The geniuses at ABC TV did everything wrong, spending the first hour of the Democratic debate on nasty trivia, butchering the continuity of both hours with endless commercials and having their moderators badger the candidates to the point of interrupting their answers to argue with them.
For fully half the time, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos harped on Jeremiah Wright and sniper fire in Bosnia, adding to the ugly mix a former member of the Weather Underground with a marginal connection to Obama. The premise seemed to be that Republicans would run a Karl Rovian smear campaign against one of them in the fall, so why not preview it now?
Obama protested that American voters would not succumb to those tactics in a year when they faced serious problems, but Clinton seemed eager enough to roll in the mud under the high-minded pretense of discussing "character."
In the second hour, when the questions became substantive, on Iraq and the economy, Hillary Clinton was at her sure-handed best while Obama gave cogent enough answers but seemed a little weary of suppressing his anger and dealing with Gibson's gotcha questioning.
The dismal two hours started with a suggestion from Mario Cuomo, the best president we never had, that the candidates promise now to run on the same ticket, regardless of who wins. They refused, of course, but if the campaign continues along the lines set by ABC last night, it might be impossible to get them into the same room by convention time.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The Home-Foreclosure Picnic
Hearts aching for millions of Americans in danger of losing their homes, the Senate has been working hard on the Foreclosure Prevention Act, which will provide billions of dollars in tax breaks for airlines, automakers, alternative energy producers and home builders.
As they always do, lobbyists have been hijacking the bill that has bipartisan support in an economic crisis to lard it with help for their clients, everybody but homeowners.
“The Senate legislation gave corporations and Wall Street billions in tax breaks,” the president of the Laborers International Union of North America said at a news conference yesterday. “Tax breaks for corporate home builders won’t help stabilize the housing market, won’t create jobs and won’t prevent a single foreclosure.”
In the House, New York's Charles Rangel is pushing a bill to give tax breaks to first-time home buyers, but the realtors lobby would like it to apply to all buyers as would the National Association of Home Builders, the Mortgage Bankers Association, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks.
Meanwhile, the only help beleaguered home owners are getting is from some states and cities. "This month alone," the Washington Post reports, "Philadelphia's sheriff delayed foreclosure auctions of 759 homes...Maryland extended the time it takes to complete a foreclosure. State leaders in Ohio recruited more than 1,000 lawyers to aid distressed borrowers."
Nine states have committed more than $450 million to loan funds to refinancing mortgages of at-risk borrowers, according to a study by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Some have brokered deals with lenders to ease terms for troubled loans. A few states have lengthened the time it takes for foreclosure.
When they face the voters this fall, members of Congress may have trouble figuring out why some of them are so...bitter.
As they always do, lobbyists have been hijacking the bill that has bipartisan support in an economic crisis to lard it with help for their clients, everybody but homeowners.
“The Senate legislation gave corporations and Wall Street billions in tax breaks,” the president of the Laborers International Union of North America said at a news conference yesterday. “Tax breaks for corporate home builders won’t help stabilize the housing market, won’t create jobs and won’t prevent a single foreclosure.”
In the House, New York's Charles Rangel is pushing a bill to give tax breaks to first-time home buyers, but the realtors lobby would like it to apply to all buyers as would the National Association of Home Builders, the Mortgage Bankers Association, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks.
Meanwhile, the only help beleaguered home owners are getting is from some states and cities. "This month alone," the Washington Post reports, "Philadelphia's sheriff delayed foreclosure auctions of 759 homes...Maryland extended the time it takes to complete a foreclosure. State leaders in Ohio recruited more than 1,000 lawyers to aid distressed borrowers."
Nine states have committed more than $450 million to loan funds to refinancing mortgages of at-risk borrowers, according to a study by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Some have brokered deals with lenders to ease terms for troubled loans. A few states have lengthened the time it takes for foreclosure.
When they face the voters this fall, members of Congress may have trouble figuring out why some of them are so...bitter.
No News from Iraq
When Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker left Washington last week, they took the war with them, at least as far as the news media are concerned. Things have been happening in Iraq, all of them bad, but you have to look hard to see past the Clinton-Obama-McCain war of words to find out about them.
Violence is spiking again, with Sunni insurgents joining the Shiites in causing carnage. Car bombs killed at least 60 people yesterday, the most deadly of them at a restaurant in "safe" Anbar province. In Baghdad, another targeted a convoy carrying the director of police affairs.
In Sadr City, a company of Iraqi soldiers abandoned their positions, despite pleas from American forces to hold the line against Shiite militias. This happened a day after the Iraqi government announced it had fired 1,300 soldiers and policemen for refusing to fight during the Maliki-ordered offensive last month in Basra.
Meanwhile, as the candidates back here bicker about Barack Obama's perceived insult to small towns, there is some discussion about what the $1 to $3 trillion war is costing American life, but most of that is going on behind the scenes.
Meanwhile, the icasualties web site, after what is described as "a malicious attack" on its server, reports that 25 American troops have died in Iraq so far this month, a number that is slowly rising toward pre-Surge levels.
But none of that is making much news. The Petraeus-Crocker show satisfied our curiosity about Iraq so we can concentrate on the Presidential campaign and the Pope's visit.
Violence is spiking again, with Sunni insurgents joining the Shiites in causing carnage. Car bombs killed at least 60 people yesterday, the most deadly of them at a restaurant in "safe" Anbar province. In Baghdad, another targeted a convoy carrying the director of police affairs.
In Sadr City, a company of Iraqi soldiers abandoned their positions, despite pleas from American forces to hold the line against Shiite militias. This happened a day after the Iraqi government announced it had fired 1,300 soldiers and policemen for refusing to fight during the Maliki-ordered offensive last month in Basra.
