Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > August
August 2008
GOP convention may not happen
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
With Hurricane Gustav scheduled to hit the Gulf Coast tomorrow, the McCain campaign and GOP officials are being forced to scramble. Here’s how the Washington Post is reporting it:
“(McCain campaign manager Rick) Davis told reporters here that the seven-hour program scheduled for Monday night would be pared down to a bare-bones afternoon session of roughly two hours devoted mainly to meeting the legal requirements involved with convening the party’s nominating convention. He said that there would be no partisan speeches and that officials would assess what to do with the rest of the convention once it became clear the magnitude of the storm damage. He said that they would seek to make sure that “nothing new distracts from the” response efforts in the Gulf.”
Permalink | Comments (42) | Post your comment |
McCain throws Hail Mary in first quarter
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
It sure has been interesting watching the reaction to John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate. On the right, it has been greeted enthusiastically and even ecstatically. On the left, it has been greeted warmly as well, as evidence of desperation and poor judgment by McCain.
For the moment, the pick has at least succeeded in patching a McCain weakness by generating excitement among the base of his party. The Republican core likes — no, they love — Palin, and they are absolutely convinced that their own excitement will be echoed by excitement among independent and female voters.
I just don’t see it.
The biggest reason is the experience issue. With a younger presidential candidate, it wouldn’t matter as much, but McCain is 72. And while the GOP would like to counter that Palin is as experienced as Obama, I don’t think the general electorate is going to buy that.
Whatever you think about Obama, he has earned his prominence and the top spot on the national ticket by beating both the Clintons in a hard-fought primary battle. Palin, on the other hand, has been plucked from total obscurity with nothing to suggest she is conversant with national issues.
I also think it is easy to underestimate the importance of experience in the national media spotlight. The glare is unforgiving; it is not the place for on-the-job training, and as governor of Alaska you just don’t get exposure to it.
Then there’s the matter of Palin’s role in getting her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper. I don’t know how that story will play out, but the fact that it still does have to play out — coming to light only in July, with an investigation still underway and depositions yet to be taken — suggests how half-baked the choice really was. A presidential candidate who was confident of his chances would not have put it all at risk with such a pick.
In her first national appearance, Palin placed herself in a line of succession that included Geraldine Ferraro. I think the comparison is accurate. Ferraro, a N.Y. congressman, was picked as a running mate by Walter Mondale in 1984 to try to generate excitement and draw attention to his flagging candidacy. It did, for a while. But when November came, Mondale lost by 18 percentage points.
I don’t expect a blowout like that by Obama. But I do think that as a executive-level decision, the choice of Palin reflects poorly on McCain. She has a great story and seems personable, and her positions on the issues excite the hard right. None of that makes her remotely qualified to be one step from the presidency.
Permalink | Comments (101) | Post your comment |
The destructive force of Hurricane Karl
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
“”The Republicans can’t seem to get a break with regards to August, when it comes to the weather,” says Karl Rove, noting the possibility that Hurricane Gustav may hit New Orleans just as the GOP convention opens.
As they board up their homes and scatter, I’m sure the people of the Gulf Coast are full of sympathy and concern for Karl.
Permalink | Comments (132) | Post your comment |
Nobody hits the Exacta…
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Back on Aug. 16, I asked for predictions on who would be the running mates. I’ve gone back to check, and not surprisingly, nobody got ‘em both right.
RW gets credit for picking Palin, but predicted Richardson on the other side. @@ picked Biden — but as McCain’s running mate.
Permalink | Comments (28) | Post your comment |
Didn’t see that one coming….
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
CNN is reporting that McCain’s pick is Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a 44-year-old who is halfway through her first term as head of a state of fewer than 700,000 people, less than the population of DeKalb County.
If true, that’s a pretty stunning pick, and it suggests McCain had to reach pretty far down his list to find someone acceptable to his party’s various interest groups. Palin may be very intelligent and well-grounded, and her youth and gender can certainly help McCain, but her inexperience in national and international affairs and her lack of exposure to big-time media demands make it a stretch in my opinion.
For example, would Palin be ready to step into the presidency as commander in chief to replace a man who turns 72 today?
Hey, I could be wrong — I’ve never even heard the woman say a word. But this is an odd pick.
UPDATE: On the other hand, a smiling Jim Wooten just walked into my office and slapped a dollar down on my desk, proposing a little friendly wager on the November outcome. He thinks this settles it.
And Jim doesn’t part with a dollar easily.
UPDATE II: I of course accepted the wager.
Permalink | Comments (206) | Post your comment |
Theater, pageantry — it’s just politics
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
“Modern political conventions are like a Super Bowl minus the game. They are the bling on the body politic: shiny, pretty and a touch goofy. They exist to be seen, more than to do. They are like a Miss America pageant where the fix is in. The Olympic opening and closing ceremonies without all that sweating in between.”
— Calvin Woodward, Associated Press
It’s a common refrain: Nothing important happens at political conventions anymore; they’re just theater. Some even argue that networks and reporters ought to refuse to cover the events because they’ve been reduced to mere infomercials.
