September 04, 2008
%20(Custom).jpg)
ST. PAUL--Suppose Sarah Palin had somehow ended up as the Republican presidential nominee this year. Suppose she’d picked John McCain as her running mate. And suppose he’d given the speech he did tonight. You know what people would be saying? “Crap. She should have gone with Giuliani.”
McCain’s speech wasn’t a total failure. He hit all the big talking points of this convention and his candidacy—the POW years, his reformer credentials, how great it’ll be to drill baby drill, Barack Obama’s alleged narcisissism—and when he did, the crowd responded with reasonable shows of enthusiasm. On one or two occasions, they even seemed genuinely excited. For most of the speech, though, I felt like I was watching a third-tier convention event for an outgoing GOP luminary (“Today at 3 p.m., A Tribute to John McCain: Celebrating a really long time in the Senate!”). McCain’s voice was weak, a problem he exacerbated by repeatedly speaking into lingering applause. He looked old. And he seemed tired. According to my internal Crowd-o-Meter, there was about ¼ the energy in the Xcel Center when McCain was speaking—if that—that there was during Sarah Palin’s speech last night.
To be fair, McCain seemed to get slightly looser and slightly more energetic (but only slightly!) as the speech progressed. Also, it's possible that undecided voters watching at home dug his references to recent Republican failures and bipartisanship to come. (For what it's worth, those parts of the speech helped tamp down the mood inside the hall even further.) But I’m guessing that most of them saw an elderly dude whose best years are behind him. Not the ending the GOP was hoping for.
September 04, 2008
MINNEAPOLIS--Earlier today I had lunch with an old friend who’s Jewish, pro-Israel, and pro-Obama. When I mentioned reservations about Obama in the Jewish community, he looked worried, but suggested that those reservations were based on a lack of familiarity and starting to dissipate. “My view is that there’s concern because he’s new and they don’t know him,” he said.
Based on what I just saw at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s “Salute to Pro-Israel Elected Officials” I’d say he’s right on the first count. A dozen or so US senators and congressmen spoke at this shindig, the vast majority of whom weren't Jewish, and the most striking thing about their speeches was the lack of specificity. One congressman said he supported Israel because he supports America, and left it at that. The majority, meanwhile, offered a variation on the standard-issue McCain-Obama dichotomy that’s been trotted out all week: Obama is callow, McCain is battle-tested—and because Israel’s situation is uniquely precarious, McCain’s the right choice for voters worried about Israel’s security.
Oddly—and maybe this is a good omen for Obama—about a third of the 200 or so people in attendance didn’t seem to care what the speakers had to say; they just hung out at the back of the room gabbing, despite repeated angry shushes from the bigger group up front. The talkers did pipe down, though, when Florida congressman Mario Diaz-Balart delivered what proved to be best speech of the day. Diaz-Balart may not have been accurate, exactly, but his angry electricity was something to see. Here’s an excerpt:
Let me tell you: everybody is your friend when times are good. Everybody is your friend when there’s nothing at stake. But let me tell you what’s at stake in November. In the White House, we can have a friend of Israel and a pillar of American strength. Or we can have somebody who believes in moral equivalency; who believes there’s no difference between the Palestinians and the Israelis; who’ll take polls before he makes a decision. And let me tell you where I continually stand with our colleagues here. God willing, it will never happen. But if Israel ever has to make that tough choice of protecting herself, make that toughest decision that anybody can make, we the United States of America can’t vacillate, cannot bow, and we must be with Israel! [Here, Diaz Balart’s shouted conclusion was drowned out by applause.]
A couple more things worth noting: First, while the threats from Iran and Russia were mentioned more than once--along with Obama's willingness to negotiate with Iran--there was no acknowledgment that the Iraq War has bolstered Iran’s status and strength in the region, or that Bush has been played by Putin ever since gazing into his eyes and deciding he was a good dude. (Of course, as any good Republican will tell you, Bush isn’t running.) Also, despite Obama’s focus on renewable energy and reduced fuel consumption, his lack of enthusiasm for domestic oil drilling is apparently proof (if you’re a Republican) that he’s not interested in lessening U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
Finally, everybody here is hoping that Jewish concerns about Obama will have a big effect at the ballot box this November. “Your assignment is to be the leaven in the lump, just like it talks about in the Scriptures,” Utah Senator Orrin Hatch said toward the end of the event. “The leaven in the lump in the Jewish community, to get them to see the light.” (Hatch might have been better off citing a non-Mormon phrase.)
The attendees, Hatch continued, need to explain something to their fellow Jews: “Just because your great-grandfather did it”—i.e., voted Democratic—“and just because your grandfather did it, and just because your father did it, I can break free and still be a good Jew and vote Republican.”
Later tonight, I’ll post some video of a conversation I had with Jonathan Paull, an attorney from Houston and RJC activist, in which he explains his misgivings about Obama and Israel.
