Opinion Politics

See if You Can Guess Which Organization This Is

2010-03-10T16:54:00.001-06:00

See if you can fill in the blank with the correct organization:

It’s inexcusable that we are still experiencing the ridiculous fiscal mismanagement that occurs within ____. Repeated human error tells me that there’s a systemic problem in the organization. It seems to me that this is not something they can continue to be responsible for.

On first glance, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the organization being referred to here is "Congress." Butyou'd be wrong. In fact, it's a member of Congress that's doing the complaining, if you can believe it! Politico reports that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) made the comments to the Capitol Police after they made a $5.5 million error. If you think it's crazy that members of Congress would criticize anyone for "fiscal mismanagement," you'll love her proposed solution:

[Rep. Schultz], chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch, told House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood Wednesday that she is ready to take action against Morse and his department – action that could include turning the department’s budget process back over to the legislative branch or to a government contractor that deals with federal budgets.

Now, that will fix things!

POLITICS: Digesting the Health Care Summit

2010-02-25T22:05:00.000-06:00

President Obama certainly has the gift of speech. But, when it comes to health care, it seems like every big gamble he takes results in a distraction that actually removes the focus from health care. First, there was the July press conference during which President Obama sought to "Reclaim the Debate on Health Care." That resulted in a distraction as a result of the Presidents remark that a police officer had "acted stupidly" in arresting a friend of Mr. Obama's. That controversy didn't die down until the Beer Summit nearly a week later.

Taking another stab at it, the President decided to address Congress, with some predicting that the "Obama speech may save health care reform." This resulted in yet another distraction, the infamous (and ridiculous) "You Lie" outburst. Of course, this wasn't the President's fault, but it just seemed like an instance of bad luck on his part.

That brings us to today's Health Care Summit. The President's goal was to show the Republican Party as the Party of "No." Most of this was inside baseball, and stuff that people don't really care about. After all, if it's broadcast on C-Span, there's about a 99% chance that the average American doesn't really care. Instead, we'll need to see how it played in the media. After all, like it or not, the media sets the narrative.

Well, this can't be encouraging news for the President. CNN has three stories about the event on its front page, all of which are links only (the photo stories are about the trainer who was killed by the killer whale and something known as a "biblioburro," the Colombian version of a bookmobile. One of the headlines refers to the summit as a "spectacle," but the other one is more problematic: "Obama snaps at McCain." MSNBC has a Chuck Todd video about the "icy" relationship between McCain and Obama.

Here's the point: Whether you think Obama was right or wrong in the slapdown (and, in an Opinion piece earlier today, OpinionPolitics took the position that it was not a good move), there's no way that anyone in the White House was hoping this would be the storyline this evening.

Yet another big health care moment squandered as a result of a distraction. And this time, President Obama has no one to blame but himself.

UPDATED: Here's $10 . . .

2010-02-25T20:49:00.003-06:00

. . . that Charlie Rangel remains the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, no matter that Speaker Pelosi is reserving judgment for now because she's "received nothing from [the] ethics [committee]." Rangel acknowledged today that he will be admonished by the committee for some of his travel reimbursements.

UPDATE: Looks like you owe me $10. From Politico:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi – Rep. Charlie Rangel’s most prominent defender – backed the troubled Democrat again on Friday morning, the day after news broke that the House ethics committee was planning to admonish Rangel.

“I think that every member is entitled to have his day before the ethics committee," she said. "They have said he did not knowingly violate the rules. And, again, if this were the end of it, that would be one thing. But there’s obviously more to come and we’ll see what happens with that. But every member has that right.”

OPINION: Sore . . . Winner?

2010-02-25T12:14:00.003-06:00

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it generally bad form for the winner to rub his or her victory in the face of the person who lost?

Transcript (from CNN):

Sen. John McCain slams the special deals inserted in the Senate health care bill, saying those should be removed so that the American people will know "that geography does not dictate what kind of health care they will receive."

Obama shoots back, "Let me just make this point, John, because we're not campaigning anymore. The election is over."

McCain interjects, "I'm reminded of that every day."

OPINION: Democrats and Domestic Violence

2010-02-24T23:21:00.004-06:00

Perhaps now we understand why Sen. Reid has been obsessed with domestic violence lately. From The New York Times:

Last fall, a woman went to court in the Bronx to testify that she had been violently assaulted by a top aide to Gov. David A. Paterson, and to seek a protective order against the man.
. . .