That’s all nonsense, because if you were paying attention, a lot happened this week in Denver. Among other things, we saw the hopes and dreams invested in Hillary Clinton, the most serious female presidential candidate in our nation’s history, collide head on with the hopes and dreams invested in Barack Obama, the most serious black candidate in our nation’s history.
We also saw the Democrats struggle to reweave those two strands of their party back into one, a task they performed awkwardly but in the end effectively.
The doubters are certainly right — the image projected of party unity was created by drawing upon the entire range of theatrical skills: choreography, playwriting, lighting, music and not a little bit of acting. But politics has been just another form of theater for as far back as it is possible to trace such things.
The traditions of democracy and theater arose together, simultaneously, out of ancient Greece, two siblings born of the same mother. Politicians have long been actors, and actors have long been political —- the oldest plays in our possession are ancient Greek comedies that were satires on the politics of the day, and even now we acknowledge the link by joking that Washington is just Hollywood for ugly people.
So while the conventions have become nothing more than political theater, they remain essential for just that reason. A debate over tax policy or environmental laws doesn’t draw the public to politics; it is personality, drama, conflict. In fact, on the stage in Denver this week, we saw story lines and characters that themselves could be drawn from a Greek play:
The wife once scorned but now ascendant, and in the end denied the vindication she sought; the aging roue, reluctant to cede the stage to the younger interloper but forced to drink the bitter dregs; the mysterious, charismatic stranger who bursts upon the scene and alters everything.
Even the complaint that theater somehow pollutes politics is as old as history. In “The Republic,” written in the fourth century B.C., Plato complained about the rise of what he called a “theatrocracy,” in which those on the stage tried too hard to please their listeners. He believed “the sovereignty of the audience” gave the great unwashed too much sway over those who led them.
However, the theatricality of modern politics also has a purely pragmatic side. Leadership is a twofold challenge. First you have to decide on the right thing to do, then you have to persuade other people to do it. Campaigns exist to test that second skill, a candidate’s ability to communicate and generate support through the force of personality and intellect. And in that, a touch of theater is always useful.
Charisma — a Greek word, by the way — helps too, as millions of American voters no doubt saw last night in Obama’s acceptance speech. His Republican opponents have tried to undercut that appeal by dismissing Obama as “a celebrity,” but his communication skills clearly make them nervous.
That discomfort is understandable. In recent years, Republicans have vastly outperformed the Democrats in the theater of politics. In fact, if they had been able to run the government half as well as they could run campaigns, we wouldn’t have a country in which 76 percent of Americans now believe we have gone “seriously off on the wrong track.”
In next week’s Republican National Convention, the GOP will have their chance to explain that record to the American people, and explain how the next four years would be different. It promises to be an instructive performance, and not a little entertaining as well.
Permalink | Comments (34) | Post your comment |
No looking back, no going back….
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I know this will shock some of you, but I thought Obama’s speech was excellent. I think the most compelling part of it was the way, in case after case, he took on the worst that his opponents have said about him and refuted it, head on and point blank.
Let the nitpicking begin, as it will, but nitpicking and those who pick them won’t be enough. As the man said, this cannot be a campaign about little things, not at this time in this nation’s history, not with this much at stake. We can’t afford that kind of campaign, and Obama made it pretty clear he will fight to make sure it doesn’t become that.
So. Your turn at bat, Sen. McCain…..
Permalink | Comments (103) | Post your comment |
Indications it may be Romney
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Roll Call, a well-respected newspaper covering Capitol Hill and national politics, reports evidence that Romney may be the GOP running mate:
“If security sweeps are the giveaway, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney may be on the brink of being selected as Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) vice presidential running mate.
According to sources with strong Michigan ties, the Secret Service has conducted a security sweep of the home of Romney’s sister. Romney was raised in Michigan, where his father served as governor.”
Permalink | Comments (71) | Post your comment |
Handel shouldn’t decide PSC race
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Elections should be decided by citizens in the voting booth, not by bureaucrats and judges.
But Secretary of State Karen Handel — the officer charged with protecting the electoral process — nonetheless seems determined to dictate the outcome of a race for the Public Service Commission. Should she succeed, she will also succeed in denying the people of Georgia a voice in decisions with billions of dollars at stake.
Jim Powell and Lauren McDonald are running to represent PSC District 4, in North Georgia. Under state law, PSC candidates must live in the district they seek to represent, although they are elected by statewide vote.
In the Democratic primary, Powell’s residency in District 4 was challenged by his opponent. The arguments and evidence were heard by an administrative law judge, who ruled in Powell’s favor.
Powell bought a house in Hiawassee in 2006 and spends most of his time in the district. As the judge noted in his ruling, Powell also “attends church, pays taxes, registered two cars, registered to vote, voted three times, owns and operates a boat, obtained a driver’s license and receives some of his mail” in Hiawassee.
Furthermore, the judge noted that in March 2007, Powell filed to transfer his homestead exemption from a house in Cobb County to his home in Hiawassee, but could not because the deadline had passed.