September 04, 2008
ST. PAUL--After Monday's big RNC protest march, I had kind words for the comportment of the police. "Despite their scary-ass outfits," I said, "they ultimately proved to be a pretty restrained bunch."
That description still applies to the police I saw in action that day. It's clear, though, that there's been some deeply troubling behavior by law enforcement during the RNC--including the arrests of Democracy Now's Amy Goodman, Nicole Salazar, and Sharif Abdel Kouddous. [Video footage of the arrest here.] Last night at the RNC, I spoke with Goodman and Salazar about what happened on Monday and what their current legal situation is. Here's the video:
September 04, 2008
.png)
ST. PAUL--In an email, a DQM reader takes vigorous issue with my assessment of Mitt Romney's speech to the RNC:
A B-plus my ass! You won't see or hear a worse speech all year than Mitt's. I was sitting on my couch practically covering my eyes. I don't like him, but I was touting him for VP.
Real quickly, here's my response. First off, I've felt like covering my eyes pretty much this entire week. And my expectations for Romney are exceedingly low. I'm surprised at the surprise that Romney's speech has elicited: if you're a long-time Romney watcher, you know that--while he's talented and very smart--he decided several years ago that pandering to the baser instincts of the GOP was his path to political success. (As I noted last night, Mitt's speech was actually less strident than his '04 RNC address, when he posited a parallel between gay marriage and Islamic terrorism.)
Even though it's awfully difficult, given my own liberalism, I've been attempting to hear these speeches the way a Republican would, whether it's a Republican in the convention hall or a Republican sitting at home. This approach + my low Romney expectations = Mitt's B-plus.
Incidentally, if I wasn't trying this little excercise in sociopolitical empathy, I would have been a lot harder on both Palin and Giuliani. Giuliani in particular strikes me as a menace. There's nothing like a victim complex when it comes to whipping up aggression, and Giuliani's 9/11 grudge--and his willingness to milk that day for political benefit--is flat-out dangerous, whether or not he gave the "speech of the week."
September 04, 2008
Photo credit: Joeff Davis
DOWNLOAD: Sarah Palin, RNC 2008 Convention Speech [mp3]
ST. PAUL--Here's what really stood out about Sarah Palin's RNC speech tonight:
1. The woman has ice in her veins. This was the biggest moment of her political career to date, probably the biggest moment she'll have during the '08 campaign, and she didn't look nervous. At all.
2. The crowd loved her knocks on Obama. Of course, Palin was preaching to the choir here, but her unique hockey mom/mean-but-popular high-school girl/rural American everywoman shtick seemed to make the audience extra receptive to her zingers.
3. Palin does this weird, sneery nose-curl thing when she really wants to drive home a point. (If memory serves, her fascinating accent also becomes extra pronounced at these moments.) I'm guessing that most of the people who watched her in the Xcel Center think this a loveable tic. I'm also guessing that many hours will be spent over the next few days trying to eliminate it.
4. After Palin's foray into media criticism--i.e., the media whacks you if you're "not a permanent member of the Washington poltical elite"--a bunch of delegates stood up on the floor and pointed accusatorily at the press section. At one point today, I heard NPR's Robert Siegel say that Republicans are never more united than when they feel besieged by the press. The way the Palin pick has whipped up precisely this sentiment makes me think my conspiracy theory regarding her selection isn't all that nutty.
5. While Palin did a great job inside the convention hall tonight, I wonder how she looked to undecided voters watching at home, and how her act is going to play with the general public over the next few months. A woman sitting next to me during the speech praised Palin's tone, calling it "snarky without being bitchy"--a tough balance, she added, for a woman to strike. Even if you accept that assessment, too much snarkiness could easily end up backfiring on Palin down the road. The prediction here is that it will.
P.S.--After watching Palin and Rudy Giuliani speak, I'm downgrading Mitt Romney's effort to a B-plus. And, keeping on my thinking-like-a-Republican cap, I'm giving Palin and Giuliani flat A's.
P.P.S.--Not sure if this came through on TV, but there was an awkward moment after Palin's speech. McCain came out, everyone went nuts, he talked about how Palin was the right pick, and everyone went more nuts. And then everyone just...stood there. It got quiet, no one quite knew what was happening, and you could practically hear the excitement being sucked out of the hall.
P.P.P.S.--Everyone knows that McCain's no great orator, but if I were him I'd be worried that the strong (if you're a Republican!) speeches of the past couple days will make him look like a total dud tomorrow night.
September 03, 2008
VIDEO: Mitt at RNC Night 3
ST. PAUL--Unless my ears deceived me, our former governor didn’t mention gay marriage once! That’s a big change from his last RNC speech, when he described gay marriage was a threat comparable to Islamic radicalism. He did, however, give a little nod to family values, referring to the fact that we need to raise our children in “homes free from promiscuity.” While I’d love to think that was a little dig at Sarah Palin, that’s not usually how Mitt rolls, so who knows. What else? Democrats weak on terrorism; Washington liberal despite eight years of Bush/Cheney (who also seemed to go unmentioned); liberals think economic strength comes from government (not sure if it’s true, but it sounds good); Republicans are always proud of their country; America’s fate in God’s hands; hypocritical Al Gore flies a private jet…. I think that pretty much covers it. Credit Mitt for a couple dandy turns of phrase (“China’s acting like Adam Smith on steroids,” the economy’s bad because “mortgage money was handed out like candy) and eliciting two (!) chants of “U-S-A!” from the audience. Actually, I might have heard it there at the end again, too, so make it 2.5. It’s hard for me to think like a Republican, but if I do, Mitt gets an A-minus. Kudos, Governor!
