March 30, 2013

Friday Talking Points (251) -- Don Young Shows GOP How Not To Reach Out To Minorities

While it certainly was (quoting the Flintstones theme) a "gay old time" in Washington this week, I have already spent the whole week on the subject, so I'm really only going to mention it in passing. I did run a column from last December this week where I predicted the outcome of both cases at the Supreme Court, if you're interested in grading my predictions -- and I might point out that it seems that many other pundits have now come around to this way of thinking, especially after watching the oral arguments.

But while we were all court-watching, there was some other political news happening this week. We start off with an embarrassing item. Now, I'm as big a Star Trek fan as the next guy, but hearing that the I.R.S. spent $60,000 on a Star Trek spoof training video was a bit much even for me. Sure, that's not just "peanuts" when it comes to federal budgeting, it's in fact "one grain of salt on one single peanut." But still, guys, it's like you're painting a target on yourselves (right before tax season, to make it worse) saying: "Oh, please cut our budget... pretty please?!"

The strangest thing to us is if we were asked to list "federal agencies you might expect to make a Star Trek spoof video," the I.R.S. would be way way down on our personal list. I mean, number one would probably be the folks over at N.A.S.A., wouldn't you think?

Moving right along, President Barack Obama did one very smart thing this week. He appointed the first woman to ever head the Secret Service. This was a smart move because the agency quite obviously has some "macho" problems (such as hotel visits from prostitutes, for instance) that need fixing. Naming a woman to head the agency sends a clear signal that it is time for the agency to reform itself and set only the highest standards for their agents, both on and off the job. This is one of the nation's elite law enforcement groups, and we think it's high time for a woman to be in charge of it.

The big news towards the end of the week was "stupid things Republicans say," of course, but we're saving most of that for the "Talking Points" part of the program. The biggest fray was over a Congressman from Alaska who apparently grew up in Central California in a time where bigotry was acceptable. Now, this isn't that damning a thing, since many folks grew up where various strains of bigotry were acceptable in polite society. The big difference is, most of us have realized that such bigotry was, in fact, wrong and demeaning and mean-spirited if not downright evil. Most of us have also realized that using the same terminology that was bandied about by some folks in the past is no longer acceptable in any way shape or form, here in 2013.

Don Young apparently hadn't learned this lesson yet, as evidenced by his casual use of the term "wetbacks" in a radio interview. As I said, I'll address this later, but what we found notable was an article in the Washington Post which charted Young's previous odd and dubious behavior. Which included a line (you just can't make this stuff up, folks) which just begged to be included here in our intro, and which we leave you with as a wrapup for this week: "Young brandished an 18-inch-long walrus penis bone and pounded it into his hand for emphasis."



[center][/center]

It was indeed impressive to see a whole passel of office-holding Democrats come out in full support of gay marriage this week, in advance of the Supreme Court's arguments. By doing so, they are all following President Obama's leadership on the issue, after he proved that Democrats can support gay marriage even during a fierce campaign and still win. Of course, some give most of this credit to Joe Biden, and they do indeed have a case. Either way, though, it's heartening to see that the Democratic politicians are catching up to where the voters are leading on the issue.

Bernie Sanders had a pretty good week, getting a vote to protect Social Security through the Senate and introducing a new bill to take on the whole "Too Big To Fail" concept on Wall Street. So we've got to at least give him an Honorable Mention.

But the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week goes to Kentucky's governor, Steve Beshear. His legislature passed a "religious freedom" bill whose sole purpose seems to be to give businesses legal cover to be as discriminatory as they feel like being, because of "religion." This seems like a novel new way for Republicans to alienate gay people (and those who support their rights), so this legislative effort will likely soon spread to other red states, if the recent past is any judge.

Beshear, however, vetoed this bill. It didn't matter, and he knew it wouldn't. They had enough votes to override his veto, and they had those votes before he did so. The bill is, quite obviously, a "wedge issue" to pit those who support religious freedom against those who support gay rights. In Kentucky, the safe course was to just sign the bill, and not risk political blowback by vetoing it. Beshear chose to stand up for what he thought was right, even though the only result of doing so was to risk his own political skin.

We have to say, that's pretty impressive. Which is why, for his veto of this bill earns Governor Beshear this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award.

{Congratulate Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear on his official contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.}



[center][/center]

We've had a few weeks without many disappointing actions from Democrats. It's been slim pickings here in the MDDOTW category, to put it another way.

This week all of that changed, as an absolute flood of disappointment hove onto the horizon. If we handed out a "Democrat Who Disappointed The Most Other Democrats" award, we would have to hand it to Ashley Judd, who announced that, contrary to breathless reports from pundits on the Left, she will not in fact be running for Mitch McConnell's Kentucky Senate seat.

Unfortunately, Judd aside, we've got some major disappointments to report on. While this one actually happened a while back, we feel that Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter deserves a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award nonetheless. We'll backdate it, how's that? Nutter was upset because a local writer penned a magazine article, from the perspective of a white guy, about the pitfalls about talking about race in the city. Nutter likened the article to "fighting words" and demanded that the local human rights commission do something about it. Free speech, according to Nutter, means not publishing things the mayor doesn't like to read. Way to further a serious conversation about race, Mayor Nutter.

New Jersey assemblyman Joe Cryan learned a lesson a lot of politicians seem to still not have learned: don't send sexual texts and emails unless you are OK with them being exposed to the public on the front page of your local newspaper. Seriously, shouldn't there be some sort of "Politics 101" class that covers this sort of thing by now? "The number one rule of politics is don't talk about sexual affairs online. Period." Sigh. When will they learn?

Speaking of online rants, Alabama state representative Joe Mitchell pretty much takes the cake this week. In response to a constituent who emailed him about gun control, Mitchell (who is black), sent the following in response:

Um, way to further race relations yourself, there, Mr. Mitchell. Nothing like accusing a constituent of having relatives who rape babies to get the conversation started, eh?

Surprisingly enough, this wasn't even the most bizarre story of the week. Out in Nevada, the state legislature has expelled a Democratic member who is scaring other lawmakers with his strange behavior. As if this weren't bad enough, now state representative Steven Brooks has been arrested in neighboring California. We're not sure how this story is going to end, but we are sure that it takes the "most bizarre" prize of the week.

We say let's hand out Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week prizes all around! Michael Nutter, Joe Cryan, Joe Mitchell, and Steven Brooks have all done more than enough to merit their MDDOTW awards, we are truly sorry to say.

{Contact Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter on his official city contact page, New Jersey Assemblyman Joe Cryan on his official contact page, and Alabama Representative Joe Mitchell on his official contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions. Nevada's Assembly website is pretty badly designed, so all I could come up with was an official page for Assemblyman Steven Brooks, with no contact information. Perhaps they've already taken such information down, who knows?}



[center][/center]
[center]Volume 251 (3/29/13)[/center]

OK, we've got kind of a mixed bag this week, and we're already running long, so let's just get right to it. The last portion of the program will center on "what Republicans should -- and should not -- do to fix their problems with minorities." Or, to put it another way: "I'll take 'Driving minorities away from our party' for a thousand, Alex!"



Unbelievable

This one is truly astounding -- an excellent example of why Americans hold Congress in such low esteem.

"I see that a compromise may happen on background checks for gun purchases between the parties. What I can't understand is that to get this compromise one loophole had to sneak back in. The one loophole everyone is apparently agreeing upon is for gun transfer between family members. Now, a quick review is in order. Where did the Sandy Hook shooter get his guns from? His mother. The Sandy Hook shooting was the reason we're even talking about gun legislation right now, and the compromise both sides can agree upon leaves as the only loophole the way the Sandy Hook shooter got his guns. Brilliant. Simply brilliant. And people wonder why cockroaches are more popular than Congress."