That would seem a pretty compelling case that Powell lives in Hiawassee. Nonetheless, Handel intervened and — just a few days before the July primary — tried to yank Powell from the ballot. Only an emergency court order allowed the election to take place, with Powell winning 85 percent of the vote.
Still not satisfied, Handel appealed the case to Superior Court, where she once again lost. Undeterred, she has since filed an emergency motion with the state Court of Appeals, seeking a hearing for her claim that it is within her legal discretion to remove Powell from the ballot.
In that motion, Handel presses the case she has argued from the beginning, so far to no avail. Because Powell did not succeed in transferring his homestead exemption from Cobb to Towns County until this year, she claims, Powell remained a Cobb resident and thus cannot run from District 4.
At its best, that is a highly legalistic argument and represents a close legal call. In the eyes of two judges to date, it is not even that. And common sense would suggest that in close cases, public officials ought to stand aside and let voters, not judges, decide the matter.
If Handel wins the case, what will be the outcome? A candidate who drew 85 percent of the vote in the primary will be removed, replaced by a candidate who drew only 15 percent and has run no campaign since then. In effect, Handel will have ensured that Powell’s opponent, McDonald, will become the next PSC commissioner for District 4, stripping voters of the right to make a choice.
McDonald has served on the PSC before, losing his seat to reformer Angela Speir in 2002. He proved a stalwart — some might even say obedient — supporter of utilities on a commission dominated by such voices. When Speir replaced him, the contrast was stark. She led the charge for ethics reform and served as a strong voice for consumers and utility ratepayers. Usually she was in the minority on such issues, but at least those positions were being heard. However, she chose not to seek re-election.
Powell, a retired senior official in the U.S. Energy Department, promises to pick up where Speir left off. Thanks to his background, he knows energy issues backward and forward. If you go to Powell’s campaign site (jimpowellforgapsc.com) and click on “Issues,” you get a comprehensible discussion of his approach.
On the other hand, if you go to McDonald’s Web site (www.mcdonald4psc.com) and click “Issues,” you get a page stating “Coming Soon.”
In the next few years, the PSC will make critically important decisions on energy conservation, nuclear power, natural gas and alternative energy, with billions of dollars at stake.
The voters of Georgia — not the secretary of state and not a panel of judges — ought to select who makes those decisions on their behalf.
Permalink | Comments (35) | Post your comment |
With Night Three, the preliminaries are over
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
So far, I don’t think the convention could have gone better for Barack Obama and the Democrats if they had scripted the whole thing … which of course they did.
Last night the Loquacious Lothario himself, former President Bill Clinton, laid his blessing upon the upstart from Illinois, showing little if any outward reluctance in doing so. “People around the world have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power,” he said, laying out the differences in foreign policy rather nicely.
Joe Biden did well too, bringing the talk down to kitchen-table level, as Zell Miller used to say. The opening acts have warmed up the house, just as they were supposed to do, and expectations and pressure on Obama are now as high as the stadium in which he will speak.
Time to step up or step aside.
Permalink | Comments (152) | Post your comment |
True colors, shining through….
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
So Steven Spielberg, perhaps America’s pre-eminent filmmaker, the producer and director of “Schindler’s List” and “Saving Private Ryan” and producer of the excellent HBO series “Band of Brothers,” puts together a very moving tribute to U.S. troops overseas for the Democratic Convention, and Fox News refuses to show it.
I guess that demonstrates where their loyalties are.
Permalink | Comments (33) | Post your comment |
“And in conclusion — but before I do that, let me…”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Tonight’s schedule includes speeches by Joe Biden and Bill Clinton, two of the more — how shall I put this? — “generous” talkers of their time.
Any bets on who holds the stage the longest?
Permalink | Comments (68) | Post your comment |
‘We must close the bumper-sticker gap!’
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
For the moment, there’s a lot of talk over a supposed split in the Democratic Party. But in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s speech, I have seen no Obama people complaining on or off the record about her performance; the only people who profess to believe that Clinton held back in her endorsement are Republicans, and the speech wasn’t targeted at them anyway.
Besides, I suspect that John McCain may have a bigger problem than Obama with his party’s base. That lack of enthusiasm for McCain shows up in obvious ways, such as fundraising, and in more subtle ways as well.
For example, I realized the other day that I see a lot of Obama bumper stickers and almost no McCain stickers. Now, given the part of town I live in, that’s not surprising.
But I’ve asked conservative friends who live in more conservative parts of metro Atlanta, such as Cobb and Cherokee counties, whether they have seen McCain bumper stickers. And they both say no, they don’t. Very few if any, they report. Not many yard signs either.
Bumper stickers don’t decide elections. But I think they do accurately reflect the amount of enthusiasm generated by each candidate among his base, and that enthusiasm in turn helps drive voter turnout in November. The person with a bumper sticker on his car is more likely to vote, and more likely to encourage others to vote.
So I’d be curious — anybody out there seeing McCain bumper stickers?
Permalink | Comments (78) | Post your comment |
Convention impressions, Night Two
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
“Barack Obama began his career fighting for workers displaced by the global economy. He built his campaign on a fundamental belief that change in this country must start from the ground up, not the top down. He knows government must be about ‘We the people’ not ‘We the favored few.’