Meanwhile, as the candidates back here bicker about Barack Obama's perceived insult to small towns, there is some discussion about what the $1 to $3 trillion war is costing American life, but most of that is going on behind the scenes.
Meanwhile, the icasualties web site, after what is described as "a malicious attack" on its server, reports that 25 American troops have died in Iraq so far this month, a number that is slowly rising toward pre-Surge levels.
But none of that is making much news. The Petraeus-Crocker show satisfied our curiosity about Iraq so we can concentrate on the Presidential campaign and the Pope's visit.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Zero: A Memory
They're showing the original of Mel Brooks' "The Producers" on Turner Classic Movies tonight with Zero Mostel, an actor of comic genius. In 1943, we were in basic training together in South Carolina, and he gave me one of the most memorable evenings of my life.
The country boys in my company were excited by anything exotic and, given their lives before induction, it took little to tickle them. One day they were chortling over a guy in the next battalion named Zero.
He had been at City College a decade before me and in the 1940s was getting known in Manhattan night clubs for political satire that would later fail to amuse the House Un-American Activities Committee. The night I looked him up, Zero was on his way to becoming the pear-shaped presence that years later would charge around a Broadway stage and turn into a rhinoceros.
Sitting on his bunk, field jacket zipped to the throat, his big head seemed to be resting on a bulging bag of laundry. He was in his late twenties, but his eyes were a thousand years old. When I told him I was from the Bronx, he grabbed me as if I were a pastrami sandwich.
We went into town Saturday night to the Spartanburg USO, where local ladies entertained with doughnuts, coffee and Southern charm, and the troops entertained back however they could. When the hostesses heard Zero was a professional performer, they pushed him to the stage. I sat in the front row, happily awaiting my share of the attention he would be getting.
Zero slouched up to the microphone with a shy smile and a glint in his eye, gathered his bulk, fixed his face into a scowl and suddenly emitted the roar of a deep Southern demagogue. To this audience of dewy damsels and redneck recruits, he was offering his rendition of Senator Pellagra T. Polltax, a raging parody of the Mississippi racist, Theodore Bilbo.
As Zero flung his arms in all directions and turned up the angry rant about niggers and kikes, I slid down in my seat, looking for an exit.
By the time he finished, I was crouching near the floor. Through the startled silence, I heard the start of a low rumble, and I sprinted to the stage where Zero was beaming and bowing, grabbed his elbow and shoved him through a door toward the bus that would carry us, untarred and unfeathered, back to camp. On the ride Zero seemed relaxed, a small smile on his face. We never went to the USO again.
The country boys in my company were excited by anything exotic and, given their lives before induction, it took little to tickle them. One day they were chortling over a guy in the next battalion named Zero.
He had been at City College a decade before me and in the 1940s was getting known in Manhattan night clubs for political satire that would later fail to amuse the House Un-American Activities Committee. The night I looked him up, Zero was on his way to becoming the pear-shaped presence that years later would charge around a Broadway stage and turn into a rhinoceros.
Sitting on his bunk, field jacket zipped to the throat, his big head seemed to be resting on a bulging bag of laundry. He was in his late twenties, but his eyes were a thousand years old. When I told him I was from the Bronx, he grabbed me as if I were a pastrami sandwich.
We went into town Saturday night to the Spartanburg USO, where local ladies entertained with doughnuts, coffee and Southern charm, and the troops entertained back however they could. When the hostesses heard Zero was a professional performer, they pushed him to the stage. I sat in the front row, happily awaiting my share of the attention he would be getting.
Zero slouched up to the microphone with a shy smile and a glint in his eye, gathered his bulk, fixed his face into a scowl and suddenly emitted the roar of a deep Southern demagogue. To this audience of dewy damsels and redneck recruits, he was offering his rendition of Senator Pellagra T. Polltax, a raging parody of the Mississippi racist, Theodore Bilbo.
As Zero flung his arms in all directions and turned up the angry rant about niggers and kikes, I slid down in my seat, looking for an exit.
By the time he finished, I was crouching near the floor. Through the startled silence, I heard the start of a low rumble, and I sprinted to the stage where Zero was beaming and bowing, grabbed his elbow and shoved him through a door toward the bus that would carry us, untarred and unfeathered, back to camp. On the ride Zero seemed relaxed, a small smile on his face. We never went to the USO again.
The Foundering Fathers
HBO has made John Adams a lot less lovable than Tony Soprano and, despite all the critical tiptoeing around it, picked a poor time to demythologize the making of the American miracle.
In this week's next-to-last installment, a sour, surly Adams slips out of a half-finished, half-furnished White House to board a crowded jitney and avoid attending the inauguration of Thomas Jefferson, a former friend he has come to envy and despise.
This is a typical moment in seven hours of relentless "realism" to offset a century of Hollywood biopics that glorified the Founding Fathers beyond human recognition and now attempts to balance the books by presenting them warts and all but ends up with a visually spectacular exhibition of warts.
It was only in middle age that, as a child of immigrants, I fell deeply in love with the makers of the American Revolution while touring the stately homes of England to view huge tapestries celebrating ancestral slaughter that created a ruling aristocracy who passed along generations of splendor to a few who live at the expense of misery for the many.
Washington, Jefferson, Adams and Franklin fought a war to escape all that and, by some miracle, found a way not to replicate it but create something magnificently new in history that endures to this day.
That they were vain, petty, self-seeking--in a word, human--is not surprising, but a televised tapestry of their faults is no more a cause for self-congratulation than the wall hangings in those palaces built on exploitation.