How smart are those dogs?

In all the other Supreme Court news, this one kind of snuck under the radar, but it is truly a win for civil libertarians, and deserves to be pointed out.

"I see that the Supreme Court has ruled that before the police can use a dog on your front porch to check for illegal smells coming from your house, they now have to get a warrant. This is a clear victory for the Fourth Amendment, and is a very commonsense ruling by the Supreme Court. After all, I don't know many dogs who have actually read the Constitution."



Retreat! Retreat!

OK, the rest of this column, as promised, will be on the subject of how Republicans can drag their own party, kicking and screaming, into the new millennium. We've got a few "how to do things right" examples, and a few "no, that's not quite the way to do it" examples as well. We'll start on a positive note.

"I heard that this week, Bill O'Reilly actually kind-of sort-of came out in favor of gay marriage. I also heard that Rush Limbaugh basically admitted defeat on the issue as well. This should be seen as a good sign, because the quicker the Republicans realize they're on the wrong side of history here, the quicker they'll be able to convince voters that they're not just the party of cranky old men. To Republicans considering how to continue fighting on the gay marriage front, I say: Listen to Bill O. Listen to Rush. That sound you hear is the bugle call to retreat. You can either follow it, or you can continue to fight for what is going to be a very lonely and increasingly-unpopular stance. It's your choice."



Maybe stop calling them "filthy," to start?

Of course, there will always be those few who refuse to answer that bugle call.

"I heard that a member of Michigan's Republican Party leadership posted a pretty vile article this week on the subject of gay rights. Although 21 Republican officeholders have called on Dave Agema to resign, he's standing by his ignorant and disgusting statement. While I certainly applaud those 21 Republicans for attempting to purge their party of bigotry and hatred, I wonder why such a person was put into such a position of responsibility in the first place. The conversation on gay rights has changed. Most of America has realized it. Sadly, Agema has not."



If I'm ever in Rancho Cucamonga...

This is the sort of story which shows that change may come slow, but deserves mention when it does arrive.

"I would like to publicly applaud the owner of a Chick-fil-A in Rancho Cucamonga, California, for handing out free chicken coupons at a pro-gay-marriage rally recently. Even in the corporate world, attitudes are changing, and it is refreshing to see. I welcome the gesture by this franchise owner, and I promise that the next time I'm in Rancho Cucamonga, I will stop and get some chicken at his restaurant."



Not to get all PC... but...

A member of the House from Alaska showed in a painful way that some congresscritters have just been there too long, and have distinctly elderly ideas about what "the good old days" were really all about.

"I was astounded to hear Representative Don Young casually use the term 'wetback' this week in a radio interview, in the year 2013, for Pete's sake. Really, Representative Young? You really have no problem tossing such a term around? Here is 'Exhibit A' in why the Republicans have such a long road to travel on the journey towards convincing Latinos to ever consider voting Republican. It's not 'messaging' so much as it is outdated thinking. I was a bit heartened to see several prominent Republicans in Congress disavow Don Young's use of such a despicable term, but I also notice that nobody seemed to be calling on him to step down. The message is clear: Republicans can hold these sorts of beliefs, as long as they don't say so in public. In the next presidential election, when Latinos vote 75 or even 80 percent for Democrats, maybe Republicans will look back at this week in their search for why this is so."



Literacy tests to be on ballot

This one falls under the heading of "you've got to be kidding," really.

"I see that North Carolina may get a chance to vote on removing the unconstitutional and shameful 'voter literacy test' from their state's foundational law. What with the Voting Rights Act before the Supreme Court and what with the long and ugly history of hurdles placed in front of minorities to suppress their voting rights, I think it is long past the time when such a change is due. This is a reminder to us all that while we think America has progressed since the Jim Crow era, disturbing remainders still exist. I call upon all citizens of North Carolina to unanimously vote out this holdover from a shameful era in their state's history."



[center]Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank[/center]

March 23, 2013

Friday Talking Points (250) -- Happy Sestercentennial Column!

Welcome to the 250th Friday Talking Points column!

If we had had our act together, we could have run some "looking back" or "best of" nostalgia today, but we in fact do not have our act together, and so we'll just have to muddle along with the usual weekly thing.

A lot happened last week, but most of the action took place over in Republicanland. Senator Rob Portman announced that -- after having thought the matter over for a mere two years after his son came out to him -- he would now support gay marriage. I suppose that's a little too snarky, though, especially since Hillary Clinton also announced her support this week. Better late than never, one supposes....

The sequester was set in stone for the next six months, so America is now going to learn what "budget cutting" really means. Paul Ryan doubled down on the slash-and-burn budgeting, and the House passed his budget for the next fiscal year, while the Senate is expected to pass a Democratic budget shortly. Neither will make it into law, but the conference committee should be interesting -- keep an eye on who gets named to that committee, as the membership will be crucial to shape any sort of deal.

Reince Priebus, chair of the Republican National Committee, put out an "autopsy" of the rotting corpse of the Republican Party's 2012 campaign. This led me this week to write one of the few columns where the title becomes obvious long before I figure out what to say in the text. Because, as has been pointed out before, when you remove the vowels from Reince's name, you are left with: "RNC PR BS," which summed up the contents of the "autopsy" perfectly. The continuing civil war within the Republican Party shows no signs of abating any time soon, so it'll be fun to watch for months to come, folks! Next up on the Republican battlefield: immigration reform. Watch the fur fly!

President Obama's off in Israel, which seems to be going well so far. No big summit news or anything, but nobody really expected any to begin with, so that's not really any surprise. Obama is slowly (very slowly) formulating a drone policy that will move some drone control to the Pentagon from the C.I.A., but that's not really much of a policy change on how we actually use them.

That's about it for this week, except for one amusing petition we can fully support, and urge you to as well. In fact, we've voiced this opinion before, starting back in FTP (189) (in the last talking point). Now, there is a new petition up on the White House site that everyone can sign. Here's the petition:

Since the White House upped the bar which generates a response, the petition has a long way to go (it's just over 15,000 at this writing, it needs to get to 100,000). So click on over and show your support for this great idea! Sure, it'll never happen for various reasons, but it would be fun to see their response nonetheless.



[center][/center]

We've got to at least give an Honorable Mention to John Hickenlooper for signing some very tough gun legislation in Colorado, proving that even the Mountain West -- traditionally a very gun-friendly region -- can lead the rest of the states on the path to saner gun laws.

But our real Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week is Elizabeth Colbert Busch, sister of comedian Stephen Colbert, who just won a primary for a special House election in South Carolina. This seat was open as a result of Jim DeMint pulling "a Sarah Palin" and walking away from the Senate to take a cushy job as "conservative emeritus" (or something). In any case, Busch won the primary handily, and will now take on Mark "hiking the Appalachian Trail" Sanford in the general election in May.

We wish Busch the best of luck, without knowing what sort of chance she's got of winning. If she does win, her famous brother is going to become a lot more interesting to watch, that's for sure (he's been campaigning for her already).

{Congratulate Elizabeth Colbert Busch on her campaign page, to let her know you appreciate her efforts.}



[center][/center]

Harry Reid disappointed many this week, none more than Dianne Feinstein, who might in fact be called the "most disappointed Democrat of the week" this week. However, Reid was just doing his job in this case, so we can't really fault him all that much.

Reid knows that DiFi's assault weapons ban simply does not have the votes to pass. So he stripped it out of the gun control legislation he'll be bringing to the floor. Reid will allow Feinstein's bill to be brought to a vote as an amendment to the main bill, so that a vote will be held (and fail). This will improve the chances for the other pieces of the legislation to move forward. It was a very pragmatic decision, and we don't have to like it, but it's also hard to see how doing it any differently would have been any better for the overall goal.