And when Barack Obama is in the White House, he’ll revitalize our economy, defend the working people of America, and meet the global challenges of our time. Democrats know how to do this. As I recall, President Clinton and the Democrats did it before. And President Obama and the Democrats will do it again.
He’ll transform our energy agenda by creating millions of green jobs and building a new, clean energy future. He’ll make sure that middle class families get the tax relief they deserve. And I can’t wait to watch Barack Obama sign a health care plan into law that covers every single American.
Barack Obama will end the war in Iraq responsibly and bring our troops home - a first step to repairing our alliances around the world. — Hillary Clinton, Aug. 26, 2008
It seemed to me Hillary did exactly what she needed to do last night, and did it very well. As I noted below, I think it was the best speech I’ve ever seen her give. The passion seemed real, and there was no sign of the defensiveness and stilted delivery that in the past have handicapped her as a speaker.
I did have to chuckle at those boys on Fox though. Fred Barnes insisted the Obama camp was going to be very upset at the Hillary people. Bill Kristol claimed the endorsement was “shockingly minimal.” Pretty damn funny, those guys. They live in an alternative universe. Of course, in that universe Saddam also had tons of WMD, we would be greeted as liberators and the Iraqis would finance their own reconstruction.
I also think Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer did a good job as well, although at times in his speech it did seem like he was channeling Rodney Dangerfield with his body language. He would have been fun to watch even with the sound off.
Permalink | Comments (153) | Post your comment |
For Hillary, a matter of maturity
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
“What Obama has to have Hillary do is stand up and say — not only in words but it’s got to be almost method acting — and say it in a way that’s believable — that she wants Barack Obama to be president,” said Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen. A classy backing “frankly goes toward any future political considerations she may have.”
I think that last point is critical. If Clinton delivers anything less than what Bredesen describes in tonight’s speech, she seriously harms not only Obama’s political future but her own as well, because memories will be long. Bill and Hillary Clinton have been intelligent, passionate and incredibly tenacious leaders both for the nation and for the Democratic Party, but when they have failed, they have failed because of a lack of maturity.
Tonight that maturity will be tested again. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Hillary stepped up.
I have never thought much of her as a speaker, especially compared to her husband. Her strengths were elsewhere. But this was the best speech I think I’ve ever heard her deliver. The passion seemed real. Whatever the goals set for the speech, she met them and probably exceeded them.
Permalink | Comments (43) | Post your comment |
Impressions of convention, Night One
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I thought Ted Kennedy’s appearance at the convention in Denver was compelling, although I suspect the media got spun a good bit, told to expect a more frail “Uncle Teddy” than what we saw just to build up the impact.
Michelle Obama was gracious, likable, attractive and yes, motherly. Very effective. If the right wing has that “whitey” tape out there, now would be a good time to unleash it, right boys? Did you hear me, Rush? Paging Mr. Limbaugh? Hah.
Anybody who believed in that tape’s existence — well, apparently it’s a myth that turkeys are so stupid they’ll look up at the sky in a rainstorm and drown, but I still have doubts about certain elements of the human race.
And I sure do hope that possible assassination plot turns out to be nothing. “….officers found two rifles, including one with a scope; a bulletproof vest; boxes of ammunition; walkie-talkies; and suspected narcotics, said Aurora police Detective Marcus Dudley.”
It’s that bulletproof vest and walkie talkies that get you worried. I don’t know if you’ve seen the mugshots of two suspects in the case, but if you see them outside staring up at the sky in a rainstorm….
Permalink | Comments (257) | Post your comment |
FairTax excerpts posted on CNN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Again, for those interested, CNN.com has posted two excerpts of a recent coffee-shop discussion on the infamous FairTax, hosted by Rick Sanchez and including Neal Boortz and myself. It was recorded as part of a CNN show that appeared Sunday night.
Permalink | Comments (101) | Post your comment |
What if Atlanta just disappeared?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In the morality tale spun by public officials in Florida and Alabama, big, bad overdeveloped metro Atlanta is sucking up all the water out of the Chattahoochee watershed, leaving little or none for downstream mussels, oysters, farmers, power plants and those all-important barge operators.
The story has little or no basis in fact, and no support in the data. But it does sound good, and it casts metro Atlanta as a useful villain that officials in other states can claim to be fighting on behalf of their constituents.
To understand why the story is false, or at the very least overblown, it’s important to understand the distinction between water use and water consumption.
Imagine that we withdraw 100 gallons of water from a river, stream or lake, use that water, and then treat it and return the same 100 gallons to its source. In that theoretical case, there is no net loss of water available for downstream users. No water is consumed.
However, if we withdraw 100 gallons but return only 60 gallons — using the rest to water lawns and landscaping and golf courses, for example — we have consumed 40 gallons of water that is not available downstream.
Metro Atlanta does use a substantial amount of water, and that amount has increased as the metro area has grown. That’s undeniable. But in 2007, according to state figures, 60 percent of that water was used, treated and put back into the watershed. Our consumption of water, versus our use of water, was relatively small.