[J]ust before she was due to return to court to seek a final protective order, the woman got a phone call from the governor, according to her lawyer. She failed to appear for her next hearing on Feb. 8, and as a result her case was dismissed.

Many details of the governor’s role in this episode are unclear, but the accounts presented in court and police records and interviews with the woman’s lawyer and others portray a brutal encounter, a frightened woman and an effort to make a potential political embarrassment go away.

Sen. Reid, get that jobs bill passed now, before another Democrat starts beating his wife!

OPINION: Phony Transparency

2010-02-24T22:28:00.002-06:00

So, OpinionPolitics sat down at the computer tonight to write a little bit about the health care summit, and started looking for a news article about the summit and how it is the fulfillment of President Obama's promise to hold health care debates on C-Span. From the looks of it, though, even the MSM isn't buying it. MSNBC doesn't even have an article about the summit in the first screenfill, and CNN's only article is an opinion piece by David Gergen describing it as a gamble. The fact of the matter is, this is nothing more than political theater.

The Washington Post has a "Viewer's Guide." The New York Times headline is "Preparing in Great Detail for a Health Debate, and for its TV Audience."

All of this misses the real point. During the campaign, we were promised a transparent process. And not just during the general election. In fact, one of President Obama's greatest criticisms of Candidate Hillary Clinton was the secrecy surrounding her health care initiative in the early 1990s. Here is what he promised:

I'm going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We'll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies -- they'll get a seat at the table, they just won't be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies. And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process.

Now, look at who would be at these televised debates? Anyone see Republicans on the list?

There's a reason for that. No one has very been worried about President Obama striking a backdoor deal with Republicans. No one spends their days fretting that there'll be a "Boehner Boondoggle" or a "McConnel Money-Grub." Instead, people (rightfully) worry about secret negotiations that resulted in the "Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker Kickback."

True transparency would result in televising the negotiations among those who are trying to get the healthcare plan through, not result in what is nothing more than a preplanned debate on the topic of healthcare.

True transparency would have given voters a chance to learn more about Sen. Nelson's sweetheart deal for his home state of Nebraska well before the Senate voted on the bill.

True transparency would have resulted in a Senate vote sometime other than Christmas Eve night, when Democrats knew that most Americans had focused their attention on other matters.

True transparency would have occurred before the first bill was introduced in the House, not after a House bill and a Senate bill had passed.

In short, true transparency doesn't require a viewer's guide. Phoniness does.

OPINION: Alexander Haig -- Misquoted Again

2010-02-23T23:30:00.000-06:00

The "template" mindset of journalists was perhaps most noticeable during the 2000 campaign. It was during that election that any verbal gaffe by Governor Bush, which fit into the media's "'W' is dumb" template, was the focus of endless news stories, while a verbal slip-up by Vice President Gore was practically ignored. Alternatively, any time Mr. Gore misconstrued any detail of any story, which fit the media's "Gore is an exaggerator" template, that would get blown all out of proportion.

But template journalism has been around much longer than that. Consider Alexander Haig, who was Secretary of State under President Reagan and who passed away over the weekend. At that time, the media had a president who had been shot, and a vice president who was out of town. What better template to create than the third in line of succession trying to usurp power. And how easy, given Mr. Haig's "I'm in charge" comment. But besides the fact that that's not even what he said (he actually said "I'm in control," CNN's video caption notwithstanding), it's clear from even a cursory review of the video that that isn't what he meant at all.

Here's what he said:

Should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. As of now, I am in control here, in the White House, pending the return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up I would check with him of course.

Now, exactly what part of that should we interpret as meaning that Mr. Haig was attempting to usurp anyone's power? In response to a question on the matter (it's not like he just went out and decided to discuss the succession plan), he started by clearly acknowledging that the President himself was still at the "helm." Then, he indicated that, if the President transferred power, it would be to the Vice President. He then simply stated that he was in control "in the White House," and tapped his hands on the podium almost as if to indicate his control was limited to that building. In fact, for all we know, he could have been talking about being in control of the briefing room (after all, the press secretary was also seriously wounded in this attack).

What is clear is that, whatever Mr. Haig was talking about, he was not talking about being in charge of the country. And, if we do nothing else in his memory, the very least we could do is acknowledge that the view of Mr. Haig as someone who thought he was in control of the entire federal government is nothing more than a simplistic urban legend that was started by a bunch of journalists who can't think outside of their templates.

Not much has changed in the last quarter-century.