UPDATE: After hearing Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin, I downgraded Mitt to a B-plus. If that still strikes you as overly generous, here's my reasoning.
September 03, 2008
ST. PAUL--Spent some time this afternoon in "The Fox Experience," which is basically just a great big Fox newsroom located across the street from the Xcel Energy Center. After going through security, delegates and other visitors can pick up some free Fox memoribilia and watch Fox's journalists do their thing. It all happens underneath a great big projected American flag (or something reasonably flag-esque):
%20(Custom).jpg)
Like almost everyone else who hit TFE, I was immediately drawn to the swag table. There was Fox hand sanitizer, Fox faux-straw hats with red and blue bunting, and buttons featuring your favorite Fox personality. To the dismay of pretty much everybody, though, only Alan Colmes was left:
.jpg)
The abundance of Colmeses and absence of his colleagues was a popular topic, but by no means the only thing on people's minds. Here's a sampling of what I heard during as I hung out in the civilian zone:
--"This is almost intoxicating. This is simply amazing."
--"I want Hannity. All they've got is Colmes."
--"Is this pepper spray?"
--"Nobody wants him [i.e. Colmes]. I feel bad for him."
--"Just as predicted, Joe--look who's left!"
--"I wasn't much of a Republican until 9-11. Actually, I think I was always a Republican. I saw what they did to Oliver North and I thought, I want a man like that doing things for my country!"
--"Are there any Hannity pins?"
That last query came from Laurette Mayo-Blasig, a portfolio manager and delegate from Los Gatos, California. When she saw me jotting down what she'd said, she was kind enough to introduce herself. And unlike some other delegates I've spoken with (or tried to), she was willing to provide some insight into what she--as a staunch member of the Red team--actually believes about life and politics. An edited transcript of our conversation follows, along with Laurette's photo; for those who think I was too diffident (starting with you, Dad), bear in mind that my mission here was sociological:
-----
.jpg)
LAURETTE: I want an adult president, a president who has the life experience that John McCain has. If he could beat Hanoi Hilton--he was in there five years. Five years he went through that! He could beat all the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. He can talk right off the cuff because he knows what he's doing. He doesn't need a teleprompter. There was one time I saw--oh, I shouldn't say it.
ME: That's fine. Sarah Palin?
LAURETTE: I love her! I love that she's a tough woman. She said no to the Bridge to Nowhere--"If we want to have a bridge in Alaska, we'll build it!" You name me one politician that has an 88 percent approval rating. Name one!
ME: I can't do it.
LAURETTE: And I like the fact that she is a regular person, regular family woman, who achieved her goals. That's terrific to me.
ME: About Obama: one of the big themes this week has been not just that he's inexperienced, but that you don't really know who he is.
LAURETTE: You don't! He released one page on his health. One page! What is that?
ME: Is he healthy, maybe?
LAURETTE: I don't know! His doctor said he is healthy, period. McCain at 72 gave you a whole file, a whole dossier. But I don't want to go negative. I just want to talk about my candidate, who to me is a positive adult person. When Putin wants to bomb another country, I want someone who knows what he's doing.
ME: Well, I think he'd be better with Putin than--
LAURETTE: Anybody!
ME: Well, Bush. Remember, Bush looked into Putin's eyes and saw into his soul or whatever--
LAURETTE: Bush isn't running.
ME: As you know, a lot of liberals think Fox's "Fair and Balanced" slogan isn't honest.
LAURETTE: Why? They have Alan Colmes! They have all the people on that are--
ME: But look at the Colmes buttons.
LAURETTE: It's a Republican convention! Why would they want the liberal commentator?
ME: It's a reasonable point. So would you say Fox is straight down the middle?
LAURETTE: Yes. As a matter of fact, I tell all my Democratic friends, because they watch CNN, and their favorite person is the independent, because he gives both sides--
ME: Which guy are we talking about here?
LAURETTE: Lou Dobbs.
ME: See, I think of him as conservative.
LAURETTE: He's not! He's an independent. He likes no one [laughs]. But he gives both sides, and on Fox, they always have both sides. Democrats see the world how they wish it could be; Republicans see the world how it is.
ME: [Pause]
LAURETTE: Gotcha! He can't talk! He's speechless!
ME: I would say that the current Republican approach to foreign policy, at least in the Bush Administration--
LAURETTE: He's not running.