In fact, James Hairston, a professor at Auburn University and a nationally recognized expert in irrigation and water use, puts our water consumption in a context that is rather startling.
In general, Hairston says, an acre of rural land with no development — an acre covered with trees, brush, kudzu and other natural vegetation — consumes more water than an acre of developed land.
How is that possible?
Natural vegetation consumes a lot of water, Hairston explained. Rainfall that would otherwise make its way into a stream or creek is sucked up out of the ground by trees and other plants, and then lost into the air through transpiration. As I found later, a single large tree can pull several hundred gallons of water out of the ground on a hot day, and then evaporate that water through its leaves.
That’s several hundred gallons that will not make its way into streams, creeks and rivers for use downstream. It is water that is consumed.
So let me get this straight, I asked Hairston. If metro Atlanta didn’t exist — if instead this entire region were returned to undeveloped countryside covered with trees and natural vegetation, as many of its critics would apparently prefer — this region would take more water from downstream users than it does today as a major city?
“Exactly,” Hairston said.
On an annual basis, Hairston said, undeveloped land will also consume more water than irrigated farmland, because irrigation occurs only during the growing season, and only to supplement rainfall, while natural vegetation consumes water all year long.
Here’s another way to measure metro Atlanta’s impact on water supplies in Florida, where the city is blamed by some for cutting the flow of much-needed fresh water into Apalachicola Bay.
Metro water consumption is always highest in the summer, and in July 2006 metro Atlanta consumed an average of 287 million gallons a day from the Chattahoochee watershed. That sounds like a lot. However, farmers in the Flint River basin — which also flows into Apalachicola Bay — drew an average of 250 million gallons a day from surface water and another 950 million gallons a day from the shallow underlying aquifer to irrigate crops. Almost all of that was consumptive use.
Again, that was in 2006. Since then, metro Atlanta’s consumptive use has dropped considerably. Water use has dropped by roughly 20 percent, and water consumption has no doubt dropped even further, since much of that reduction has come from less outdoor watering, a highly consumptive use.
Metro Atlanta does have a responsibility to use its water resources more wisely. While we’ve made progress, we have more to do. Nonetheless, some of our critics in other states insist that our only option is to lock the gates against newcomers and growth.
And as Hairston put it, “That is so stupid it doesn’t even make sense.”
Permalink | Comments (80) | Post your comment |
Assessing the Beijing Olympics
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
We happened to drive by Atlanta’s Olympic flame this morning, and someone in the car pointed out how small and puny it looked compared to Beijing’s version. And it surely does.
From China’s point of view, the 2008 Summer Olympics have to be counted a major success. The Games went off without a hitch, the Chinese Olympic team did very well in competition and the world got a taste of what China can accomplish when it sets its mind to something.
But as others have pointed out, where did the Chinese get the money for the Bird’s Nest and its other spectacular venues? The answer is by selling us the shirts we wear on our backs, the plasma TVs hanging on our walls, the shoes we put on our feet and the electronics we plug into our walls. A significant wealth transfer has been underway for the past 10 years, and we saw the fruits of that on NBC.
For those who paid attention, we also saw the Chinese government’s absolute firm grip on power, tolerating nothing that might be perceived as dissent. That apparent “unity of mind” gives China certain economic, political and military advantages, but it brings challenges as well.
I should also mention a point made in the new movie “IOUSA.” In 1956, the British, French and Israelis seized control of the Suez Canal from Egypt, over the strong opposition of the United States. However, President Eisenhower quickly forced the British to withdraw and surrender control of the canal by threatening to dump large U.S. reserves of British currency, an act that would have crippled the pound and Britain’s economy.
Today, 45 percent of our massive national debt is held by foreigners in the form of dollars. Japan holds the most, followed by China and then Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing states. If we continue to borrow so heavily from other nations, we could surrender a potentially dangerous degree of our own autonomy.
Permalink | Comments (57) | Post your comment |
FairTax debate airs tonight on CNN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
For those who are interested, excerpts from the panel discussion on the FairTax that I taped with Neal Boortz and others for CNN are scheduled to be shown tonight at 10 p.m., with unedited video of the discussion to be posted sometime this weekend on the CNN site.
I’ll post a link to that video when it’s up. If someone else finds it first, please post it in the comments.
Permalink | Comments (120) | Post your comment |
Break out your hairplug jokes….
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
And as you do, watch me hit this drive.
(I’m headed for the links, trying once more to break 80).
Permalink | Comments (168) | Post your comment |
It all goes back to the playground
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Watching the back and forth on the McCain house question, I’m coming to the realization that every presidential race since Carter vs. Ford has been decided on the same basis:
The guy who gets ridiculed and picked on the most, the one who offers the most fodder to late-night comics — he’s the one who always loses. Take a look.
Ford in 76, for being clumsy and stupid (which he wasn’t … stupid, that is).
Carter in 80, for killer rabbits, being from Georgia, Billy Beer, etc., etc, etc.
Mondale in 84, … well, he just got slaughtered by Reagan, period.
Dukakis in 88, two words: The tank.