What the magnificent Laura Linney as Abigail Adams keeps warning about in pillow talk would have been helpful to the producers of the HBO epic. "Ambition," she keeps saying sadly. "Vanity."
In this week's next-to-last installment, a sour, surly Adams slips out of a half-finished, half-furnished White House to board a crowded jitney and avoid attending the inauguration of Thomas Jefferson, a former friend he has come to envy and despise.
This is a typical moment in seven hours of relentless "realism" to offset a century of Hollywood biopics that glorified the Founding Fathers beyond human recognition and now attempts to balance the books by presenting them warts and all but ends up with a visually spectacular exhibition of warts.
It was only in middle age that, as a child of immigrants, I fell deeply in love with the makers of the American Revolution while touring the stately homes of England to view huge tapestries celebrating ancestral slaughter that created a ruling aristocracy who passed along generations of splendor to a few who live at the expense of misery for the many.
Washington, Jefferson, Adams and Franklin fought a war to escape all that and, by some miracle, found a way not to replicate it but create something magnificently new in history that endures to this day.
That they were vain, petty, self-seeking--in a word, human--is not surprising, but a televised tapestry of their faults is no more a cause for self-congratulation than the wall hangings in those palaces built on exploitation.
What the magnificent Laura Linney as Abigail Adams keeps warning about in pillow talk would have been helpful to the producers of the HBO epic. "Ambition," she keeps saying sadly. "Vanity."
Recession Rolls On
As Americans mail in tax returns and wait for their economic stimulus checks, they will find fewer places to spend the money when it arrives. Retail chains are closing stores and going out of business in the face of declining sales and mounting debt, the New York Times reports:
"Since last fall, eight mostly midsize chains--as diverse as the furniture store Levitz and the electronics seller Sharper Image--have filed for bankruptcy protection...
"But the troubles are quickly spreading to bigger national companies, like Linens ‘n Things, the bedding and furniture retailer with 500 stores in 47 states...
"Even retailers that can avoid bankruptcy are shutting down stores to preserve cash through what could be a long economic downturn. Over the next year, Foot Locker said it would close 140 stores, Ann Taylor will start to shutter 117 and the jeweler Zales will close 100."
As food prices rise at a record rate and gasoline prices keep climbing, they crowd out other purchases--people are spending less on furniture, clothing and electronics. As jobs disappear in these contracting companies, the recession may worsen and snowball beyond the pathetic efforts of a clueless Congress and President to affect them.
Meanwhile, billions of American dollars keep disappearing into the sinkhole of Iraqi corruption. At least business is booming at banks in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.
"Since last fall, eight mostly midsize chains--as diverse as the furniture store Levitz and the electronics seller Sharper Image--have filed for bankruptcy protection...
"But the troubles are quickly spreading to bigger national companies, like Linens ‘n Things, the bedding and furniture retailer with 500 stores in 47 states...
"Even retailers that can avoid bankruptcy are shutting down stores to preserve cash through what could be a long economic downturn. Over the next year, Foot Locker said it would close 140 stores, Ann Taylor will start to shutter 117 and the jeweler Zales will close 100."
As food prices rise at a record rate and gasoline prices keep climbing, they crowd out other purchases--people are spending less on furniture, clothing and electronics. As jobs disappear in these contracting companies, the recession may worsen and snowball beyond the pathetic efforts of a clueless Congress and President to affect them.
Meanwhile, billions of American dollars keep disappearing into the sinkhole of Iraqi corruption. At least business is booming at banks in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.
Obama's Defining Moment
Tomorrow night's debate in Philadelphia could be the turning point. If he is the masterful politician he seems to be, Barack Obama will seize the moment to rise above the squabbling and bickering to define himself for American voters.
Just as he broadened the Jeremiah Wright brouhaha into a statement about race in America in that same hall, Obama can use his "small town" misstep to address directly the doubts that exist and are being exacerbated about him and re-frame the issue of his trustworthiness.
In response, he can acknowledge understandable skepticism on the part of Americans who were told eight years ago that George W. Bush was a compassionate conservative who would not embark on nation-building, only to get a president with no empathy for their needs, a radical agenda to enrich the richest and a reckless foreign policy that would destroy another nation and squander our blood, treasure and reputation in the world trying to put it back together again.
Voters, Obama can point out, thought they were making a safe choice in selecting a familiar name and reassuring promises from a comforting source. Now they are being asked to give their trust to a dark-skinned man with an odd name and exotic roots who, they are being told, is "elitist" and "out of touch" with them.
But which is the greater gamble at this low point of Americans' confidence in their future? More of the same or trusting someone whose judgement has thus far turned out to be sound and whose promise of change is not encumbered with a history of business-as-usual in Washington?
Playing it safe, Obama can truthfully tell Americans, is the biggest gamble of all.
Just as he broadened the Jeremiah Wright brouhaha into a statement about race in America in that same hall, Obama can use his "small town" misstep to address directly the doubts that exist and are being exacerbated about him and re-frame the issue of his trustworthiness.
In response, he can acknowledge understandable skepticism on the part of Americans who were told eight years ago that George W. Bush was a compassionate conservative who would not embark on nation-building, only to get a president with no empathy for their needs, a radical agenda to enrich the richest and a reckless foreign policy that would destroy another nation and squander our blood, treasure and reputation in the world trying to put it back together again.
Voters, Obama can point out, thought they were making a safe choice in selecting a familiar name and reassuring promises from a comforting source. Now they are being asked to give their trust to a dark-skinned man with an odd name and exotic roots who, they are being told, is "elitist" and "out of touch" with them.
But which is the greater gamble at this low point of Americans' confidence in their future? More of the same or trusting someone whose judgement has thus far turned out to be sound and whose promise of change is not encumbered with a history of business-as-usual in Washington?