OPINION: Well, the Republicans are in Charge, And They've Screwed Everything Up

2010-02-19T23:14:00.006-06:00

Why is it that when Republicans are in charge, they get blamed for everything that's wrong in Washington, and when they aren't in charge, they still get blamed for the Washington being "Frozen" and "Broken"?

The worst part is that CNN is giving Jack Cafferty a primetime special to do his Grumpy Old Men bit for an hour. I mean, liberal bias is one thing, but an hour of Jack Cafferty is just too much.

Obama Can't Get the Garbage Picked Up -- Literally

2010-02-19T10:49:00.003-06:00

In local politics, you judge a politician by the basics, like whether they can get the garbage picked up. And while some folks (i.e., Drudge) have made a big deal about the fact that President Obama made the Dalai Lama walk by trash bags to get out of the White House, the bigger question for me is, why are the trash bags there to begin with. The Getty Images caption reads:

Exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama (L) walks out the doors of the Palm Room of the White House by trash bags waiting to be picked up due to delays from the snow storms of last week in Washington, DC, February 18, 2010 after meeting with US President Barack Obama. The Dalai Lama appeared in public at the White House Thursday and said US President Barack Obama was 'supportive' in a meeting that drew angry protests from China.

Seriously? I'm no expert on garbage collection, but I would think if I were running a little behind, the first house I would visit once I was up and running would be the White House!

So, What Exactly Was Newsweek "Saying"?

2009-11-18T16:45:00.004-06:00

Most of the OpinionPolitics readers have probably already seen this cover. It depicts Sarah Palin in a runner's outfit, just as the cover has depicted various male politicians in runner's outfits, right? Anyway, for those of you who claim that this is sexist, you can rest assured that the selection of this photo is not sexist. According to a release from Editor Jon Meacham:

We chose the most interesting image available to us to illustrate the theme of the cover, which is what we always try to do. We apply the same test to photographs of any public figure, male or female: does the image convey what we are saying? That is a gender-neutral standard.

So, just one question: What exactly is Newsweek "saying"?

TVNewser: CNN Alters Promo Audio to Make It Sound Less Left-Leaning

2009-10-13T17:35:00.004-05:00

But don't worry, they haven't altered any actual programming to make it sound less liberal--it will continue to sound left-leaning.

via TVNewser.

The revised promo is below:

Anti-War Protestors on Defensive After Arkansas Recruiting Center Shooting

2009-06-03T20:20:00.007-05:00

Can anyone explain why a shooting by someone opposed to abortion others opposed to abortion "on defensive" . . .

. . . but a shooting by someone opposed to the war doesn't put others opposed to the war on the defensive, even when the headline acknowledges a political motive?

Obama Advisor: Fundamentals of our Economy Are Strong

2009-03-15T17:55:00.007-05:00

Ok, a follow-up to yesterday's post. Yesterday, OpinionPolitics pointed out that some of Obama's language sounded much like McCain's upbeat language on the economy during the campaign, in spite of the fact that the economy is actually doing worse than it was during the campaign.

But now, Obama economic advisor Christina Romer, upon being asked this morning on Meet the Press whether the fundamentals of the economy are sound, responded with almost the same wording that McCain used:

Of course they are sound.

—Christina Romer, March 15, 2009

I think a quote from Senator Obama might be appropriate here:

[W]hat economy are you talking about?"

—Barack Obama, September 15, 2008

OpinionPolitics agrees that the fundamentals are strong, but if they're strong now, they were definitely strong when McCain made his much-criticized assessment during the campaign.

Obama: The Fundemantals of Our Economy Are Strong

2009-03-14T14:54:00.013-05:00

"[T]he fundamentals of our economy are strong, but these are very, very difficult times."
—John McCain, September 15, 2008

"He doesn't get what's happening between the mountain in Sedona where he lives and the corridors of Washington where he works. . . . Why else would he say, today, of all days—just a few hours ago—that the fundamentals of the economy are still strong? Senator—what economy are you talking about?"
—Barack Obama, September 15, 2008

Now, does anyone believe the economy has gotten any better since last fall? For reference, the Dow closed at $10,917.51 that day (it has dropped 34% since then, even with the recent "surge").

Well, one person does.

"We’ve got the most dynamic free market economy on earth."
—Barack Obama, March 14, 2009

OpinionPolitics agrees that we have the most dynamic free market economy on earth, but that can only be true if the fundamentals of our economy are strong. That is true today, but it was also true (even more true, actually) on September 15, 2008.