Bush in 92, Dana Carvey, “wouldn’t be prudent,” being agog at a supermarket scanner, general rich-guy dorkiness.
Dole in 96, old and, like Mondale, just blown out of the water anyway.
Gore in 2000, Ozone man, invented the internet, etc.
Kerry in 2004, windsurfing, Band-Aid Purple Hearts, married for money, Swift Boated….
And in 2008?
Permalink | Comments (103) | Post your comment |
What goes around comes around
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Obama campaign is making a big deal about John McCain’s inability to remember how many homes he and his wife own — four? seven? ten? — and the fact that they spend a quarter of a million a year on household servants. The Republicans are complaining that the attack is unfair.
“Americans don’t like this class warfare stuff,” one McCain campaign official said.
They also pulled out the Vietnam card once again.
“This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years — in prison,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers explained to the Washington Post.
All of this is vaguely familiar to me …. I’m trying to remember …. Something about making fun of a candidate because he had married an extremely rich woman who kept him in the lap of luxury he had never earned?
And mocking that same candidate because he allegedly relied way too much on his Vietnam service to deflect criticism?
Is this ringing a bell? Can anybody out there refresh my memory on that? Is that familiar to anybody else? Because damn if it doesn’t sound familiar. Or maybe it’s just that deja vu thing.
Permalink | Comments (126) | Post your comment |
The horses are now in the starting gate, and ….
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Nothing that has happened until now is going to have much impact on the final outcome of the presidential race. These past few weeks have just been the warmups, the prelude to the real thing.
But the conventions are about to begin, announcements about running mates loom in the near future, and the McCain and Obama camps have now agreed on a debate schedule and formats.
Four debates — three between McCain and Obama, and one between their running mates — with the first presidential debate on Sept. 26, focusing on foreign policy and national security and moderated by Jim Lehrer of PBS.
Then a town-hall format with Tom Brokaw as the moderator on Oct. 7, and the final presidential debate on Oct. 15, with Bob Schieffer of CBS on economic issues.
Let the games begin!!!!
Permalink | Comments (116) | Post your comment |
Why aren’t the hyenas howling?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Under the urging of U.S. Secretary of State Condi Rice, NATO members have agreed upon a course of action in response to Russia’s invasion of Georgia and its apparent refusal to live up to its agreement to withdraw.
In retaliation, NATO’s going to give Russia the silent treatment. That’s right, they’re going to refuse to talk to Russia again unless it withdraws totally from Georgia.
That’ll teach ‘em.
In reality, there’s not much else to be done. Once Georgia attacked its breakaway enclaves, and once Russia responded with overwhelming force, the options available to NATO and the United States dwindled to almost none. Success would have been in preventing that sequence of events, and we failed. At this point, no military response is feasible or advisable.
But I can’t help but think what the reaction would be in conservative circles if a Democrat was sitting in the White House right now, dealing with the very same circumstances confronting President Bush. Can’t you just hear it?
The howling and complaining would be deafening, with overheated accusations that the president lacked guts, courage and any other manly virtue. Limbaugh and his Dittoheads would be braying like a pack of cartoon hyenas, with congressional Republicans joining right in, demanding that the 82nd Airborne descend on Moscow and bring Putin’s head home on a stick.
It would be sickening.
Permalink | Comments (131) | Post your comment |
Welcome to the good ol’ I.O.U.S.A
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Over the last few years, millions of homeowners borrowed more money than they could repay. They were living beyond their means, hoping that sometime in the future, something would come along to bail them out.
They’re now paying for that lack of responsibility. In the second quarter of 2008 alone, more than 700,000 homes went into foreclosure, driving housing values lower and gutting the nation’s construction industry.
There’s an important lesson in that tragedy, not just for Americans as individuals but as citizens of the United States of America. As a nation, we are living well beyond our means and behaving just as irresponsibly as those individual homeowners who mortgaged their family’s future for a plasma TV or European vacation.
Our national debt — the accumulation of year after year of deficit spending by our government — is approaching $10 trillion and growing, with almost 45 percent of it owed to foreigners.
And just as overextended homeowners lost their homes, we Americans may lose our country, or at least the prosperous, powerful country as we’ve known it. The debt is growing so large that last month alone, interest payments totaled $24 billion. Again, that’s a single month.
To see where that will inevitably lead, “we only need to look at the fate of other countries who have lived beyond their means for a long time,” warns former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, who was fired from his Cabinet post by President Bush for daring to insist that deficits matter. “When you get extended to the point you can’t service your debt, you’re finished.”
O’Neill issues that warning in “I.O.U.S.A,” a documentary about our nation’s pending fiscal crisis that opens Thursday night, for one night only, in 400 movie theaters around the country, including eight in metro Atlanta. (For a list of theaters, go to http://www.iousathemovie.com/).
As the movie points out, a country deep in debt to the rest of the world loses control over its own future. Most of our foreign-held debt is owned by Japan, China and the oil-exporting countries, giving them enormous potential leverage not just over our foreign policy but over our domestic economic policies as well.