ME: I know, but you said Republicans. You didn't say McCain--
LAURETTE: They see the world how they wish. They're very emotional.
ME: The Bush Administration is?
LAURETTE: Democrats are very emotional.
ME: I understand Bush isn't running. But I'd say the Bush Administration's approach of remaking the Middle East, planting the seed of democracy by invading Iraq--to me, that's seeing the world how you want it to be.
LAURETTE: I have an answer to that. Have you seen another 9-11?
ME: Nope.
LAURETTE: Have you heard much in the mainstream media about Iraq or how it's going over there? No. Because it's doing well. Do you live in Newton? My old dear friend Nancy lives in Newton. It's a really fancy section of--
ME: It is very fancy. Is she a rare Massachusetts conservative?
LAURETTE: No, she's a Democrat voting for McCain. She doesn't like Obama. She's Jewish. A lot of Jewish people aren't voting for him. I'm not going into their reasons; I'm just telling you.
ME: I enjoyed talking to you.
LAURETTE: I enjoyed talking to you. Most Democrats come at me very angry, and then when I try to talk facts--"I don't want to talk about it anymore." I'm not talking about you, because you're educated. But a lot of them, it's pure emotion. I don't know how you can be liberal! You're too intelligent.
ME: That's very kind.
LAURETTE: And you're young. When I was young, I was a Democrat too.
-----
Thanks again for chatting, Laurette, and enjoy the rest of the convention.
September 03, 2008
.jpg)
ST. PAUL--Like conspiracy theories? Try this one: John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin wasn’t the result of poor vetting or poor judgment. Instead, it was a crafty, forward-thinking move aimed at turning Palin into a martyr and then using her martyrdom for political benefit.
If that sounds far-fetched, consider what transpired earlier today during a pro-Palin conference at the Xcel Energy Center. With former Massachusetts Governor Jane Swift taking center stage, an array of female McCain supporters used what’s transpired since Palin’s selection to rip the shit out of Barack Obama, Democrats, and the media. Some highlights:
--“She is more prepared than Barack Obama to be the president of the United States. Barack Obama’s experience is basically, as he himself has said, in running a campaign. Governor Palin’s experience is in running a state.” (Swift)
--“One of the things I have been told by many, many Democrats over the past several months is how disappointed they were in their own party for not standing up against the sexist smears that Hillary Clinton endured. The Republican Party will not stand by while Sarah Palin is subjected to sexist attacks.” (Former HP head Carly Fiorina)
“I am the proud mother of a Child with Downs Syndrome. My son is 23 years old. Governor Palin and I share the joy of having a child with a developmental disability…. I am absolutely incensed and insulted and offended that the media has made much ado about that, and how dare she run for pres when she has a child with a disability?” (Rosario Marin, former U.S. Treasurer)
--“Let me say to you, the Democrats will allow you [i.e. the press] to talk about Hillary in the way you did, in a very demeaning way. Us up here, we are not going to allow you to do that…. Lemme use some Ebonics right here, ’cause I want to make sure you understand what I’m saying, so I can bring it down to you like the kids say on the street. As Republican women, we know what we’re doing; we know who we are; we ain’t gonna take it; we’re not gonna take it; and we will get with you when you keep messin’ with us!” (Renee Amore, deputy chairman of the PA Republican Party)
So, to recap: Obama is inexperienced; Democrats tolerate sexism but Republicans don’t; Hillary’s (allegedly) raw deal remains an open wound; Republicans aren’t afraid to take on the press; Palin’s critics may be anti-developmental disability; and there are black Republicans, too. That's some efficient messaging right there.
When the Q-and-A started, I had a chance to float an argument that I’ve been hearing from a number of women: namely, that it’s sexist to imply — as Fiorina seemed to — that liberal women might support McCain/Palin due to perceived sexism even if they disagree on the issues. I wish Fiorina had answered; instead, it was Swift. “I don’t think anybody’s saying that you should support Governor Palin because of sexism,” she replied. “I think what we’re saying is that all good people of America won’t stand for the kind of sexism and double standard that’s being applied to Governor Palin. And if we can get beyond talk about achievement — reasonable people disagree on issues, but that’s what we should be focused on.” (Incidentally, Swift struck me as the best of the bunch. I'm not buying what she's selling, but she was quite good.)
What’s the hook to McCain’s military service, you ask? Fret not; it’s there. Toward the end, a reporter noted that, like Obama, McCain seems to lack executive experience when contrasted to Palin. Take it away, Carly Fiorina! “He ran the largest squadron in the Navy. He took that squadron from abysmal performance on every metric and turned it into one of the best performing squadrons in the navy on every metric. So that’s impressive.”
One final point: in making the case that Palin has been the victim of sexism, Fiorina and the others cast a wide net, from Obama’s campaign to the mainstream media to “supermarket tabloids that support Obama” to the Democratic blogosphere. With that in mind, consider Fiorina’s response to a very astute closing question from a British reporter — namely, whether Hillary Clinton has ever been the victim of Republican-instigated sexism: “I would not concede that. I would absolutely say that Hillary Clinton has been subjected to sexism. But by the way, if there are facts that you can show me, I would be delighted to see them. But I do not think that based on my experience, what I’ve seen, I do not think the Republican Party subjected her to sexism. I think the Republican Party took her on on her stand on issues.”
