhile and have a larger impact).  

This is the product, or result, of a broken media system which seems to be circling the drain with an increasing velocity.  What caught my eye today was the Daily Beast/Howard Kurtz breakdown of early morning network programs -- Today, The Early Show, Good Morning, America -- all of which are virtually unwatchable, and the effort to get them to be more "news" oriented as opposed to the lightweight infotainment they offer now.  

Duncan and I used to watch the Today show until I couldn't stand it anymore.  They never got the mix of hard news and entertainment right (from my perspective, the two shouldn't mix, anyway.  I'm sorry, but you can't tell me about the CIA's extraordinary rendition program and then follow it with a Justin Beiber concert on the plaza.). 

I appreciate that Chelsea is donating her salary to the Clinton Foundation.  I also appreciate that she'll be contributing to the "Making a Difference" series which is a Nightly News feature on NBC, not the unwatchable morning garbage.  Still, this is just a little much.  How is the presence of Chelsea Clinton going to communicate the difference someone makes?  What qualifications does she have to investigate how those differences were made, and why?  

Sorry, Chelsea.  If it helps, it's not really your fault.  This system was broken a long time ago.