Also, we have two other candidates in the disappointing category this week. Whoever heads up the Veterans Administration seems to be doing a pretty weak job of processing claims from veterans returning from our wars, leading to years-long backlogs. Meaning Eric Shinseki deserves at least a (Dis-)Honorable Mention.

But our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week is environmentalist and billionaire Democratic donor Tom Steyer, who made a very ham-handed attempt to interject himself (and the Keystone XL pipeline) into the special Senate election in Massachusetts. Monday, he sent out public notice that if one of the candidates didn't swear that he'd oppose the pipeline (by "high noon" -- you can't make this stuff up, folks), then Steyer would spend a bunch of money in the other candidate's favor. Ed Markey, the candidate who would have benefited, strongly denounced such tactics (to his credit). Massachusetts is a state where outside money is not appreciated in their politics to begin with, it bears mentioning.

There's a political term for the tactics Tom Steyer just attempted to use, and that term is (or should be, at any rate): Norquistian. Signing "loyalty oaths" under threats of flooding the election with money is not exactly something a Democrat should be proud of. For his overreach and tin ear, and for trying to adopt the tactics of Grover Norquist, Tom Steyer is our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week.

{We could not find public contact information for Tom Steyer, sorry.}



[center][/center]
[center]Volume 250 (3/13/13)[/center]

Welcome to our sestercentennial edition! That's a word that all Americans are going to become aware of in 2026, we assume. Has it really been 250 weekly columns since we started attempting to show Democrats that talking points are a tactic which can actually work wonders, if handled right?

Well, whether you've been with us since the beginning, or are reading one of these for the first time, we'd just like to thank everyone for their continuing support. We'd love to wake up one week and realize that this column is not even necessary anymore because Democrats had suddenly become as good as Republicans at keeping "on message" -- but we're not exactly holding our breath, if you know what we mean.

But enough of that, let's get on with it, shall we? We haven't done it in a while, but we're going to spend this entire week rubbing salt in the wounds of the GOP.



One change in policy? That's it?

First, an overall view of the Reince Priebus autopsy report.

"The Republican Party spent four months examining why they got shellacked in the 2012 election, and while they had some ideas on how to communicate better, there was only one policy change in the entire document -- support comprehensive immigration reform. That's all they could come up with? One thing to change about the entire Republican platform? Wow. Well, good luck with that, guys -- it's looking like you'll have to lose another few elections before you have a chance at winning another national election, I guess. What a missed opportunity...."



It's not the medium, it's the message

It doesn't matter what label's on the can, if what's inside is dogfood, then people just aren't going to be wild about eating it.

"Republicans did a lot of examining why they had problems getting their message out. All well and good. Communications can be crucial to success in politics. But even with the best messaging operation known to mankind, if the message is something the public doesn't like, it doesn't matter how well you communicate it, people are still going to reject you. Voters are not stupid. You can put all the lipstick you want on a pig, but it's still a pig. Republicans need to wake up and realize that it isn't so much how they're saying things, it is actually what is being said. Until they realize this, all the communications skills in the world aren't going to help."



Extreme and out of the mainstream

Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

"On issue after issue, in poll after poll, the Republican Party's position is seen as extreme. Large majorities of the public agree with Democrats on policy, meaning most Democratic positions are now the mainstream of political thought. Until Republicans begin speaking up against the extremists in their own party, they're never going to convince moderates and independents to vote for them. Most Republicans are terrified of the extreme wing of their party, and stay silent when some awfully nutty things are said by fellow Republicans. This hurts the party more than anything else, because when nobody is brave enough to disavow extremism, then extremism winds up defining the party. Even the RNC autopsy report admitted that the Republican Party is seen as too extreme on a host of issues. Until they modernize their party, the public will continue to see Republicans as extreme and out of the mainstream."



You've got to be for some things, too

Being against stuff is fun, but in the end it doesn't get you very far.

"The Republican Party has earned their reputation of just being against things. Anything Obama's for, they're against -- even ideas which were originally Republican ideas, like Obamacare. Republicans have for too long been defining themselves as what they are against -- immigrants, women's rights, minorities, education, science, just to name a few -- and spent precious little time defining what they are for, outside of more and more tax cuts for the uber-wealthy. Republicans have become the cranky party, yelling at the kids to get off their damn lawn, and this presents an awfully negative face to the public. When's the last time you heard a Republican described as 'optimistic' -- about much of anything? That's a big problem, right there."



Maybe the Supreme Court will save you

This one is counterintuitive, but it makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

"If I was a Republican who cared about expanding my party in the future, I would be fervently praying for the Supreme Court to declare gay marriage a constitutional right. By doing so, this would remove the issue altogether and Republican politicians could shrug and say 'nothing we can do about it now' and move on. That's really the only thing that's going to save them. Gay marriage is going to advance in this country, one way or another -- the writing is on the wall. The more Republicans fight it, the more of the youth vote they will give up, possibly forever. As those kids get older, there will be fewer and fewer extremists on the issue. Republicans are now tied to a policy that is guaranteed to shrink their future prospects. The only thing that can get them out of this trap is if an external force removes the issue altogether, so they don't have to talk about it anymore. If I were a Republican politician right now, perhaps thinking of running for president one day, I would be sincerely hoping the Supreme Court rules for gay marriage."



Stop the War On Women

The extremists are running riot on this one, in statehouses across the country.

"Women are not a minority -- they are actually the majority of the electorate. The more the Republican Party keeps up its 'War On Women' the more women are going to flee their party. Once again, this shows how the Republican Party seems to be locked in to shrinking their political chances for the future. Women don't just notice stupid comments about rape -- they also notice that the Republican Party's platform stands for banning all abortion even for rape victims. You can get better candidates, who don't say such stupid things, but that doesn't change the fact that the party actually stands for those stupid policies. Most women aren't stupid, though, and every time they see Republicans blocking a law like the Violence Against Women Act, they sit up and take notice. I'll believe the Republican Party is serious about changing things for the better when they start actually talking to women and listening to them -- instead of passing law after law telling them what they can and cannot do."



Here's an idea: support Puerto Rican statehood

I threw this one in, just because after a while you start to feel sorry for where the Republicans currently find themselves.

"OK, you want me to be positive? Here's an idea I'll hand for free to the Republican Party, which could go a long way towards convincing a lot of Latinos that they ought to consider voting Republican. While it is flying under the radar for most people, Puerto Rico is getting very close to deciding once and for all that they want to become one of the United States. Democrats haven't really picked up on this yet. And there are actually a lot of very conservative voters in Puerto Rico. So Republicans could lead the bandwagon and champion the cause of Puerto Rican statehood, and Democrats would be seen as playing catch-up, following the Republicans' lead. How's that for a game-changing idea? Republicans standing up for Latinos -- think that would make some inroads for the party in the Latino vote?"



[center]Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank[/center]

March 16, 2013

Friday Talking Points (249) -- Chides Of March

Welcome to the Ides of March, now known as the day after "Pi Day." If you need to look up either of those references, may I humbly suggest that your pop-cultural education may not be quite wide enough. The Wides of March? Maybe I'm just being too snarky -- yet another of the Snides of March, perhaps.

OK, I'll stop. We'll get on instead with the normal chiding we do here on a weekly basis (must... not... repeat... subtitle phrase...). Speaking of chiding, New York City Mayor Bloomberg is fit to be... well... tied. No, really, I'll stop now -- I promise. Ginormous soda drinkers across the city are assumably rejoicing in the streets, now that a judge has struck down Bloomberg's "nanny-statist" law. Bloomberg vows to appeal. Will Gotham streets be held in the grip of the Sodameister? Will Batman and Robin save the day? Stay tuned, kiddies....