Playing it safe, Obama can truthfully tell Americans, is the biggest gamble of all.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Small-Town, Small-Time Politics
By now, Barack Obama has learned to avoid sociological commentary during a presidential campaign, after unleashing the Clinton-McCain attack dogs with his observations at a San Francisco fund-raiser.
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest," he said, "the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
McCain's spokesman pounced: "It shows an elitism and condescension towards hardworking Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking. It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans."
Hillary Clinton was shocked, shocked and evoked her own Lincolnesque, Annie Oakley childhood, recalling how her father taught her how to shoot when she was a young girl and her faith as "the faith of my parents and my grandparents,” presumably unlike that of you-know-who's Muslim forebears.
The Clinton and McCain little houses on the prairie in Chappaqua and upscale Arizona are a rebuke to the Obamas' elitist life style in Chicago and should serve as a reminder to the candidate to stay in touch with the realities that voters face every day.
No matter how bad things get in Bush America, it's not a good idea to knock guns or God, especially with Charlton Heston still warm in his grave.
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest," he said, "the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
McCain's spokesman pounced: "It shows an elitism and condescension towards hardworking Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking. It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans."
Hillary Clinton was shocked, shocked and evoked her own Lincolnesque, Annie Oakley childhood, recalling how her father taught her how to shoot when she was a young girl and her faith as "the faith of my parents and my grandparents,” presumably unlike that of you-know-who's Muslim forebears.
The Clinton and McCain little houses on the prairie in Chappaqua and upscale Arizona are a rebuke to the Obamas' elitist life style in Chicago and should serve as a reminder to the candidate to stay in touch with the realities that voters face every day.
No matter how bad things get in Bush America, it's not a good idea to knock guns or God, especially with Charlton Heston still warm in his grave.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Ending an Era of American Impotence
Those ubiquitous commercials for Cialis, Levitra, etc. may be telling us more about our national psyche than just the state of the male libido.
Put together with surveys showing sagging confidence in the institutions of power, they present a picture of American impotence--to either win or get out of a hopeless war, to rebuild after a natural disaster or deal with hard times. (Is Congress' stimulus bill any more than a weak dose of economic Viagra?)
Years of a smirking, swaggering George W. Bush who has failed to perform where it counts have taken a toll on American life. To compensate, he has surrounded himself with Cheney's Neo-Cons, whose judgement has been clouded by seven-year erections for which they have failed to find satisfaction or seek medical attention.
Now the political party that gave us all this is offering an aging macho figure who promises to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of Hell but can't seem to find his way around the factions in Iraq.
In offering a non-belligerent younger man and/or a woman, Democrats may be onto something--empowering Americans with the sense that real strength comes, not from blustering and bullying, but using empathy and understanding to form real connections in the world.
We don't need pills for that.
Put together with surveys showing sagging confidence in the institutions of power, they present a picture of American impotence--to either win or get out of a hopeless war, to rebuild after a natural disaster or deal with hard times. (Is Congress' stimulus bill any more than a weak dose of economic Viagra?)
Years of a smirking, swaggering George W. Bush who has failed to perform where it counts have taken a toll on American life. To compensate, he has surrounded himself with Cheney's Neo-Cons, whose judgement has been clouded by seven-year erections for which they have failed to find satisfaction or seek medical attention.
Now the political party that gave us all this is offering an aging macho figure who promises to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of Hell but can't seem to find his way around the factions in Iraq.
In offering a non-belligerent younger man and/or a woman, Democrats may be onto something--empowering Americans with the sense that real strength comes, not from blustering and bullying, but using empathy and understanding to form real connections in the world.
We don't need pills for that.
Odd Couple: Ahmadinejad and Cheney
This week the President of Iran was strutting around his nation's main uranium enrichment facility, claiming installation of 6,000 new centrifuges in addition to the existing 3,000 there--an ill-advised nose-thumbing gesture in the direction of the US and Israel.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a chronic sufferer from the need for attention on the world stage, who has been in remission since his visit to the UN last fall. With this latest turn for the TV cameras, he is showing symptoms of an acute and, for his regime, possibly life-threatening new outbreak.
Dick Cheney immediately made the diagnosis on right-wing talk radio. The Iranian President, he told Sean Hannity, is "a very dangerous man" who "has repeatedly stated that he wants to destroy Israel" and believes that "the highest honor that can befall a man is that he should die a martyr in facilitating the return of the 12th Imam. It's a radical, radical point of view."
Dr. Cheney's cure would involve surgery, military action against Iran before the end of the year, a treatment thus far successfully opposed by Bush's Secretaries of Defense and State, who favor sanctions and diplomatic pressure.
But Ahmadinejad's antics are encouraging Cheney's Neo-Cons, who take heart from William Kristol's report of his Bush interview this week suggesting the President hinted that military action against Iran was "not out of the question."
Before his earthly departure, Saddam Hussein admitted that he refused to stop bluffing about WMDs to maintain a strategic advantage against Iran. If his former antagonist is now following that course, as he well may be, he is a slow learner.
But one thing is clear: On the subject of lethal madness, Cheney and Ahmadinejad are soulmates at heart.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a chronic sufferer from the need for attention on the world stage, who has been in remission since his visit to the UN last fall. With this latest turn for the TV cameras, he is showing symptoms of an acute and, for his regime, possibly life-threatening new outbreak.
Dick Cheney immediately made the diagnosis on right-wing talk radio. The Iranian President, he told Sean Hannity, is "a very dangerous man" who "has repeatedly stated that he wants to destroy Israel" and believes that "the highest honor that can befall a man is that he should die a martyr in facilitating the return of the 12th Imam. It's a radical, radical point of view."