Anyone care to set Fiorina straight? I’d be happy to pass on your examples.
September 02, 2008
MINNEAPOLIS--Sometimes Ron Paul seems like a bona fide political prophet. Here, for example, is what the Republican congressman from Texas and former GOP presidential candidate had to say about militarism and American culture during the closing speech of his three-day "Rally for the Republic" this evening: "We get taught history in our public schools, and who are the great presidents? The great presidents are always said to be the ones who run a war! Why don't we have the peace candidates be the great presidents?"
Less than a minute later, Paul--who, much to the consternation of his supporters, wasn't offered a speaking slot at the RNC--offered his gloss on the definition of patriotism: "Today, they want you to believe that patriotism means you support everything the government wants. A true pa-tri-ot defends liberty and the people!" This elicited thunderous applause and a chant--RON PAUL! RON PAUL!--from the 8,000 or 9,000 people inside the Target Center, even before Paul finished his thought: "And just naming a bill the Patriot Act doesn't make you a patriot. A true patriot will repeal the Patriot Act!"
Also noteworthy: Paul's remarkably edgy assessment (remember, this dude's a Republican congressman!) of the root causes of Islamic terrorism:
It just happens that we as a nation have allied ourselves with secular Muslims, imposed our will by propping up these puppet governments in the Middle East, antagonizing and actually giving motivation to the radicalism that wants to come here to kill us. But why should that be so strange? What if somebody came over here that looked differently than us, had different religious [sic] and different values, and put an air base on our land and imposed their will? The one good thing that would come of that is that his country would be totally unified, because we would resent the occupation of any foreign power on our land!
Other times, though, Paul's ideas can seem odd, or even downright spooky. So, he doesn't want the federal government to fight needless wars, or violate civil liberties, or throw people in jail for smoking pot. Super. He also doesn't like the U.S. Department of Education; or the Federal Reserve (three times tonight, the Pauline crowd whipped itself into a frenzy with an "End the Fed!" chant); or participation in international bodies like the U.N.; or any kind of environmental protection that isn't based solely on property rights; or the fact that we can't all bring guns on airplanes. (If we could, he suggested tonight, 9/11 might have played out differently.)
What's more, while Paul usually makes his Gospel of Freedom sound marvelously benign, there are occasional glimmers of a dark side. "If we have people who ignore [the Constitution], it won't serve our purpose," Paul said tonight. "We have to have a moral people and...moral politicans who represent us." Hmm. Also, if Paul's dream of a truly free America is ever realized, you'd better make sure you carry your weight. "When we have a free society," Paul intoned, "we reject the idea of people being leaches and looters and plunderers. We don't need them."
But really, how much does Paul actually matter? Outside the Rally for the Republic, I spoke with a few people who said they'd been die-hard Republicans until Paul helped them focus on the internal rot plaguing the GOP; now, instead of voting for John McCain, they were thinking about voting for Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party, or Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, or even writing in Paul himself. So there's a chance that Paul could have a sort of indirect Nader affect on this year's presidential election.
Judging from the way he closed his speech, though, Paul's ambitions are bigger. His goal, evidently, is affecting an ideological revolution that touches all parties; the Gospel of Freedom needs to be spread not just within the GOP, but among Democrats and independents as well. And if the U.S. (or, as Paul invariably terms it, "The Republic") becomes even less hospitable to freedom--if, for example, the draft gets reinstated--he'll just have to help freedom's allies fight back. "When do we get so dissatisfied with our current operation trying to bring about change?" he asked as his speech drew to a close. "There is a time and place, I think, for peaceful civil disobedience. The changes brought about by Gahndi and Martin Luther King were peaceful. And they understood the consequences."
Scoff if you will, but the way Paul's audience reacts to him is something to behold. People don't just applaud when Paul hits a high note; they thrust their arms triumphantly skyward and release exultant screams of joy. A woman sitting a few feet to my left--a middle-aged librarian type wearing a sundress and a homemade "Ron Paul '08" bib--looked, on more than one occasion, like she was about to have an orgasm right there on the floor. The object of their affection, meanwhile, is a short, slight, somewhat shrill gentleman who--when he's not thundering away like the second coming of Barry Goldwater--seems genuinely tickled that he and his supporters actually found each other. "Can you believe," he asked at one point, "that 18 months ago, at the beginning of this campaign, I didn't know any of you existed?"
September 02, 2008
VIDEO: OldWhiteGuyFest2008, starring That Dude from Law & Order.
VIDEO: Fearless leader of Dumbass Right smirks at "Angry Left"
VIDEO: Judas!