In addition to O’Neill, the movie features financier Warren Buffett, former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and others. But its two stars are David Walker, until recently head of the Government Accountability Office, and Robert Bixby, head of the Concord Coalition, who have been traveling the nation trying to stir up grassroots concern about the problem.
The Concord Coalition, founded in 1992 by a Democrat and two Republicans, has been studiously nonpartisan. As Walker puts it, “The facts aren’t Democrat or Republican. The facts aren’t liberal or conservative. The facts are the facts.”
But facts being facts, two presidents in particular come in for pointed criticism. In one clip, Ronald Reagan is seen pointing out correctly that “for decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children’s future, for the temporary convenience of the present.”
But as he speaks, graphics point out that in Reagan’s eight years as president, our national debt almost tripled, from $909 billion to $2.6 trillion.
The current President Bush is given similar treatment. In a press conference, he is seen proudly awarding himself “an A for keeping taxes low and being fiscally responsible with the people’s money.” But as graphics demonstrate, our national debt was $5.7 trillion when Bush took office; it will be almost twice that when he leaves. There is no curve in the world on which that performance merits an “A.”
The film does not offer a detailed solution, but it does express restrained outrage at the immorality of one generation of Americans — you and I — willing to mortgage the futures of our children and grandchildren to satisfy our own selfishness.
It’s the scariest movie you are likely to see this summer, not least because we play the villains.
UPDATE: The movie premiere is Thursday night. The item has been updated to reflect that fact.
Permalink | Comments (134) | Post your comment |
Sticking US taxpayers for Europe’s defense
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Russia’s invasion of Georgia has refocused public attention on U.S. efforts to build a missile-defense system for Europe. While the United States officially insists that the system is intended to defend against missiles fired from Iran, it seems pretty clear that the system’s real “target,” so to speak, has always been Russia.
Congressional Democrats are still balking at the proposal, claiming that the system isn’t ready for deployment. And they’re right. The Pentagon’s own test and evaluation office acknowledges that the system is untested, unproven technology, but they want to install it anyway.
But I have a more fundamental question. Forget for a moment whether the system is ready for deployment. Forget about its potential diplomatic and military impact.
Why on earth is it the obligation of U.S. taxpayers to pay for, build and operate weapons systems to protect Europe from either Iran or Russia? Why is that our problem?
The cost is substantial — $712 million in the next fiscal year alone, just to start construction of the project.
Europe is a pretty wealthy place. The European Union has a combined annual GDP of $18.5 trillion, compared with roughly $14 trillion in the United States. The European Union accounts for 31 percent of total world economic output.
If Europe believes it is threatened by such missiles, it should build the system itself or at least compensate the U.S. taxpayer for our cost. Instead, U.S. officials have had to beg, wheedle and cajole European nations to accept those missiles. They act as if they’re doing us a great big favor by letting us build a system to protect them.
If they don’t think it’s such a big problem, why should we?
American conservatives like to complain that the Europeans are unwilling to protect themselves, that they leave the fight to the Americans. Well why shouldn’t they, if we are so eager to do it for them? Why should they spend their own euros and put the lives of their own children on the line when those silly Americans are so willing and eager to do it for them?
And what’s in it for us? Bragging rights? The psychic reward of proclaiming that “We’re No. 1!”? There’s something seriously awry here, something that very few people in this country are even willing to think about.
Permalink | Comments (72) | Post your comment |
Ga. beaten to the draw again
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In recent years, Florida and Texas have set the pace with legislation encouraging the spread and use of firearms, with Georgia legislators scurrying along to catch up.
Well, wait until the “bullet boys” in the Georgia Legislature hear about this one. Once again, the Peach Staters been beaten to the draw.
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Gov. Rick Perry indicated Monday that he supports a school district’s decision to allow teachers and staff to pack guns for protection when classes start this month.
Trustees of the Harrold Independent School District approved a policy change last year to allow employees to carry concealed firearms to deter and protect against school shootings.
“There’s a lot of incidents where that would have saved a number of lives,” Perry said after a news conference in Austin.
Texas law outlaws firearms on school campuses unless specific institutions allow them.
District policy requires a teacher carrying a gun to school to have a Texas concealed handgun license, authorization by the district to carry the weapon, training in crisis management and hostile situations, and ammunition designed to minimize the risk of ricochet.
Where’s all this going to end? Not until guns are everywhere and Americans are as safe and secure as, say, Baghdad?
Permalink | Comments (155) | Post your comment |
John McCain and the moment of conception
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In his appearance at Saddleback Church over the weekend, John McCain made clear his belief that human life begins at the moment of conception. While I respect that opinion, it does raise some troubling problems.
If human life begins at the moment of conception, it means that abortion must be outlawed in all instances, with no possible exception for pregnancies that result from rape or incest. By McCain’s definition, those embryos are human beings that must be protected, without regard to how they might have been created.
It also means that IUDs are not a form of birth control but murder weapons, because they operate by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus, thus starving it to death. Some prolife physicians even believe that the birth-control pill is an abortion device, because in some cases the pill can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.