Moving on from the Soda Wars to our neverending War On (Some) Drugs, sooner or later the math is going to become compelling to budget cutters, one hopes. Want to cut something like $850 billion from the next 10 years of budgeting? End the War. There's a novel budget-cutting idea, eh, folks? The Drug War has now cost us roughly the same amount as the Iraq War, to put it in context -- two trillion dollars each. In other "white smoke" news this week, the United Nations came out and condemned the states of Colorado and Washington, and urged the Obama Justice Department to fight their marijuana legalization laws full-force -- on the same day the U.S. Ambassador came out and chided his colleagues for their serious drinking problems in the U.N. You just can't make this stuff up, folks -- a gaggle of drunkards getting on their high horses (and then, likely, falling off) about continuing harsh temperance laws.

In other ironic and/or hypocritical news, Republican Senator Rob Portman bravely switched his position on gay marriage... after his own son came out as gay to him. Well, two years after, but who's counting? Now if only other children of Republicans were to come out as unemployed, or perhaps marry a minority, maybe party thinking could further evolve. There's always hope.

Speaking of hope, President Obama continued his charm offensive this week, by meeting with all four partisan caucuses up on Capitol Hill (two parties times two houses equals four caucuses). Whether any of this reaching out will pay any sort of dividend is yet to be seen, but at least the atmosphere seemed to be a little less harsh in Washington this week, so perhaps hope is not entirely unjustified this time around. Then again, there's always next week. We'll see.

Donald Trump has offered to pay the price to reopen the public White House tours, meaning... um, I'm not sure. Meaning it's time for a reality show based around touring Washington landmarks? It'd certainly be more interesting and educational than watching Trump fire people. You could have a race up the steps of the Washington Monument, for the grand finale, even!

But let's return to the concept of hope to wind up this week. Because the Catholic world is certainly hopeful for the success of the new Pope Francis I, and we will certainly lift a glass and wish him well on one of the two upcoming "saints' days" that Americans celebrate across sectarian lines (Valentine's Day being the other, of course). Which is our way of working around to saying have a Happy Saint Patrick's Day, everyone! Or, to put it properly: Beannachtaí na Féile Pádraig!



[center][/center]

There were a number of impressive things on the Democratic side to note this week. Maryland's governor is about to sign the abolition of the death penalty in his state, which is certainly noteworthy.

Senator Patty Murray, who chairs the Senate budget committee, put out a Democratic budget proposal this week. This is impressive only because it is the first time in five years that such a document has come forth. Now, this isn't Patty's fault, really, since the committee was chaired for the past four years by Kent Conrad, who retired in 2012. But, at best, it rates only a Honorable Mention for Murray, because we're really supposed to get one of these every year, like clockwork.

Our second Honorable Mention comes with no caveats, because the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Pat Leahy, successfully moved all four gun control bills through his committee this week. While their future is uncertain even in the full Senate, this is a necessary first step -- moving the bills out of committee. Leahy has done so with blinding speed (by Washingtonian standards, that is), only a few months after the tragedy in Newtown. While the country is still waiting on bills to reform immigration or the minimum wage or any of the other agenda items President Obama put forth in his State Of The Union speech, gun control is now moving forward as solid legislative proposals. For doing so, Leahy certainly has earned an Honorable Mention.

But our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week falls into the "credit where credit is due" category, from an event which happened almost a year ago. A bartender working a fundraiser casually put a video camera on the bar and taped what was going on at the event he was serving. That event was to raise money for Mitt Romney, and it is where Romney uttered his now-famous "47 percent" remarks. Thanks to not only the foresight in taping the event in the first place, but also to his determination to get the tape out to the political chattering classes, Scott Prouty changed the course of the presidential election.

Up until now, the journalist who first spotlighted the tape has gotten most of the credit for the tape's impact. We here have lavished praises (and two MIDOTW awards) on the man who connected the journalist with Prouty -- James Earl Carter IV, President Jimmy's grandson. But now that he's gone public and admitted his role as the originator of the video, we in all fairness have a long-overdue Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award for Scott Prouty. We're not even sure if he's a registered Democrat or anything, but he certainly deserves a lot of credit for the Democratic presidential campaign efforts last year. Romney never truly recovered from the damage the tape did to his campaign, and it will be remembered decades from now as a historical turning point. For making such history possible, Scott Prouty definitely deserves our weekly MIDOTW award.

{Scott Prouty is a private citizen, not an elected or party official, so it is our policy not to provide contact information, but you can always offer up your congratulations in the comment section.}



[center][/center]

With so much lunacy on the right this week (what with the CPAC convention and Florida's Lieutenant Governor stepping down hastily), it was hard to find any examples of disappointing conduct by Democrats.

President Obama at least deserves a (Dis-)Honorable Mention this week, for his justification of being "no Dick Cheney" on drone warfare. Seriously, Mister President? This is the bar Democrats set for themselves now? Being slightly better than Dick Cheney? Wow, that's a pretty low mark to hit.

Obama needs to realize that what worries Democrats (and Rand Paul) is not that we really think Obama himself is guilty of far-fetched drone scenarios, it is instead the "just trust me" attitude -- because setting such a precedent is an incredibly bad idea. Having a secret drone policy in the first place means that while we may be justified in "just trusting" Obama, what will happen with the next president? And the one after that? Sooner or later, we will indeed have someone just as bad (or worse) as Dick Cheney in the White House, and that is the president we are worried about. Or you can spell that "precedent we're worried about" -- it works both ways.

But while Obama deserves at least a (Dis-)Honorable Mention for his off-the-cuff comment, we just dinged him last week, so we don't feel his remark rises to the level (or "sinks to the level&quot of the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award.

In fact, no one does. For the first time since the 2012 election, no Democrat has seriously disappointed us this week, so there will be no MDDOTW award this week -- unless someone nominates a doozy in the comments whom I have missed or forgotten to mention.



[center][/center]
[center]Volume 249 (3/15/13)[/center]

So far, we've had three competing budgets appear, from House Republicans, House Democrats, and Senate Democrats. None will pass as-is, which gives us pundits and wonks months and months of arguing about their relative merits, which is certainly more interesting than watching paint dry, right?

Well, let's get right to it, such as it is. As always, these talking points are offered up to Democrats everywhere, from those about to sit down on a Sunday morning chat show to those shooting the political breeze around the water coolers of the nation.



So much for the "liberal" press

What's that? You weren't aware there were three budget proposals? I'm simply shocked. If you want a stellar rundown of what I'm talking about, check out Robert L. Borosage in the Huffington Post for the best article I've seen yet about the Progressives' House budget.

"You know, for all the griping on the right about the supposedly 'liberal' mainstream press, I have yet to hear a rundown of the Congressional Progressive Caucus' Back To Work Budget in any of the big media outlets. Oh, sure, Paul Ryan got lots of press by introducing essentially the same budget he's introduced for the past three years, and Patty Murray got somewhat-less attention for her budget proposal, but the real 'liberal' budget has yet to see the light of day in any mainstream press I've seen. The Back To Work budget is just as serious as Paul Ryan's budget, and it deserves equal attention because it is much more in tune with what the American people tell pollsters they want, in poll after poll. I mean, somebody should alert the soi-disant 'liberal' press, or something."



Obama already cut the deficit

These next two are true talking points -- phrases that need repeating, over and over again, until the media realizes their inherent truth and stops parroting nonsense from Republicans.