Dr. Cheney's cure would involve surgery, military action against Iran before the end of the year, a treatment thus far successfully opposed by Bush's Secretaries of Defense and State, who favor sanctions and diplomatic pressure.
But Ahmadinejad's antics are encouraging Cheney's Neo-Cons, who take heart from William Kristol's report of his Bush interview this week suggesting the President hinted that military action against Iran was "not out of the question."
Before his earthly departure, Saddam Hussein admitted that he refused to stop bluffing about WMDs to maintain a strategic advantage against Iran. If his former antagonist is now following that course, as he well may be, he is a slow learner.
But one thing is clear: On the subject of lethal madness, Cheney and Ahmadinejad are soulmates at heart.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Bill Clinton on the Couch
Political analysis won't do to explain why the former President is sabotaging his wife's dwindling chances for the Democratic nomination. Call in the shrinks.
Yesterday's Bill Clinton super-whopper revival of Hillary's Bosnia sniper fire story on the campaign trail in Indiana can be explained only by premature political Alzheimer's or an unconscious desire to bring her down. (Eight easily fact-checkable lies in less than a minute must be a record, even for the former Slick Willie.)
When he hurt Hillary with his "rolling the dice" comments to Charlie Rose and accused Obama of telling fairy tales about his opposition to the Iraq war, Bill Clinton might have been excused on the grounds of irrational exuberance.
When he gratuitously dragged race into the campaign after his wife's South Carolina loss by comparing Obama's win to Jesse Jackson's, Clinton could have been forgiven for spousal overreaching.
But rubbing salt into the Bosnia wound to Hillary's campaign just as it was healing takes his mischief-making to a new level that can't be explained by the former President's need for attention or diminished political judgment.
It may be too late, but somebody should put Bill Clinton on the couch and help him figure out why he is undermining the woman who stood by him in his time of crisis. No good deed goes unpunished?
Yesterday's Bill Clinton super-whopper revival of Hillary's Bosnia sniper fire story on the campaign trail in Indiana can be explained only by premature political Alzheimer's or an unconscious desire to bring her down. (Eight easily fact-checkable lies in less than a minute must be a record, even for the former Slick Willie.)
When he hurt Hillary with his "rolling the dice" comments to Charlie Rose and accused Obama of telling fairy tales about his opposition to the Iraq war, Bill Clinton might have been excused on the grounds of irrational exuberance.
When he gratuitously dragged race into the campaign after his wife's South Carolina loss by comparing Obama's win to Jesse Jackson's, Clinton could have been forgiven for spousal overreaching.
But rubbing salt into the Bosnia wound to Hillary's campaign just as it was healing takes his mischief-making to a new level that can't be explained by the former President's need for attention or diminished political judgment.
It may be too late, but somebody should put Bill Clinton on the couch and help him figure out why he is undermining the woman who stood by him in his time of crisis. No good deed goes unpunished?
McCain's Surge in the Polls
Suddenly public opinion results show John McCain leading Barack Obama as well as Hillary Clinton, and they recall the numbers of a year ago when Rudy Giuliani was beating every Republican in sight and Clinton was on her way to a coronation on the Democratic side.
In this long, long pre-election season, the pollsters and pundits should try harder to distinguish between near-term sentiment and electoral viability. Last year's wide Giuliani and Clinton leads turned out to be more about name recognition and TV-like familiarity ratings than serious thought about who would make the best president.
Isn't the current McCain bounce more about the fallout from the Obama-Clinton mud-fighting than about a sudden desire on the part of voters to see McCain in the White House? Have they fallen in love with him or are they just irritated by super-delegates, Michigan, Florida and other Democratic follies? Do these figures mean anything more than last year's did?
The polls we might want to pay attention to now are those that show Americans unhappier about the economy, the war and politicians of both parties than at any time in memory. In November, they will be deciding who has the best answers for their fears and doubts.
Meanwhile, the candidates are making pitches on "American Idol." Fascinating but, as Dick Cheney might say, so?
In this long, long pre-election season, the pollsters and pundits should try harder to distinguish between near-term sentiment and electoral viability. Last year's wide Giuliani and Clinton leads turned out to be more about name recognition and TV-like familiarity ratings than serious thought about who would make the best president.
Isn't the current McCain bounce more about the fallout from the Obama-Clinton mud-fighting than about a sudden desire on the part of voters to see McCain in the White House? Have they fallen in love with him or are they just irritated by super-delegates, Michigan, Florida and other Democratic follies? Do these figures mean anything more than last year's did?
The polls we might want to pay attention to now are those that show Americans unhappier about the economy, the war and politicians of both parties than at any time in memory. In November, they will be deciding who has the best answers for their fears and doubts.
Meanwhile, the candidates are making pitches on "American Idol." Fascinating but, as Dick Cheney might say, so?
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Iraq Skin Game
Now that President Petraeus and Vice-President Crocker have given us our marching orders, someone named George W. Bush will emerge today at the White House to rubber-stamp them, suspending troop withdrawals after this summer but sweetening the bitter medicine by cutting combat tours back to 12 months.
These actions will bring troop deployment back to where it was at the start of last year, a thousand American deaths and several hundred billions of dollars ago.
Even the good news is illusory. The tour cutbacks will affect only troops sent to Iraq in August or later. As the president of Veterans for America points out, nearly half of the Army's units are now deployed for 15 months and will stay there, making the "hollow announcement...nothing more than political posturing at the expense of our troops."
The net effect of this week's doings, as the New York Times points out quoting "senior administration and military officials" is "a bleak assessment that Iraqi forces remain unprepared to take over the mission of securing their own nation."