And then there’s the issue of fertility clinics. A few years ago, I did a story on a clinic here in Atlanta. I watched as a technician, operating with a microscope, collected a single sperm and injected it into a human egg, thus by McCain’s definition creating a human being.
Scattered all around the clinic were small, squat vats of liquid hydrogen, containing frozen embryos that, again by McCain’s definition, were human. The vats contained thousands of such embryos, just in that one clinic. Some were destined to be implanted in human womb in the hope that they would begin to thrive, although most would not. Others were destined to be destroyed because the couples that had arranged for their creation already had the children they were seeking. That would be mass murder, as McCain would have it.
It also means, of course, that stem cell research into cures for Alzheimers, Parkinson’s, diabetes and other diseases is murder and must be abandoned immediately.
Permalink | Comments (144) | Post your comment |
We must protect Georgia … someday, maybe
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has signed a ceasefire agreement committing his country to withdraw from occupied areas of Georgia, but if the Russians intend to honor that commitment, they’re going to do it in their own sweet time.
Eyewitness reports from Gori say there’s no sign of a Russian withdrawal, and in fact Russian troops seem to be preparing for a long stay. If that proves true, there’s not much the United States can do about it except complain and try to make the Russians pay as high a price as possible in diplomatic and economic terms.
But it does seem time to ask: How did we get into this mess? After all, this is a war in which everybody has lost.
The Russians will now incorporate South Ossettia and Abkhazia into their sphere of influence if not into their country, but those two impoverished areas surely aren’t worth the damage this war has done to Russia’s reputation and economic relationships.
Georgia of course has suffered far greater damage — militarily, economically, physically and psychologically. And the United States has been embarrassed by its inability and unwillingness to protect a close ally from invasion.
The Georgians wanted very badly to believe that America would come rescue them in a crisis — after all, tiny Georgia had sent 2,000 troops to help us out in Iraq, so surely the big, bad United States would return the favor for their little friend, right?
For their part, American officials gave the Georgians just enough subtle encouragement to keep that belief alive, in part because they never thought the crisis would come. Both the Georgians and Americans convinced themselves that the Russians would never dare treat a U.S. ally so harshly.
Well, the Russians would, and did, and still are.
At root, the Georgian tragedy can be blamed on a disconnect in U.S. foreign policy. The American people like thinking of their country as the world’s policeman, protecting the little guy. “We are all Georgians,” as John McCain expressed it. That’s why both McCain and Barack Obama continue to talk tough even now, claiming to support Georgia’s inclusion in NATO even though they both know that would require the U.S. to defend Georgia militarily against attack.
Yet right at the moment, the moment when it matters, neither one of them is willing to take that step. They’re talking smack while they’re backing out the door.
That’s the essence of the problem right there: Even after Russia has called our bluff, we still try to pretend that someday off in the future, we will protect Georgia.
Just not today.
In the end, the Georgians are victims not just of their own self-delusion, but of our little national ego trip. We like to think of ourselves as defenders of democracy; we like others to think of us that way. But unless our direct national interests are on the line, we aren’t willing to pay the price required.
The Russians knew that. The Georgians now know it too. Only the American people and their leaders still pretend otherwise.
Permalink | Comments (83) | Post your comment |
McCain’s instincts push him toward war
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sen. John McCain has seized on the Russian invasion of Georgia as a chance to demonstrate to the American people what kind of president he would be on foreign policy matters.
For better or worse, I think he’s succeeded. McCain has clearly been more confrontational and aggressive than the Bush White House, going so far as to announce that in the wake of the invasion, “We are all Georgians,” a statement that implies a degree of commitment that the United States is not in a position to honor.
Even more startling was McCain’s decision, as a mere candidate for president, to send personal envoys to confer with Georgia’s leadership. Such a step is the prerogative only of a president, and is an act of dangerous presumption at an extremely delicate time.
To some Americans, McCain’s rhetoric has nonetheless communicated an image of authority that they find reassuring in a president. It also confirms him as an instinctive type of leader, someone whose response to a crisis is driven more by his own character than by the specifics of a challenge.
That has produced a consistent response to a wide range of policy questions.
In 1999, when President Clinton decided to launch air attacks to stop Serbian attacks on civilians in Kosovo, most Republicans in Congress opposed military intervention. McCain was also a harsh critic of the Clinton policy, but for a very different reason: It wasn’t aggressive enough.
McCain claimed —- incorrectly, it turned out —- that bombing alone would never work. Instead, he wanted to send tens of thousands of U.S. troops to the region, ready to intervene.
“Militarily, you just go in and drive them out of Kosovo,” he said at the time. “Yes, the terrain is terrible; yes, the Serbs are tough. But … if we can’t prevail over a country the size of Ohio with 10 million people, we’ve wasted several trillion dollars in defense spending.”
In the Republican primaries of 2000, the hard-line conservative foreign policy “experts” who later pushed hardest for an invasion of Iraq did not support George W. Bush. Their candidate was McCain, because they believed he would be most likely to conduct the sort of militarily interventionist policy they advocated.
More recently, McCain’s aggressive instincts have been apparent in his policy toward Iran