Sarah Palin -- PublicTrustAbuser

2008-10-10T22:01:00.005-05:00

It took the 9/11 Commission almost two years to complete a study and make ten earth-shattering recommendations (you know, like "identify and prioritize actual or potential terrorist sanctuaries" [yes, that's a real one--check out page 367]). Of course, they were only trying to prevent future terrorist attacks (ok, well that's actually arguable, but anyway . . .). The Sarah Palin investigation, on the other hand, they're trying to prevent another power hungry governor from ever abusing her power to have a police officer fired for threatening to kill people and tazering 10-year-old kids, so of course that investigation was so important that it was completed in a matter of less than two months! Of course, it had nothing to do with the upcoming election.

The most bizarre finding is that Palin violated the public trust--and Alaska law--because she tried to "benefit a personal or financial interest through official action." (page 8) Because we all know that protecting your father and nephew from a nut-case state trooper is a "personal interest." I suppose that under this theory having security personnel follow you around would be in your own interest too, and a violation of the public trust.

McCain Disses Obama

2008-10-07T22:30:00.002-05:00

Doesn't he realize that Obama is "the one," and not "that one"?

You Know a Candidate Is in Trouble . . .

2008-09-10T21:42:00.003-05:00

. . . when the post-mortems are already being written. From Howard Fineman:

But if I were an Obama partisan I would be worried that his mistakes have a common thread - pride.
Obama seems to want to do things on his own, and on his own terms. It’s understandable. Obama has his own crowd – from Chicago, from Harvard, and from a new cadre of wealthy, Ivy-educated movers and shakers.

Who's the Pig Here?

2008-09-09T21:13:00.005-05:00

Who was it that said "words mean something"? Because I have a feeling we're gonna hear a lot of excuses in the next couple of days.

It looks like Barack Obama will be knocked off message for yet another news cycle because of another verbal gaffe resulting from the fact that he hasn't learned that by fighting against Sarah Palin, he can do nothing but harm his own candidacy. From the ABC News Political Punch:

LEBANON, Va. -- "That's not change," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said of what Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is offering.

"You know, you can put lipstick on a pig," Obama said, "but it's still a pig."

The crowd rose and applauded, some of them no doubt thinking he may have been alluding to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's ad lib during her vice presidential nomination acceptance speech last week, "What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick."

With his foot firmly implanted in his mouth, he continued with what OpinionPolitics would call a "backhanded compliment." After mentioning Palin a few seconds later, the crowd booed, and Obama attempted to stop them:

No, she's new. She hasn’t been on the scene, you know, she’s got five kids and my hat goes off to anybody who’s looking after five. I’ve got two and they tire Michelle and me out!

By stating that his two children "tire" him out, Obama is, for the first time, raising the issue that keeps popping up on liberal blogs--whether Palin can serve as Vice President while also raising her children. If you don't agree, ask yourself whether you've ever heard Obama compliment President Bush (or any other male politician) for rasing a family.

Words do mean something, and it's context that gives those words meaning. When one of the most-quoted lines from someone's nomination speech involves lipstick, and in a race where liberal bloggers continue to question whether Palin would be able to serve as Vice President while also raising five kids, these words do mean something--that Barack Obama has problems respecting women.

Gee, what's a good word for someone who thinks men are better than women and holds women in low regard? Male chauvanist . . .

Phil Griffin only about 8 Months Dumber than the Rest of America

2008-09-08T21:49:00.004-05:00

Over the weekend (after about 8 months of this insanity), it finally occurred to Phil Griffin (and, if you believe him, Keith Olbermann) that maybe having a DNC's spokesperson serve as anchor during political events wasn't such a great idea after all.

"In a rapidly changing media environment, this is the great philosophical debate," Griffin said.

The fact that this was ever a "debate" in his mind might explain why MSNBC still manages to linger in third place.

Clinton to Sock It To Palin?

2008-09-06T22:52:00.008-05:00

If Barack Obama is counting on Hillary Clinton to wipe out Sarah Palin (which she clearly has the ability to do), he'd better think again. We all read the statement that Senator Clinton first put out:

We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate.

Not to parse words (although we all know that the Clintons are very careful about choosing their words), but it's worth noting that the only critical part of that statement (only 10 words) is sandwiched between words like "proud," "historic," and "important new voice." Not exactly a ringing endorsement for Senator Obama.

Then comes word that Senator Obama intends to use Senator Clinton and other female surrogates to "undercut" Gov. Palin. Let's see how that's working so far.