John McCain assures Americans the Surge has been a success, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid seems closer to the mark in saying that “based on everything we have heard, we can reach only one conclusion: With 160,000 courageous American troops serving in Iraq, President Bush has an exit strategy for just one man--himself--on Jan. 20, 2009.”
These actions will bring troop deployment back to where it was at the start of last year, a thousand American deaths and several hundred billions of dollars ago.
Even the good news is illusory. The tour cutbacks will affect only troops sent to Iraq in August or later. As the president of Veterans for America points out, nearly half of the Army's units are now deployed for 15 months and will stay there, making the "hollow announcement...nothing more than political posturing at the expense of our troops."
The net effect of this week's doings, as the New York Times points out quoting "senior administration and military officials" is "a bleak assessment that Iraqi forces remain unprepared to take over the mission of securing their own nation."
John McCain assures Americans the Surge has been a success, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid seems closer to the mark in saying that “based on everything we have heard, we can reach only one conclusion: With 160,000 courageous American troops serving in Iraq, President Bush has an exit strategy for just one man--himself--on Jan. 20, 2009.”
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Proof That God Exists
Amid all the evidence that the world is a random hellhole, there is sometimes a small cosmic joke. Consider today's news about Joe Lieberman.
In August 2006, as Connecticut Democrats were preparing to shed his sanctimonious carcass in their party primary, George W. Bush's favorite toady charged that anti-war voters had sabotaged his web site the day before.
Now, the FBI has reluctantly released results of its investigation of this weighty national security matter to the Stamford Advocate:
"(T)he site crashed because Lieberman officials continually exceeded a configured limit of 100 e-mails per hour the night before the primary.
"'The system administrator misinterpreted the root cause,' the memo stated. 'The system administrator finally declared the server was being attacked and the Lieberman campaign accused the Ned Lamont campaign. The news reported this on Aug. 8, 2006, causing additional Web traffic to visit the site.
"'The additional Web traffic then overwhelmed the Web server...Web traffic pattern analysis reports and Web logging that was available did not demonstrate traffic that was indicative of a denial-of-service attack.'"
Sounds perfectly consistant with Sen. Joe's modus operandi in urging a US attack on Iran for the past year.
In August 2006, as Connecticut Democrats were preparing to shed his sanctimonious carcass in their party primary, George W. Bush's favorite toady charged that anti-war voters had sabotaged his web site the day before.
Now, the FBI has reluctantly released results of its investigation of this weighty national security matter to the Stamford Advocate:
"(T)he site crashed because Lieberman officials continually exceeded a configured limit of 100 e-mails per hour the night before the primary.
"'The system administrator misinterpreted the root cause,' the memo stated. 'The system administrator finally declared the server was being attacked and the Lieberman campaign accused the Ned Lamont campaign. The news reported this on Aug. 8, 2006, causing additional Web traffic to visit the site.
"'The additional Web traffic then overwhelmed the Web server...Web traffic pattern analysis reports and Web logging that was available did not demonstrate traffic that was indicative of a denial-of-service attack.'"
Sounds perfectly consistant with Sen. Joe's modus operandi in urging a US attack on Iran for the past year.
Boxer's Breakthrough
You have to get to the last two paragraphs of the Washington Post story on yesterday's hearings to learn that Gen. David Petraeus actually heard something one of the US Senators was saying:
"The United States was still funding the roughly 90,000 Sunni security volunteers who Maliki's Shiite-dominated government is reluctant to put on its payroll, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) told Petraeus. 'I'm just asking you why you would object to asking [Iraq] to pay for that entire program, given all we are giving them in blood and everything else.'
"'It is a very fair question,' Petraeus responded, 'and I think that if there's anything that the ambassador and I will take back to Iraq candidly after this morning's session and this afternoon's is, in fact, to ask those kinds of questions more directly.'"
Very noblesse oblige of our Middle East proconsul to acknowledge that, after all those long hours, something actually registered behind that stony stare as the plebians were ranting about his management of the empire's affairs.
If Petraeus asks politely enough, maybe Maliki will also agree to give him some advance notice the next time he decides to play George Washington in Basra and draw us into bailing him out--at our expense, of course.
"The United States was still funding the roughly 90,000 Sunni security volunteers who Maliki's Shiite-dominated government is reluctant to put on its payroll, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) told Petraeus. 'I'm just asking you why you would object to asking [Iraq] to pay for that entire program, given all we are giving them in blood and everything else.'
"'It is a very fair question,' Petraeus responded, 'and I think that if there's anything that the ambassador and I will take back to Iraq candidly after this morning's session and this afternoon's is, in fact, to ask those kinds of questions more directly.'"
Very noblesse oblige of our Middle East proconsul to acknowledge that, after all those long hours, something actually registered behind that stony stare as the plebians were ranting about his management of the empire's affairs.
If Petraeus asks politely enough, maybe Maliki will also agree to give him some advance notice the next time he decides to play George Washington in Basra and draw us into bailing him out--at our expense, of course.
The Petraeus-Crocker Autocracy
The nation's elected lawmakers of both parties spent yesterday pleading with two bureaucrats to give them some idea of when our young people will stop being killed and maimed thousands of miles from home.
Who empowered David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker to make the judgement that progress in Iraq was “fragile and reversible” and that consideration of any new withdrawals of American troops be delayed until the fall?
If George W. Bush has delegated these powers to two unelected employees of the US government, he is in dereliction of his duty as President. Why isn't he answering the questions and being held to account for over 4000 lives and billions of dollars? And why is Congress acceding to his budget demands as if they had no choice but to do exactly what he wants when he is not doing what the Constitution requires him to do?