11:33 pm: CNN announces that John McCain pulled an interview with Larry King . . . specifically as a result of the infamous Campbell Brown interview with RNC spokesman Tucker Bounds . . . because McCain says the interview went "over the line." (Long pause, brow crinkles.) Ummmmmm . . . what line would that be, John? The First Ammendment? Campbell Brown stepped over the Bill of fucking Rights? No. She just stepped over the John-McCain-is-a-decrepit-grumpy-baby line. He's taking his Vice Presidential candidate and he's going home. No wonder he doesn't want to engage in meaningful dialogue with the leaders of Iran -- he can't even engage in meaningful dialogue with an over-the-hill talk show host!
11:15 pm: Finally, CNN acknowledges that there's a war going on . . . in St. Paul. Like right outside the door. As in cops going apeshit and reenacting the fall of Baghdad, lobbing tear gas and stun grenades at a bunch of spoiled teenagers in skinny jeans and bandannas. Yes, the anarchists are kind of annoying. But you didn't need to shoot shit at them. All you needed to do was grab a bullhorn, point down the block, and shout, "Hey look -- the dude from Crass is sitting in with Howard Zinn!", and they'd have been out of your hair in about 10 seconds.
11:03 pm: Song for backstabbin' Joe Lieberman: dude, Gergen is fuckin' pissed. You better watch your back, son.
10:52 pm: Liberman blah blah blah blah. Nobody will be able to tell you two things about this speech tomorrow. I can't even tell you anything about it, like, this second. Mainly because I've been too busy watching the newly-unearthed Sarah Palin church video, which -- trust us, go watch it now -- could very well be the end for her. Unless America's ready for yet another batshit-crazy Jesus freak who prays for pipelines and has no need of foreign policy advice unless it comes from God. If that doesn't get her, then we'lll see what the Right thinks about this: she's been caught on tape granting "honorary citizenship" to dangerous un-green-carded immigrants.
10:37 pm: Republicans are so weird. CNN showing what I can only assume is the Texas delegation -- who appear to be Seig-Heil-ing the podium with their cowboy hats. And the Pennsylvanians are waving the Terrible Towel! Democrats everywhere shuddering: oh, Lord, give us Karl Rove naked, give us waterboarding . . . but not the Terrible Towel!
10:35 pm: After watching Fred Thompson deliver what sounds like the RNC keynote -- you probably won't see a better speech in the next two days -- Republicans have got to be asking: why didn't John McCain nominate this guy to be Vice-President? Oh, wait, right: he isn't under an ethics investigation and doesn't have a pregnant teenage daughter. Sorry, forgot.
10:25 pm: Fred Thompson: "It's pretty clear there are two questions we will never have to ask
ourselves, 'Who is this man?' and 'Can we trust this man with the
Presidency?' " That phrase, "never have to ask ourselves," is emblematic of the underlying difference between the Republican and Democratic approaches to hardball politics, and why the Republicans so often win: the Republican strategy is to pre-empt critical thinking with appeals to lizard-brain fear and hate; the Democratic arguments require the American people to perform a semblance of rational thought. If anyone has read the headlines of the past two days, they'd be asking themselves precisely the two questions Fred Thompson doesn't want you thinking about, although they might be phrased slightly differently: "Who the hell are you and what have you done with John McCain?", and "How does he expect us to trust him with the Presidency when he can't even vet his own VP nomination?"
9:45 pm: I will fistfight anyone who says that the dude who jumped on the grenade is not part of my America. That kind of heroism belongs not to Republicans, not to Democrats, but to all of us who live in these United States. Dunno about you, but in the neighborhood where I grew up, that guy's an all-around hero. You probably knew someone like him: a little crazy, quite possibly a little Rain Man ("Hey Mike, wanna box of chocolates?" "Roger that"), but definitely a motherfucking world-class badass and braver than John Wayne. Here's the thing: you go into a firefight, that's the guy you want next to you. But the guy with the nuclear codes at his fingertips? The leader of the free world? You might not want the guy who's gonna jump on the grenade. What the office of President requires is someone who is less committed to intractable, non-negotiable notions of personal valor and much more interested in our common welfare. To put the question in a way that will offend just about everyone: What was John McCain trying to tell us about his leadership style by highlighting the story of a man who committed suicide for his country?
September 02, 2008
ST. PAUL--Last night I dropped by “Political Chicks a Go-Go,” a women-in-politics shindig sponsored by the Lifetime network and RightNow!, an organization for women who share a belief in “common belief in free-markets, limited government and personal responsibility.” I’ve been fascinated for a while by the possibility that disgruntled female supporters of Hillary Clinton might end up voting for John McCain, and I wanted to see what women there had to see about that scenario—particularly in the wake of McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate.
First up: Crystal Dueker, an older businesswoman from Fargo, North Dakota who was decked out in a flag hair scrunchie, flag scarf, and flag rhinestone earrings. “I’ve met a lot of women who were on the fence and liked the idea of making history with Hillary,” Dueker, a guest of the ND delegation, said. “They weren’t necessarily 100 precent behind her, but the just felt like it was about time we had a woman president. So there was this push. Also, a lot of women wanted Barack Obama to pick her for vice president, because the race was close. I think there are a lot people middle, looking at history, who like Palin. She’s tough. I call her the Margaret Thatcher of America!” (I would have thought that was Hillary, but I'm biased.)