"You know, I keep hearing Republicans saying we need to cut the deficit. But somehow I never hear from them that President Obama has indeed cut deficits by something like $2.5 trillion over ten years. It's not like Obama hasn't signed off on budget cuts and deficit reduction. Republicans are scared to admit it, but this president has cut yearly deficits by at least one-third already -- when the numbers for 2013 are in, they will be around one-third lower than the deficit Obama was handed when he walked onto the job. Deficits have come down from $1.3 trillion per year to what looks like less than $900 billion this year. How about a little credit for Obama already moving so far in the right direction?"



Obama has offered entitlement reform, too

Once again, rinse and repeat.

"I hear Republicans call for entitlement reform, but the one person in Washington who has put more solid offers on the table to reform entitlements than any other is President Obama. Obama has, at various times, suggested means-testing Medicare, moving to the 'chained CPI,' raising retirement ages, and that doesn't even count the savings within Obamacare -- the $716 billion that Paul Ryan raked him over the coals for doing before Ryan added the savings to his own budget. Obama steps up to the plate again and again with serious suggestions for entitlement reform, and the only solid proposal from Republicans is to voucherize Medicare which is simply never going to make it through the Senate. Republicans just keep repeating 'Obama must lead on entitlement reform' over and over like a mantra, when Obama is actually the one out there with all the viable proposals to do just that. Obama is leading on entitlement reform, but Republicans refuse to take him up on any of these offers, and fail to come up with any realistic ideas of their own. Obama has offered entitlement reform, and Republicans should stop saying he hasn't, because it is simply not true."



What year is it?

This is a common refrain for all sorts of people, upon seeing Paul Ryan's budget proposal.

"Well, we all got a good dose of 'meet the new Ryan budget, same as the old Ryan budget' this week, as the most substantive change I see was to do a global search-and-replace to add 'fiscal year 2013' to Ryan's budget blueprint. It's like the election never happened. Ryan said he thought his party 'won the argument' politically on budget matters in the last election. Really? The 2012 election was a big win for Republicans? Wow. Paul Ryan's budget is being seen as less and less serious the more the American public gets to know what's in there. Investor Business Daily pointed out that federal spending outside of Social Security and the interest on the debt would be at the lowest level of GDP since 1948 if Ryan's budget actually became law. Think about that for a minute -- the lowest since 1948, before Medicare and Medicaid even existed. The American public rejected such severe austerity in the election, but apparently Paul Ryan didn't get that memo."



GOP for it before they were against it

The flip-floppiness of Republicans needs not just one but two talking points as well.

"Three months ago, Republicans from Mitt Romney to their congressional leadership were for cutting tax expenditures, otherwise known as loopholes. Romney actually ran on cutting loopholes. Now that President Obama is proposing doing so, Republicans are against it. It's like their position just a few months back went down the memory hole. Republicans don't really want a big budget deal, it seems. They are going to be against whatever Obama is for -- even when it's an idea they were pushing three months ago. The hypocrisy is just astounding."



GOP against it before they were for it

Sadly, it works the other way, too.

"Six months ago, Paul Ryan was out on the campaign trail using 'Mediscare' tactics to win votes among seniors. Ryan and Romney made a ton of political hay over terrifying seniors that Obama was stealing $716 billion from their Medicare benefits. They swore up and down that the first thing they'd do in office would be to 'restore those Medicare cuts.' Funny how Paul Ryan now includes them in his budget, isn't it? In case there was any doubt, the 'biggest lie of campaign 2012' has now been crowned. Even three months ago, Republicans were warning the sky was going to fall and the American economy would collapse if we raised tax rates on something like two percent of all earners. That didn't happen, and now Ryan is including those deficit-cutting tax rates in his budget as well. What I thought was screamingly funny was Ryan's pathetic inability to square this circle in his budget proposal rollout press conference. He was asked why he included the tax hike, and he answered 'it is settled law,' and he was asked why he was still fighting Obamacare while retaining the $716 billion in savings he had loudly denounced, and he had no real answer for that. Paul Ryan: against the $716 billion Medicare cut before he was for it, and against the new tax rates before he was for them, too. The hypocrisy is getting deep, folks, and it looks like it'll get even deeper soon."



You got that one right, Congressman Ryan

But, of course, I saved the best for last. Ryan had a slip of the tongue or perhaps a gaffe, or perhaps just a Freudian moment with his subconscious. When attempting to formulate some sort of answer on the Obamacare question, Ryan responded with a true gem of an answer:

[center]Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank[/center]

March 9, 2013

Friday Talking Points (248) -- I'd Love To Change The World

Our column's subtitle this week is a silent homage to guitarist Alvin Lee of the band Ten Years After, who sadly died this past week. Anyone who has seen the movie Woodstock knows of Lee's incredible talent on the electric guitar, and we just wanted to begin by noting that Alvin Lee is "Goin' Home" for the last time. Requiescat In Pace.

Transitioning from Alvin Lee's death to current political news is tough to do, but not impossible. We offer up a "six-degrees-from" sort of segue, to do so: Alvin Lee was the lead in Ten Years After. Former Republican Senator Norm Coleman (the guy Al Franken beat out) was also a former roadie for Ten Years After. During Franken's campaign, I wrote an article titled "When Hippies Go Bad," doing my part to expose the hypocrisy of Norm Coleman. This week it was revealed that Louisiana is paying tax dollars for history books which use all sorts of derogatory names for hippies (and warn they listened to rock bands which worshipped Satan). Mike Huckabee, when running for president, opined: "If you think that Medicare is expensive now, wait until 10,000 aging hippies a day find out they can get free drugs. Then, it's really going to get expensive in a hurry." And with that, we're back to the budget, Medicare, and Paul Ryan. Voilà!

Paul Ryan introduced his version of the Republican budget this week, and it seems Ryan has agreed that two or three of President Obama's biggest budget victories actually do significantly cut the deficit, and are therefore worth including in the Republican plans for the future. Remember that $716 billion that Ryan and running mate Mitt Romney made so much political hay over, in all their "Mediscare" ads during the campaign? Hey presto -- it's back in Ryan's budget! Guess Ryan and Romney were just flat-out lying about how they'd restore every dime of that $716 billion, eh? Also included in the recent Ryan budget are the tax increases Obama got through the fiscal cliff showdown. So now the Republicans are fully on board with those, too, rather than all their nonsense about how it was going to kill the American economy. Also notable, Ryan's budget does not directly attack Obamacare, and just assumes it will be implemented as designed. Another issue Republicans have now accepted as reality, apparently.

If you thought that previous segue was too convoluted, here's a much easier one: ten years after we decided to go to war with Iraq, a final report was released which showed that America wasted at least eight billion dollars in the reconstruction effort (out of $60 billion total). Note that "at least" -- the real figure could be much, much higher. Talk about "waste, fraud, and abuse" in government. In any case, it allowed me to get that "ten years after" reference in, ahead of the flood of stories we will be experiencing in the next two weeks over the Iraq War's anniversary.

Let's see what's going on in the world of Republican-on-Republican attacks (always a fun place to observe from afar). We have the Virginia governor's race and the Iowa Senate race, which will both be providing all kinds of amusing stories over the next year or so. We had Rand Paul mount his first-ever filibuster, and then the spectacle of John McCain denouncing him the next day for doing so. Maybe McCain's afraid all the Sunday morning shows will be calling up Rand Paul to be on teevee more than they'll be calling him... or something... it's always hard to tell what McCain's thinking at any particular moment. And finally, we all enjoyed the deliciousness of watching Jeb Bush twist slowly in the wind on immigration. Bush wrote a book a while back (which is just now being released) in which he staked out a position that was actually more moderate than the position Republicans were holding when he wrote it. Now, however, the ground under the GOP position has shifted, and Bush now looks like a right-wing reactionary -- which was not his intended effect. So he had to kick off his book tour by disavowing the position he took in the book. A book specifically about immigration. So it wasn't even a Republican-on-Republican attack in this case, it was Jeb Bush-on-Jeb Bush. Delightful to observe!



