Gray Matter

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

The Kitchen Sink Strategy

It’s about time that I set the record straight.

Despite my vast experience and Mensa-worthy intelligence, the public seems enthralled by the soaring rhetoric and surface appeal of my rival bloggers.

Since being raised modestly by working class parents, I have devoted my life to poking fun at the foibles and hypocrisies of the worlds of politics and government.

Who can deny that I am best prepared for a career as an online political humorist? I attended the same high school as Art Buchwald and the same college as Dave Barry! My career in journalism and media relations has given me unparalleled insight into the compromises and petty struggles that are endemic malignancies on the authority figures and institutions of power of our time.

Now that I am toiling away day and night to share my insights with the masses surely the world will recognize that I am entitled to my rightful place as blogger extraordinaire despite its apparent attraction to the pretty words of my clearly less deserving competition.

So after careful consultation with my coterie of respected advisors, I have decided to launch my “kitchen sink” strategy to point out the flaws of these pretenders who dare challenge my blogger preeminence.

Before I start, let me state clearly and unequivocally that I have the utmost respect for all of my peers in the blogosphere. They are all extremely accomplished and, if I wasn’t in this race, I would passionately and energetically support whichever one of them wins the endorsement of the public.

But you would have to be deaf, dumb and blind (not that there’s anything wrong with that!) not to recognize that I am the most qualified and therefore undeniably entitled to ascend to the throne of top blogger.

For starters, let’s take a look at my distinguished colleague from Madison, Ed Garvey. I welcome Ed’s contribution to the public discourse; his liberal credentials and institutional memory are assets that we all should treasure.

But surely I am not the only one to notice that Ed spent years working for one of those unions representing athletes. With all the controversy surrounding sports these days, is it really much of a stretch to imagine Ed sticking a syringe into the butt of Roger Clemens? Think about it?

I hereby declare that I have never injected an athlete with performance enhancing chemicals. Et tu, Ed?

Next, I call your attention to Bill Christofferson, a smart and talented former journalist and political operative who I have the utmost admiration for. Nobody gets under the skin of Wisconsin’s conservatives more than Bill. They blame him for every tactic undertaken by the state’s Democrats and assorted progressives ranging from creating 527 groups to masterminding Jim Doyle’s election as governor.

But isn’t it time that we reject the politics of the past? Certainly nobody has ever compared me to Rasputin and I doubt Charlie Sykes or Mark Belling even know my name!

Then there’s James Rowen, another worthy blogger whose contributions on politics and the environment are knowledgeable and thought-provoking.

However, it has been brought to my attention that years ago Jim became engaged to, and later married, the daughter of former Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota, who was the Democratic nominee for president in 1972. Can we really read his words without the image of Sen. McGovern drifting into our thoughts? Nepotism is such an unpleasant word but I’m just saying.

Let there be no doubt that nobody in my family has ever accomplished anything worthwhile so I don’t stand on anybody’s shoulders but my own (and that’s a feat I challenge anyone to try!).

I am so tired of the mainstream media giving those other bloggers a free ride. I mean does it take a skit on Saturday Night Live to bring a little fairness to this competition? Does Mr. Garvey want a mocha latte? Does Mr. Christofferson need a pillow? Does Mr. Rowen care for a glass of charcoal-filtered tap water (I can only imagine what he’d say if we handed him water in a plastic bottle!).

So I call on all good people in search of honest, independent, thoughtful entertainment on the internet. This is my destiny and you need look no further.

(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Monday, February 25, 2008

Hillary’s bipolar campaign

So which is it?

Is Hillary Clinton choosing to go negative against Barack Obama, as in attacking him for “plagiarizing” the words of his friend and campaign co-chair, Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts?

Or is she taking the high road and praising her opponent as she did when she said how “proud” she is to be in the race with Obama?

Clinton’s vitriolic attack on Obama yesterday for distributing fliers that dared to criticize her positions on health care and trade (“Shame on you, Barack Obama”), comparing his tactics to “Karl Rove and the Republicans,” suggests that she is willing to go nuclear in a desperate effort to salvage her campaign with victories in Texas and Ohio next week.

It makes you long for the good old days, like last November and December, when she withstood barbs from her male opponents with class and humor, leaving it to her husband and other surrogates to call attention to how the guys were ganging up on the one woman in the race.