When I broached the topic with some younger women sitting a few feet away, though, their reaction made me feel like I should apologize for even floating the question. "I think it’s completely ridiculous and offensive to believe that, actually,” said Holly Carmichael, an education researcher from Manhattan who identified herself as a Hillary fan and staunch Democrat. “I would hope that all women would be given credit for being able to understand issues, and stand behind the issues Hillary stood behind, and not just fall behind Palin because she’s a female. I think that McCain’s strategists really underestimated the women of the United States.
"It's pretty transparent pandering to Hillary supporters," added Jessie Everts, a doctoral student in family therapy who was sitting with Carmichael. "I think it’ll backfire. And I think the polls will probably show that pretty quickly, especially with Palin's daughter.”
Now, bear with me for a second. At this point, I chatted with three women who who seemed quite a bit more conservative, including Jane Bonvillain and lobbyist/running sensation Kristen Henehan. (Woman #3, I believe your first name was Stephanie--sorry!) Unfortunately, my audio of that conversation was either A) inadvertently deleted or B) never created in the first place--so I'll have to summarize. Like their counterparts, these women (who ranged from their late 20s to their early 40s) bristled at the idea that women might cast their vote on the basis of gender. "Insulting" was used (by Woman #3); so was "degrading."
Whch brings me, finally, to my attempt at a Working Theory of (Female) Puma-dom. The notion that angry women might vote for McCain after voting for Hillary isn't a bogus media construct. Nor is it a universal concern. It is, instead, something that breaks down largely along generational lines. Women who came of age during the Golden Age of Feminism (GAF) grew up thinking of women's rights as The Cause. Consequently, for many of them--e.g., Geraldine Ferraro--it doesn't seem unreasonable at all to suggest that frustration over Hillary's perceived ill treatment by the press and the Obama campaign might lead to a passive or active lack of support for Obama's candidacy.
But for younger women who grew up after the GAF--and have benefitted from what transpired a generation or two ago-- gender issues, especially those involving opportunity and access, are less pivotal. They matter, but they coexist with other considerations rather than trumping them. So if you're in this group--if you're a woman in your 20s or 30s or 40s--the idea that you'll vote your sex is either absurd or downright demeaning.
One final point: I asked both groups of young-ish women if they thought they'd see a woman president elected in their lifetimes. The conservatives were sanguine, the liberals less so. "Our culture and our society haven't gotten there yet," said Kimberly Diggles, a Democrat and (like Everts) a doctoral student in family therapy. "With Palin, one of the first things they mention for her is that she has kids. Would you do that for a man?" "We have a lot of progress to make before we see a woman as just another politician," added Carmichael. "And I think we need to get to that point before we get one into the White House."
That's an interesting point--and it raises a question: will the first woman president be someone who manages her gender the same way Obama has managed his race?
September 02, 2008
BLOOMINGTON, MN--It can’t be easy being Mitt Romney nowadays. Imagine: you find your place in the Republican firmament, make a serious run at the GOP’s presidential nomination, earn frequent mention as a possible running mate for John McCain — and then watch as McCain picks an obscure, untested, deeply flawed hockey mom-cum-Alaska secessionist for the job.
Maybe, deep down inside, our former Massachusetts governor rages at the injustice of it all. But rather than slinking back to to Belmont to lick his wounds, Mitt is here in Minnesota for the Republican National Convention, chairing the Massachusetts Republican delegation, doing his darndest to get McCain and Sarah Palin elected in November. And speaking to the Massachusetts delegation over Brunch on Tuesday, Romney offered some insight into how he does it.
“I want to underscore one other thing,” Romney said. “And that is that when you lose and election, lose the nomination, if you think the election is just about the person — one person — then of course you have sour grapes; you don’t get involved with the new person. But if you believe, as I do, that the election is about a series of beliefs and values you think are important — for your for your constituency, for your state, and for your nation — then when one person loses and the other person wins, who shares those values and those views, then you jump on that team and work just as hard as you did the first time.”
Bless his heart, Romney seems to be doing just that. There was no sense, at Tuesday’s exhortatory breakfast, that Mitt was going through the motions: he was earnest, animated, alternately humorous and heartfelt. Take, for example, this little joke, which was delivered with characteristic Romney aplomb. “The story is, John McCain and Barack Obama, the race’ll be so close that neither the voters nor the Electoral College will be able to decide it. So it’ll be determined—the next president—based upon an ice-fishing contest in Minnesota, right here! And the person that catches the most fish over four days wins.