[center][/center]

We've got a lot of minor points to make before handing out the coveted Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award, so let's get on with it.

In Rhode Island, Lincoln Chafee seems to be seriously considering becoming a Democrat, which is good news because he's always been a liberal (even in Republican clothing), so perhaps in future he'll be eligible for these MIDOTW awards.

Ashley Judd continues to cause Kentucky Republicans to freak out, and she hasn't even announced if she's running for Senate or not. If she does toss her hat in the ring, look for plenty of fireworks in this race.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (boy is it fun to type that title!) continues to do exactly what we all expected she'd do in the Senate: put the big bankers on the hotseat. Warren's withering contempt for "too big to fail" banks is a refreshing breeze in the halls of the Capitol, and so she's worthy of at least an Honorable Mention this week.

Bill Clinton just penned an opinion piece in the Washington Post where he admits that the Defense Of Marriage Act was not just an inadequate half-measure but also downright unconstitutional to boot. Although we applaud Bubba for completing his evolution on the matter, we can't hand him any sort of award for doing so, since he actively campaigned on signing DOMA in the 1996 campaign. This precludes whatever he has to say about it now, we feel, at least as far as handing awards out is concerned.

Instead, this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week goes to Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, for supporting Rand Paul's filibuster across party lines. Rand Paul is usually dismissed by the Left as a slightly-less-crackpotty version of his father, but in this instance Paul was indeed raising a valid point: is there any limit to what the Obama White House and the Justice Department claim they're allowed to do with armed drones?

By focusing on a very specific detail, Paul made the issue one of constitutional rights of citizens versus the federal government. By doing so, Paul's case was in fact one that Democrats (or "liberals" or "progressives," take your choice) should really have supported. Sadly, Democrats were largely absent from this debate.

Now, Rand Paul may run for president in 2016, so it's understandable that Democrats may not want to elevate his stature. And Paul's filibuster was really a political stunt, so Democrats may have wanted to distance themselves from it on grounds of propriety (or something). But Rand Paul was right. The federal government should not have the power of death-from-the-skies over American citizens on American soil when they are not actively engaged in an attack on the country. That should be explicitly stated. The Attorney General had not done so when Paul began his filibuster, but relented the next day and specifically stated that the Obama administration does not have this legal option.

Rand Paul scored a victory this week. For those who scoff at what Paul was suggesting, I pose a simple question: OK, sure, you don't think President Obama would ever do such a thing -- but what about a President Bush (or, if he had been in an unforeseen accident, a President Cheney)? For those with longer memories, how about a President Nixon (see: COINTELPRO, for context)? Executive precedents are important, and the precedents set for drone warfare now will likely be with us for a long time to come -- so it is indeed important to get all the details out on the table for discussion.

For supporting Rand Paul's effort in doing so, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon is this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week. Partisan politics aside, Rand Paul was right. His filibuster worked. And more Democrats should have stood with him, on general constitutional principles.

{Congratulate Senator Ron Wyden on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.}



[center][/center]

Before we get to the MDDOTW award, we have two notes. Senator Carl Levin announced he's retiring and will not be running for re-election next year. This is disappointing indeed, especially since it means Republicans could pick up the Michigan seat in next year's election.

Our second note is an apology. Back in FTP (243), we wrote the following:

We are hereby doing so. Senator Bob Menendez still faces several disturbing legal problems, but the "underage prostitutes" charge against him kind of fell apart this week with the news that one of the women now says she was paid to make the accusations in the first place. While we will continue to reserve judgment on the rest of the senator's legal problems, the real reason we handed him the MDDOTW five weeks ago was the prostitution scandal. We were wrong and premature to have done so, and we offer Senator Menendez our apologies and hereby rescind the award given. Mea culpa.

Looking forward, we're handing out (Dis-)Honorable Mentions to all Democratic senators, with three exceptions, for the Rand Paul filibuster. Ron Wyden, obviously, supported Paul. His fellow Democratic senator from Oregon, Jeff Merkley, at least tweeted his support. And Dick Durban stood up and asked Paul a relevant and thought-provoking question at the end of the filibuster, namely whether the president would have had the authority to shoot down the fourth plane on 9/11 before it was used as a weapon in Washington D.C. Every other Democrat in the Senate deserves a (Dis-)Honorable Mention for their silence, though.

But our winner of the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week was President Obama. Now, Obama did do some impressive things this week, including launching a "charm offensive" with congressional Republicans that is, in fact, long overdue. Obama is, famously, not a big fan of the gladhandling and politicking that presidents are expected to do in order to advance their agenda on Capitol Hill. He's held a few photo-ops and made a (very) few phone calls over the years, but he hasn't personally made such a big effort since the beginning of his first term. We're hoping this time around it'll develop into more than just a photo-op or two, and in fact bring some change to the way things have been operating for the past couple of years.

But Obama made a blunder this week which seems minor but is larger symbolically. In fact, the whole thing revolves around symbolism. Obama has been accused of "overhyping" the dire effects of the sequester. Since the sequester, even at worst, will have more of the nature of a very slow-motion trainwreck, nobody's really sure how much it's going to hurt average Americans from now until the end of the fiscal year (at the start of October). Republicans have been claiming Obama's going to make sure the cuts hurt average people, because he is "playing politics."

This week, Obama announced that White House tours will end for the duration of the sequester. This was pretty heavy-handed, and a political misstep on two levels. One, it feeds into the Republican talking point that Obama's just "looking for ways to make things hurt," and two, it also feeds into a very old theme many presidents have been painted with: a "bunker" mentality at the White House. If Obama had been a bit more deft, he could have announced that White House tours were being cut back to only three days a week, rather than just slamming the door shut. It looked, quite frankly, like an overreaction.

And for that reason, President Obama is our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week. He's handed his opponents a "poster child" in the sequester fight, when he could have avoided doing so. Republicans are already using language about the White House being "owned by the American people," and they're just getting warmed up. That's a political misstep, and it's one he may find he has to back down from eventually.

{Contact President Barack Obama on the White House contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.}



[center][/center]
[center]Volume 248 (3/8/13)[/center]

OK, we're already running long this week, so let's just get right to the talking points. As always, these are for Democrats everywhere to use whether arguing with a Republican on a national television show, or just arguing with a coworker at the water cooler. Without further ado...



Halfway there on jobs

Today's jobs numbers were a bright spot in the news this week, as the unemployment rate fell to 7.7 percent. Be sure to put this into perspective.

"Right after Barack Obama took office, the unemployment rate peaked at 10 percent. Economists tell us that what they call 'full unemployment' is a rate at about 5.5 percent or lower. This month, the rate hit 7.7 percent. Obviously, we've still got a ways to go, but to put it in perspective, this is the halfway point between where we were when the economy collapsed and where we'd like to be. So we're halfway there, and the trend is looking good for the immediate future. Of course, the sequester is going to have an impact, with the loss of up to 750,000 jobs, and we should be working right now to avoid this hit to the recovery."



The other filibuster

This is an important point to make, about the media's treatment of how things operate in the Senate these days.

"While Rand Paul captured the media's attention last Thursday with his 'talking' filibuster, it was in fact one of two filibusters which happened that day. The other filibuster took place very quietly, and the media didn't report on it at all. A federal judicial nominee was filibustered because the National Rifle Association didn't approve, but I didn't notice that story on television much, did you? Blocking eminently-qualified judicial nominees is not even news anymore, because of the routine nature of Republicans blocking up-or-down votes for Obama's judicial candidates. I think that says something about the media, don't you?"