Where is the public outrage over this charade of how government should work? Where are the protesters who should be filling the streets? Why are the Democrats who control the legislative branch deferring to this parody of how democracy should work?
While these two factotums try to barter and bribe Iraqis into some semblance of civilized governance, why are they being allowed to make a mockery of our own?
Who empowered David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker to make the judgement that progress in Iraq was “fragile and reversible” and that consideration of any new withdrawals of American troops be delayed until the fall?
If George W. Bush has delegated these powers to two unelected employees of the US government, he is in dereliction of his duty as President. Why isn't he answering the questions and being held to account for over 4000 lives and billions of dollars? And why is Congress acceding to his budget demands as if they had no choice but to do exactly what he wants when he is not doing what the Constitution requires him to do?
Where is the public outrage over this charade of how government should work? Where are the protesters who should be filling the streets? Why are the Democrats who control the legislative branch deferring to this parody of how democracy should work?
While these two factotums try to barter and bribe Iraqis into some semblance of civilized governance, why are they being allowed to make a mockery of our own?
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Iraq Farewell Tour
Today, with the next President among the questioners, the stars of the Iraq spectacle come to Capitol Hill for their final performance of the Bush era.
Knowing that, unless McCain walks on water in November, the time for an honest reckoning is here, how will David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker face the chasm between Bush intransigence and an Obama (or Clinton) mandate to bring down the curtain?
"Our experience in Iraq has repeatedly shown that projecting too far into the future is not just difficult, it can be misleading and even hazardous," Gen. David Petraeus told Congress last September. "The events of the past six months underscore that point."
But the time for adlibbing is gone, and the two maestros of the Maliki show are going to have to explain the recent misadventure in Basra--the botched offensive against the militias, the mass desertions in the Iraqi forces and the intervention of Iran in temporarily reining in al-Sadr.
Having bought off Sunnis in Anbar, how much will it take to pay off Shiites in Basra, and what are the chances they will stay bought?
The Republicans up for reelection are hearing voters' footsteps. At a hearing last week, Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman asked, "How do we get out of this mess?" A colleague, who preferred anonymity, added "We can't just say we're coasting through and waiting for the next president."
After his triumphant tour of past glories, John McCain is still in some imaginary realm, expressing support for the Basra attack but, on Fox News, suggesting that "al-Maliki should have waited until fighting subsided in Mosul.
“Look, I didn’t particularly like the outcome of this thing, but I am convinced that we now have a government that is governing with some effect and a military that is functioning very effectively.”
As the American death toll starts rising again, McCain won't be asking any tough questions today, but the Democrats who expect to take over the White House and expand their control of Congress next year should be insisting on straight answers now.
Knowing that, unless McCain walks on water in November, the time for an honest reckoning is here, how will David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker face the chasm between Bush intransigence and an Obama (or Clinton) mandate to bring down the curtain?
"Our experience in Iraq has repeatedly shown that projecting too far into the future is not just difficult, it can be misleading and even hazardous," Gen. David Petraeus told Congress last September. "The events of the past six months underscore that point."
But the time for adlibbing is gone, and the two maestros of the Maliki show are going to have to explain the recent misadventure in Basra--the botched offensive against the militias, the mass desertions in the Iraqi forces and the intervention of Iran in temporarily reining in al-Sadr.
Having bought off Sunnis in Anbar, how much will it take to pay off Shiites in Basra, and what are the chances they will stay bought?
The Republicans up for reelection are hearing voters' footsteps. At a hearing last week, Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman asked, "How do we get out of this mess?" A colleague, who preferred anonymity, added "We can't just say we're coasting through and waiting for the next president."
After his triumphant tour of past glories, John McCain is still in some imaginary realm, expressing support for the Basra attack but, on Fox News, suggesting that "al-Maliki should have waited until fighting subsided in Mosul.
“Look, I didn’t particularly like the outcome of this thing, but I am convinced that we now have a government that is governing with some effect and a military that is functioning very effectively.”
As the American death toll starts rising again, McCain won't be asking any tough questions today, but the Democrats who expect to take over the White House and expand their control of Congress next year should be insisting on straight answers now.
Monday, April 07, 2008
The Least of Obama's Problems
William Kristol, who writes as if he were being paid by the word, today gives us a diary of his recent expense-account travels and reports "that lots of conservatives and Republicans expect Barack Obama to be our next president."
But undaunted, Kristol dredges up "an experienced Democratic operative" who thinks McCain is going to win with this brilliant analysis:
"Obama isn’t growing in stature. Once I thought he could be Jimmy Carter, but now he reminds me more of Michael Dukakis with the flag lapel thing and defending Wright. Plus he doesn’t have a clue how to talk to the middle class. He’s in the Stevenson reform mold out of Illinois, with a dash of Harvard disease thrown in.”
In a close race, Kristol comforts his fellow conservatives, that “dash of Harvard disease” could be the difference.
Comparing Obama, a once-in-a-lifetime political talent, to the clueless Carter and lead-footed Dukakis, is grasping at straws and expecting an electorate, panicky about the economy and worn out by the war, to find McCain's version of Bush Lite irresistible borders on the delusional.
Between now and November, Democrats have hard work to do to assure retaking the White House, but overcoming Obama's Harvardness is not high on the list. After all, the voters didn't hold George W. Bush's Yale background against him, and he proved that a President's college education ia no measure of how he will do in office.
But undaunted, Kristol dredges up "an experienced Democratic operative" who thinks McCain is going to win with this brilliant analysis:
"Obama isn’t growing in stature. Once I thought he could be Jimmy Carter, but now he reminds me more of Michael Dukakis with the flag lapel thing and defending Wright. Plus he doesn’t have a clue how to talk to the middle class. He’s in the Stevenson reform mold out of Illinois, with a dash of Harvard disease thrown in.”