“They separate them on different lakes. On day one, John McCain comes in; he’s got ten fish, Barack Obama’s got none. Day two, John McCain has twenty fish, Barack Obama has none. Day three, [Senate majority leader] Harry Reid goes to Barack Obama and says, It’s clear John McCain is cheating; go spy on him and find out how he’s winning! So Barack Obama goes and watches John McCain, and he comes back to Harry Reid and says: You won’t believe what John McCain is doing. He’s cutting a hole in the ice!”
Take that effete, elitist liberal--please! Later, after getting serious and contrasting the experience and judgment of Barack Obama and Joe Biden (bad) with the experience and judgment of McCain and Palin (good), Romney offered a final bit of encouragement. “We may not be able to carry Massachusetts,” Romney conceded. “We’ll see; there have been some Reagan miracles in the past…. But if it looks like Massachusetts is a bit of a long shot, we’ve got to go to work on our friends in New Hampshire.”
In a way, that’s the perfect coda to Romney’s governorship. If he’d focused his considerable political talents on his home state, and run for a second term, Massachusetts might actually be in play. Instead, it’s going to go to Obama. And Mitt finds himself relegated to the role of cheerleader — which, however he rationalizes it, isn’t what was supposed to happen.
September 02, 2008
Before yesterday's march on the RNC, I chatted with Cameron White, an ex-Marine who's now active with Iraq Veterans Against the War, about how he changed his mind and what it was like fighting a war he no longer believed in. Here's the video:
September 01, 2008
This was to have been where we'd have heard Dubya talk about what a great job the Republicans have done with the country these last eight years, and how we should all rejoice for the opportunity to give them four more. Instead, the President showed an ounce of shame and kept his mug off television, praying that Gustav wouldn't force everyone to roll out the Katrina footage again. The topic of the day turned out to be Sarah Palin, again: it turns out that not only is the 44-year-old ex-beauty-queen a mother of five, she's four months away from being a grandmom -- her 17 year old is five months pregnant, and Sarah and her husband couldn't be prouder.
If you think Palin's experience as governor of Alaska makes her qualified to be Vice President, you should ask some actual Alaskans. It appears that nobody up there thinks she's ready to be a heartbeat from the Presidency, either.
Without further ado, we'll go to the tape:
1. St. Paul Police Department cut short their press conference, but not before a spokesman was forced to admit that they'd detained a journalist. When asked to identify the journalist, the spokesman declines:
2. From CNN, police pepper-spray and tear-gas a peaceful protest. Collateral damage: the CNN cameraman gets a whiff of the gas himself:
3. Collateral damage included a credentialled photographer:
4. Citizen journalist captures National Guard firing on unarmed protesters and gassing the protest's designated medics:
5. Meanwhile, re: Bristol Palin: Don't preach, she's keepin' her baby:
6. Laura Bush addresses the RNC:
7. CNN's Campbell Brown asks Republican spokesman Tucker Bounds to name an order -- any order -- that Sarah Palin made as commander in chief of the Alaskan National Guard. Tucker then does one of the all-time-great spokesman tangos in a desperate, stuttering, 1000-word attempt not to say, "I'm sorry, I can't do that":
8. Somehow, the RNC hasn't found the time to issue a talking points memo about her trial-by-fire experience as a local-news sportscaster. This clip may explain why:
September 01, 2008
ST. PAUL--The directive John McCain gave to the RNC yesterday was pretty clear: It's time to take off your Republican hats and put on your American hats.
It ain't happening. Overheard this afternoon at the Xcel Energy Center:
"There are those who never met a tax they didn't like or hike. There are some people who want hardworking Americans to send even more of their money to Washington. We disagree!" (California Congressman Kevin McCarthy, co-chair of the RNC platform committee)
"It's about the future, not the past. It's about ideas, not personalities. And it's about building a better America, not building a bigger government." (North Carolina Senator Richard Burr, McCarthy's fellow co-chair, introducing the platform. NB: "Personalities" means "Barack Obama.")
"During our time in the white house we've had the pleas of getting to know each of the governors of those Gulf Coast states. They're all strong leaders.... They all also happen to be Republicans." (Laura Bush, introducing video greetings from Govs. Rick Perry of Texas, Bob Riley of Alabama, Charlie Christ of Florida, and Haley Barbour of Mississippi)
"You're seeing the Republican governors in--I think--in Republican states doing a fabulous job of taking care of the citizens. That's what we--that's what we do." (Perry)
"I'm proud to stand with my fellow Gulf Coast governors as we respond to this storm. We have a great team in place, taking action to protect and save lives, offering help to other citizens and each other. The teamwork among our states has been unprecedented. And I want to personally thank President Bush for his leadership. He and his administration have been in close contact with each of us, and his leadership has been excellent. Thank you, Mr. President, for all you're doing." (Riley)
"Character, courage, and sacrifice. They demonstrate the highest form of citizenship...You are making this country proud. You embodey honor, duty, and dedication. And ladies and gentleman, it is those values, that strength, that will lay the foundation for our recovery."(Riley lauding John McCain. Just kidding! Actually, that's Riley lauding the Alabama National Guard.)
Remarkable.