Too big to exist

Let's have some loud vocal support for Elizabeth Warren, what do you say?

"I was pleased to see Senator Elizabeth Warren asking some very pointed questions this week on the subject of banking. Warren is right. 'Too big to fail' is a revolting concept. In fact, these banks are also 'too big to jail,' which is a downright un-American concept. No entity should be above the law in such a fashion in this country. When you get right down to it, these banks are really 'too big to exist' safely in our economy. Washington has yet to rein in the size of these banks in any meaningful way, which just sets us up for the next crisis. I fully support Elizabeth Warren's efforts to prevent that from happening. These banks are simply 'too big' -- period."



World didn't just end

The Obama administration moved so quickly on this one, there wasn't even time for the knee-jerk outrage on the Right to even develop.

"I notice that an Al Qaeda terrorist is now being tried in a federal court in New York. This should be seen as a triumph of the Constitution, and prove that such suspects are fully capable of being tried, convicted, and locked away forever using nothing but the tools the Constitution lays out. The world did not come to an end because this terrorist is being tried in federal court rather than being shipped to a secret prison or held by the military. The trial will only serve to strengthen our country and put us back on the road to trusting our own judicial system once again."



Let's cut funding for non-existent stuff!

This one was priceless. Literally -- no price attached at all!

"I notice that in their budget-cutting zeal, Republicans this week made sure that no federal money went to an organization which no longer exists. I'm sorry to inform the Republicans that defunding ACORN is going to save exactly zero dollars, since it no longer exists. Perhaps they should be focusing on things in the budget which are.... you know... part of reality. It'd certainly be a step in the right direction."



If you want to stop voter fraud...

This is "part two" of the previous talking point, really.

"If the Republicans are so all-fired concerned about voter fraud, then maybe they need to stop hiring an organization which has had voter fraud problems stretching back years. Maybe they should stop hiring an organization which is doing exactly what they accused ACORN of doing. Because to continue hiring these folks just points out the rank partisan hypocrisy in pointing fingers at voter fraud on one side of the aisle, while ignoring it -- and funding it -- on your own."



About that $716 billion...

This one is such an easy shot, we saved it for last.

"I seem to recall a lot of hysteria from Republicans during the last campaign over Medicare. Millions of dollars were spent by the Romney/Ryan campaign in order to scare the holy heck out of America's seniors and try to -- laughably enough -- paint the Republicans as the 'saviors of Medicare.' In specific, Paul Ryan denounced the 716 billion dollars that President Obama had heartlessly cut from Medicare. Ryan and Romney swore up and down that they would restore these cuts immediately, should they be elected. Turn the clock forward a few months, and instead of 'Mediscare' ads, Paul Ryan has decided to keep these savings -- savings which do not and never did cut seniors' benefits by one thin dime -- in his budget document. Just like Ryan included these savings in both his previous budget bills. All throughout the campaign, Democrats were crying 'foul' over such hypocrisy on Ryan's part -- while Republicans tried to use Mediscare as a political bludgeon. With his recent budget, Ryan is in essence admitting that he was not just wrong during the entire campaign, but flat-out lying about the $716 billion. I'd really like to see some enterprising young reporter right about now ask Paul Ryan: 'About that $716 billion, Congressman...' -- wouldn't you?"

[center]Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank[/center]

March 2, 2013

Friday Talking Points (247) -- When Universes Collide

This is what happens when Hollywood causes metaphysical universes to collide. That's the way I see it, at any rate. The news that J. J. Abrams will now be directing movies in both the Star Wars and Star Trek franchises has, quite obviously, sent ripples across the multidimensional continuum which are only now beginning to be perceived.

Case in point: President Barack Obama today, admitting he is incapable of "Jedi mind-melds" with recalcitrant Republicans in Congress. As any science fiction fan worth his or her salt can tell you (at great length, and with appropriate quotations, accents, and gestures), it's either a Vulcan mind-meld, or a Jedi mind trick. Spock never said: "These are not the droids you're looking for," and Luke Skywalker never tried a mind-meld with Jabba the Hut, to put this another way.

Personally, I blame Abrams. No one man should have all that power, as Kanye might say.

If the Obama media team is smart, what they'd be doing even as I write this would be making two phone calls -- one to Mark Hamill, and one to Leonard Nimoy. Immediately -- as fast as air travel allows -- President Obama should cut a web video with Spock and Luke, and explain how he misspoke, what he meant to say, and offer profuse apologies to science-fiction fans everywhere (who are legion). You could have all kinds of fun writing the script for such a cameo-video, in fact. Any decent wordsmith should be able to come up with something hilarious without even breaking a sweat, in fact. The studios would love it, because it just builds fan anticipation for the next two movies in the franchises. Please, please, forward this idea to the White House, someone! The best damage control in the entire political universe! Heh.

The only other good that might possibly come of Obama's slipup might be seeing the inside-the-Beltway sorry excuse for a press corps be distracted from their current medical condition. This condition (sometimes terminal) is technically known as "cranio-rectal inversion blindness," or "the inability to see the world, through having your own head jammed so far up your own..." well, we'll just have to leave it to the foul mouth of John Boehner to complete that description, as we do strive to be a family column here. Ahem.

The big news in Washington "journalism" circles this week was not the side-issue of "did Obama personally come up with the sequester idea?" but the side-side-issue of "did Obama personally take Bob Woodward out to the woodshed and beat him mercilessly with a tire iron?" Or something like that, I must admit I'm not following this "story" as closely as some appear to be. I just sort of glance at the "Woodward admits 'it was more of a wet noodle'!" headlines, and then get on with my life, if you know what I mean. But then I don't live inside the Beltway, myself.

I found that the best commentary on the sequester this week was a seemingly-unrelated photograph of none other than Paris Hilton. Paris appears to be (life was too short for me to actually read the text explaining the photo, so this is all supposition) mugging for the cameras, while her boyfriend lies bleeding and in pain from some sort of ski accident. It's pretty easy to draw parallels to Congress and the bruised American economy, so maybe this is more of the metaphysical universe-collision fallout, who knows?

The Republican Party seems to be seriously fractured (as on so many other issues, these days) on whether to attack or retreat in their War On Women. State-level Republicans are apparently all trying to outdo each other for the "most Draconian and Hester-Prynne-ian restrictions on a woman's right to an abortion of all time" award, or else just continuing the tradition of Republicans saying monumentally stupid things about women. On the national level, however, John Boehner and about three dozen House Republicans decided to support the large number of Senate Republicans who voted for the Violence Against Women Act's renewal. Bet those three dozen are in districts which haven't been safely gerrymandered for the GOP, what do you think? But at least some Republicans are making some progress on the issue of women.

In other Republican news, the same guy who spearheaded the "freedom fries" renaming has now apparently slipped into some sort of alternate universe of his own, as he now says Dick Cheney is going to Hell for the Iraq War. How times change! The rest of us are left to wonder how sinful it is to glorify in all these Republican-on-Republican attacks (and we didn't even have to bring up Karl Rove...). What else? More proof that Republican economics just don't work, if you're into that sort of thing.

Virginia Republicans now have one more Republican on the voter rolls, as Scooter Libby had his right to vote restored personally by the state's governor. Gee, must be nice to get back your right to vote -- unlike so many felons in Virginia who are not as politically connected (to put it mildly).

The Supreme Court heard arguments in a case aiming to overturn the Voting Rights Act, because as we all know there simply is no racism in America anymore. Whoops -- except maybe over at Bloomberg Businessweek, I guess. Seriously, folks, what editor in his or her right mind would approve this cover artwork in the year 2013?