After Senator McCain's speech on Thursday night (note that this was a full day after Gov. Palin's speech), she released a written statement that contained a few sentences criticizing Senator McCain, then added, "So, to slightly amend my comments from Denver: NO WAY, NO HOW, NO McCAIN-PALIN." She can't even come up with an original statement on Palin--she just tags Palin's name to the end of her week-old "no way" line. Unless you think that capitalizing the sentence somehow gives it new life or increases the sting, it doesn't seem that this statement did much to change people's opinions of Gov. Palin.

Perhaps more interesting is Senator Clinton's response to questions about Gov. Palin at a Labor Day event in New York City today: "This election is about issues, and that's what's going to matter to people at the end of the day."

If that's the best Senator Clinton has, OpinionPolitics suspects that Republicans don't need to worry about Sen. Clinton campaiging for Senator Obama.

Obama Does Have Experience: Putting up Stopsigns and Filling Potholes

2008-09-04T20:52:00.004-05:00

This is the experience that makes Obama ready to be President?

Right out of college, Obama worked in 1985 for a group called the Calumet Community Religious Conference to help unemployed people find jobs. According to the Chicago Tribune, the group also urged the city government to fill potholes and put up stop signs.

That's awesome! Maybe if things don't work out, McCain can appoint him as Transportation Secretary.

Obama Finally Explains What a Community Organizer Is

2008-09-04T18:36:00.003-05:00

It's a . . . well, I'll let him explain.

Why would that kind of work be ridiculous? Who are they fighting for? What are they advocating for? They think that the lives of those folks who are struggling each and every day, that working with them to try to improve their lives is somehow not relevant to the presidency? I think maybe that's the problem -- that's part of why they're out of touch and they don't get it 'cause they haven't spent much time working on behalf of those folks.

Understand? It's a . . . oh, I give up.

Obama Concedes the Experience Issue to Palin

2008-09-04T18:18:00.005-05:00

Regular readers of OpinionPolitics know that we've been advising Obama that he was taking the bait when he compared his experience to that of Gov. Sarah Palin. In fact, he sounded very weak the other day when comparing his work on his campaign to that of Sarah Palin when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (completely ignoring her work as governor).

Well, as further evidence that the Obama camp realizes that his experience doesn't match that of Palin's (or that he's checking the OpinionPolitics blog for campaign advice), there's this quote of Obama decidedly not taking the bait:

“I’ll let Gov. Palin talk about her experience. I’ll talk about mine.”

Of course, Governor Palin talked about hers last night. We're still waiting to hear from Senator Obama to talk about his.

Barracuda Unleashed

2008-09-03T20:15:00.005-05:00

Rock on Sarah Palin!

There Goes Keith, Playing it "Straight Down the Line" Again

2008-09-03T18:15:00.007-05:00

Poor Phil Griffin. He just thought he was the President of MSNBC.

Here's Griffin with Politico's Michael Calderone last Tuesday.

Look, when Keith anchors, he plays it straight down the line. This is our team. They’ve served us well. We love ’em, and we’re going to be at the Republican convention, and it’s going to be great. And I don’t have any hesitation.

Well, let's hesitate for just a minute. Tonight, to kick off the convention coverage, here's how Olbermann started:

"The observation was made by no less an authority than the ultra conservative website World Net Daily. 'Sarah Palin is the newest political,' in their term, 'rock star.' Does that invoke any memories of the mid-summer republican campaign against Barack Obama—the celebrity commercial? There was Karl Rove’s dismissal of a mayor turned governor turned vice presidential aspirant, saying that Obama’s consideration of Tim Kaine meant that he—Obama—was really not, first and foremost, concerned with is this person capable of being President of the United States. And then there’s an even uglier argument against Obama suddenly back in play. In the words of a gentleman writing at the conservative National Review, quote, Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man, unquote. [OpinionPolitics: I didn't remember that argument being made against Barack Obama, though maybe against John Edwards.] Tonight, the political society debut of Sarah Palin, who comes complete with her own prefabricated, self-dismissing narrative . . . against her.

He's right. It's straight down the line--the Democratic Party line.

Phil Griffin, walk outside your office door and make sure that it still reads "MSNBC President." While it isn't entirely clear who--between Olbermann and the DNC--actually does run MSNBC, if Griffin really thought that he would be able to dictate that the coverage would be straight down the line, it's clear who isn't in charge at MSNBC.