In a close race, Kristol comforts his fellow conservatives, that “dash of Harvard disease” could be the difference.
Comparing Obama, a once-in-a-lifetime political talent, to the clueless Carter and lead-footed Dukakis, is grasping at straws and expecting an electorate, panicky about the economy and worn out by the war, to find McCain's version of Bush Lite irresistible borders on the delusional.
Between now and November, Democrats have hard work to do to assure retaking the White House, but overcoming Obama's Harvardness is not high on the list. After all, the voters didn't hold George W. Bush's Yale background against him, and he proved that a President's college education ia no measure of how he will do in office.
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Stupidity Plus
Gen. Tommy Franks was off the mark when he called Douglas Feith the dumbest effing guy on the planet. On 60 Minutes tonight, Feith showed that stupidity alone is not enough to describe a clueless academic intoxicated by power and willing to stoop to intellectual dishonesty that would shame any used-car salesman
"What we did after 9/11," he told Steve Kroft, "was look broadly at the international terrorist network from which the next attack on the United States might come. And we did not focus narrowly only on the people who were specifically responsible for 9/11. Our main goal was preventing the next attack."
"So you're saying," an incredulous Kroft followed up by asking, "you didn't think it was that important to go after the people who were responsible for it--more important to go after people who weren't responsible for it?"
Feith, who helped cook the intelligence to justify the invasion, was pimping his doorstop book that blames everyone else, especially L. Paul Bremer, who ran the Iraq occupation for the first two years, for the ensuing fiasco.
If he had had his way, Feith claims, he would have turned the country over to con man Ahmad Chalabi, who fed him and his Neo-Con rubes $33 million of false information to lie us into the war.
Dumb isn't enough. Try shameless, arrogant and deceitful. There is at least one like him on most campuses. Just our luck that this specimen ended up in Rumsfeld's Defense Department.
"What we did after 9/11," he told Steve Kroft, "was look broadly at the international terrorist network from which the next attack on the United States might come. And we did not focus narrowly only on the people who were specifically responsible for 9/11. Our main goal was preventing the next attack."
"So you're saying," an incredulous Kroft followed up by asking, "you didn't think it was that important to go after the people who were responsible for it--more important to go after people who weren't responsible for it?"
Feith, who helped cook the intelligence to justify the invasion, was pimping his doorstop book that blames everyone else, especially L. Paul Bremer, who ran the Iraq occupation for the first two years, for the ensuing fiasco.
If he had had his way, Feith claims, he would have turned the country over to con man Ahmad Chalabi, who fed him and his Neo-Con rubes $33 million of false information to lie us into the war.
Dumb isn't enough. Try shameless, arrogant and deceitful. There is at least one like him on most campuses. Just our luck that this specimen ended up in Rumsfeld's Defense Department.
Death by Blogging
"In Web World of 24/7 Stress, Writers Blog Till They Drop" reads the headline in today's New York Times for a report on "digital sweatshops" that evoke images of a century ago that led to the rise of unions to protect exploited factory workers.
The documentation is scant, but the idea will nonetheless appeal to a population of writers with a congenital need to see and expose hidden evil forces in society:
"A growing work force of home-office laborers and entrepreneurs, armed with computers and smartphones and wired to the hilt, are toiling under great physical and emotional stress created by the around-the-clock Internet economy that demands a constant stream of news and comment.
"Of course, the bloggers can work elsewhere, and they profess a love of the nonstop action and perhaps the chance to create a global media outlet without a major up-front investment. At the same time, some are starting to wonder if something has gone very wrong. In the last few months, two among their ranks have died suddenly..."
The piece is a throwback to the Vance Packard school of journalism of half a century ago, when excitable writers strung together a few anecdotes and statistics to agitate readers with best-sellers such as "The Hidden Persuaders," "The Status Seekers" and "The Waste Makers."
The net effect, one publisher noted back then, was to alarm the public at the discovery that society is organized.
It would be heartless to minimize the stress that some full-time bloggers feel, but there is something odd about finding a dark side to what is a labor of love and a form of self-expression that was not available to previous generations.
Better pay and working hours for piecework bloggers, by all means, but MSM like the Times may want to concentrate on recognizing and honoring their efforts rather than drumming up sob stories about them.
The documentation is scant, but the idea will nonetheless appeal to a population of writers with a congenital need to see and expose hidden evil forces in society:
"A growing work force of home-office laborers and entrepreneurs, armed with computers and smartphones and wired to the hilt, are toiling under great physical and emotional stress created by the around-the-clock Internet economy that demands a constant stream of news and comment.
"Of course, the bloggers can work elsewhere, and they profess a love of the nonstop action and perhaps the chance to create a global media outlet without a major up-front investment. At the same time, some are starting to wonder if something has gone very wrong. In the last few months, two among their ranks have died suddenly..."
The piece is a throwback to the Vance Packard school of journalism of half a century ago, when excitable writers strung together a few anecdotes and statistics to agitate readers with best-sellers such as "The Hidden Persuaders," "The Status Seekers" and "The Waste Makers."
The net effect, one publisher noted back then, was to alarm the public at the discovery that society is organized.
It would be heartless to minimize the stress that some full-time bloggers feel, but there is something odd about finding a dark side to what is a labor of love and a form of self-expression that was not available to previous generations.
Better pay and working hours for piecework bloggers, by all means, but MSM like the Times may want to concentrate on recognizing and honoring their efforts rather than drumming up sob stories about them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)