The Obama administration filed an amicus curiae brief in the Supreme Court case over California's Proposition 8 this week, speaking out for gay marriage. I still say everyone's paying attention to the wrong case, as I think any sweeping changes from the Supreme Court on gay marriage are going to come from the DOMA case and not the Prop 8 case, but we'll all have to wait and see, won't we? It was nice to see Obama following through so strongly on his new pro-gay-marriage position, though.

And finally, before we move along to the awards, we have to at least mention the news of the first pope in six centuries to resign. While the world watched, Pope Benedictus XVI exited the Vatican and the office of the Holy See. I don't know about the rest of the world, but my thoughts were deep and reflective upon such a momentous occasion. Specifically, I was thinking: "The pope's got a helicopter? How cool is that? Everyone knows about the Popemobile, but the Popecopter?!?"

OK, perhaps its just best we move right along. All this universe-colliding is making me lightheaded, obviously.



[center][/center]

Representative Keith Ellison deserves some sort of mention for an epic rant he went on this week, while being interviewed by Fox's Sean Hannity. It is breathtaking to watch. If you ever wanted to see someone fire up a buzz saw and just rip into Hannity, here is your chance. Ellison begins with: "You are the worst excuse for a journalist I've ever seen," and then just steamrolls right on down the hill from there.

Now, we have to admit we're actually a proponent of political ranting, if done right. We've even offered up rant suggestions here in these very pages, over the years, on numerous occasions. But we're not sure how effective we'd rate the Ellison rant. It seems to falter a bit in the middle, although some of that is likely due to the delay times between Hannity and Ellison (he was in the Capitol, not on the set). So we're tossing it out there for you to decide -- what sort of award is this worthy of, if any? The "Most Hair-Raising Rant Of The Week," maybe? See what you think, and share your thoughts in the comments, as always.

Our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week is Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who joined together with David Vitter to cosponsor a bill to break up the big banks. Brown is pushing a simple idea, really: too big to fail is too big to exist. Or, as Brown put scarily put it in perspective:

Ending the concept of "too big to fail" is an excellent idea, and it really should have been done about four or five years ago. For championing the issue, and for getting bipartisan support for his legislation, Sherrod Brown is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week.

{Congratulate Senator Sherrod Brown on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.}



[center][/center]

Sadly, this one is an easy call this week.

Mitch McConnell is apparently married to Elaine Chao. This is news to us, but then we don't get invited to tony Washington cocktail parties, so perhaps we can be excused for not knowing that the Senate Minority Leader is married to an ex-cabinet member from a Republican administration.

But while our reaction upon hearing the news is likely similar to just about everyone's ("Huh... who knew?... that's interesting...&quot , apparently we're supposed to be having a different reaction, according to a group called "Progress Kentucky." This supposedly-liberal super PAC has been tweeting about McConnell's family, using what can only be called "race-baiting." Don't believe me? Decide for yourself: "This woman has the ear of (Sen. McConnell) - she's his wife. May explain why your job moved to China!"

The story doesn't even end there:



A spokesman for the group took an astonishingly blithe attitude toward the problem, responding: "It's not an official statement. It's a Tweet. And we will remove it if it's wrong. People make mistakes in Tweets. It happens."

Um, sorry, guys, but that is not good enough. It's not even near being good enough. It's not even in the same time zone as what you should have said, in fact. What's even worse is this comes from a group with "Progress" in its title.

You guys should really hang your heads in shame. And then profusely apologize. Want to know how to handle this sort of thing? Here is Ashley Judd's response (Judd may actually be contemplating a run against McConnell, and is therefore the candidate Progress Kentucky is supposed to be benefiting):



Exactly right. Couldn't have said it better. For both allowing these tweets to be published, and then for the pathetic response, Progress Kentucky wins the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award.

{Contact Progress Kentucky via their web pages, to let them know what you think of their actions.}



[center][/center]
[center]Volume 247 (3/1/13)[/center]

Before we get on with taking a look at Obama's press conference today, we've got two items that just didn't fit anywhere else. Two candidates, in fact, for upcoming elections, both of which will be very interesting to keep track of, we think.

The first is in Arkansas, where Bill Halter has thrown his hat in the ring for the governor's race. You may remember Halter as the guy who tried to "primary" Senator Blanche Lincoln. This was a big election, and a lot of outside money poured in to help Halter defeat Lincoln. This sort of thing later led Rahm Emanuel to an epic level of profanity and offensiveness, it should be noted, which we're not going to repeat here (being a family-style column, of course). Halter is now trying for the governor's office, and we certainly will be watching how the race unfolds.

But we're going to make a bold prediction here, and say that one of the most (if not the most) interesting Senate races next year is going to be between two current House members from Iowa. Hopefully, Republicans will nominate Steve King, who has a bit of a problem keeping his own mouth under control. And also hopefully (although in a different sense), Democrats will nominate Bruce Braley, who is an all-around good guy and helped create the Populist Caucus in Congress. Karl Rove has already suggested he's going to sink money into the Republican primary in the hopes of defeating King, so there's that to look forward to as well. But, as mentioned, we think this may be the Senate race to watch in 2014. And we wish both Braley and Halter good luck on the campaign trail!

OK, this is running long enough, so let's just move right along to examining Obama's press conference today. Barack Obama is starting off his second term the same way he started off his first. In his first term, this phase (sadly) ended much too soon, as Obama seemed to abandon the concept. Perhaps he's learned his lesson, and perhaps he's channeling his inner Ronald Reagan more strongly this time.

In case you're confused, what I'm talking about is the correct use of the "bully pulpit." Or, as Reagan was fond of saying to the press: "I'm going over your heads to the American people." This theme was on full display today, and you get the sense that Obama has learned that wielding this power can indeed get results in Congress, if done right.

Having said that, here are the most effective excerpts from the full transcript of Obama's press conference.



None of this is necessary

In his opening remarks, after calling the sequester cuts "stupid" (a theme he would return to), Obama did not mince words about how he saw the past week unfold. Towards the end of this excerpt, Obama begins his overall theme of "talking directly to the American people."





I am prepared to do hard things

Obama sets himself up as the "adult in the room" to counter the Republican caricature of him "just wanting taxes." He puts the whole argument into some well-needed perspective, and once again ends with an appeal to the public.





Why don't we do that?

Obama starts with his overall theme here, and then pivots to an important point -- how could Boehner be for something a few months ago, and be against it now? It doesn't make sense.





Everybody is going to have to do something

Obama, once again, stakes out a very reasonable position. Why can't everyone sacrifice a little bit?





Eventually Congress catches up

When asked about his leadership skills, Obama pointed out he didn't really need to lead, as the American people were already in agreement. Properly labeled (as far as bumpersticker-slogans go), this is the "When the people lead, the leaders follow" theory. Obama knows the polling is overwhelmingly on his side in this argument. The difference now seems to be that Obama is unafraid to say so in a very pointed manner.





Mayor Bloomberg and others may not feel that impact

When asked about the mayor of New York City's brushing aside Obama's warnings of what will be cut, Obama did not hesitate to beautifully frame the issue. This could be the clearest example of "speaking to those outside the Beltway" in the entire presser.





Jedi mind-meld

Sure, this one's going to get all the jokes. But Obama is making a very good point -- he is answering the "centrist" nonsense that has been kicking around inside the Beltway for a couple of weeks. This centrist fantasy hinges around Obama using magic "leadership" skills (which are never explained) to change the minds of the Republicans in Congress, as easy as clicking your red slippers together. The list of pundits who have written tripe about this idiocy grows daily, it seems, so it was indeed refreshing to hear Obama slap it down. Here's the whole transcript of the exchange, to show how vacuous the question is, when you attempt to actually put this "alternate universe theory" into words:





[center]Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank[/center]