Sen. Clinton’s mood swings create the appearance of a campaign off its medication. You would think after her “Xerox” line drew boos and her graceful “I’m so proud” comment generated her most enthusiastic response at last week’s debate in Texas, she would have learned a lesson.

It’s certainly not unusual for people with political ambitions to lose touch with reality. By most accounts, Richard Nixon was one whacked-out dude. And then there was Ross Perot, who said there was some kind of conspiracy to interfere with his daughter's wedding towards the end of his third party candidacy. Funny how we haven’t heard much from him since!

Those close to Hillary always stress what a normal and decent person she is, remembering their birthdays and asking about their families. How sad to see her morph into the Captain Queeg of 2008.

Saturday Night Live’s opening skit poked fun at Clinton’s increasingly bizarre rationalization of her string of losses. But the writing is on the wall. Even her husband has said that wins in Texas and Ohio were absolutely necessary for Clinton to continue.

Let’s open our hearts to Hillary. May she find comfort in her strong family and close friends, when it comes time to step aside and endorse Obama for the good of her party and nation. At some point, however, it may be necessary for a good old fashioned intervention.

I hear Dr. Phil is good at this sort of thing.

(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

A Not So Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Elections, like sports, can be incredibly entertaining, especially when the outcome is in doubt. Both, however, require the proverbial “level playing field” which is why attempts to gain an unfair advantage or improperly influence the outcome of either are so infuriating.

Whether it’s the use of steroids by overpaid athletes or misdeeds by overly-enthusiastic campaign supporters, it’s dishonest and it ain’t right.

So when I heard a few conservative voters say that they had held their noses and voted for Hillary Clinton since she would be the easier candidate for the Republicans to defeat in November, I was troubled.

Yesterday morning, I heard several callers to the morning talk show on WTMJ-AM say that they had voted for Clinton to undermine the Democratic primary and urged others, including host Charlie Sykes, to do the same.

One recommended that Sykes should buy a bar of soap on the way to the polls so that he could take a shower after voting for Clinton since the very idea of doing so was so distasteful.

Later, I noticed that Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Crocker Stephenson reported on the paper’s election blog that a Republican voter had told him that he had voted for Clinton to improve his party’s chances in the fall.

Suddenly I began to suspect some curious right wing conspiracy was afloat to, of all things, benefit Hillary Clinton. An especially ironic development given that she once said such a conspiracy was responsible for the many investigations of her husband’s administration.

Surely there weren’t too many voters who were engaging in this nefarious enterprise but if the election turned out to be as close as some suspected then, who knows, maybe these cranky Republicans would ultimately influence the selection of the Democratic candidate for president!

We now know that I didn’t need to worry.

Yesterday’s Wisconsin primary represented a stunning victory for Barack Obama. He won the state 58% to 41%. Not so shabby. He won by similar margins in Milwaukee, Madison and Green Bay, all three of the major Democratic strongholds in the state. He won or held his own across demographic categories only ceding older women to Clinton.

The last 36 hours of the campaign were not pretty. The Clinton side escalated its charges against Obama by attacking him for plagiarizing part of the speech he delivered to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin’s dinner on Saturday from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, an Obama friend and supporter.

Most acknowledge this incident is largely a tempest in a teapot but it recalls the ill-fated presidential campaign of Sen. Joe Biden in 1988 that collapsed following the disclosure that he had extensively borrowed language from a British politician.

Obama’s wife Michelle didn’t do her husband much good when she said in Milwaukee on Monday that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.” You can imagine the fun the Republicans will have with that. Likely Republican nominee John McCain was quick to have his wife tell the press that she has always been proud of her country. Jeesh, are they kidding me?

The delegate race is still close and Obama’s nomination is still not certain. But watching Clinton’s campaign struggle with its message while Obama’s continues to inspire seems to hint at where this is heading. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd puts her unique spin on Hillary Clinton’s flaws at this juncture.

Dowd’s column concludes with a punchline that nicely sums up how this race appears to be drifting away from Clinton. “Given the way the Clintons unfairly turn the tables, we’re only moments away from Hillary asking Obama: ‘Can’t you control your spouse?’”

Touché, Mo!

(4) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Saturday, February 16, 2008

The Gloves Come off

They say politics ain’t beanbag (confused? think hackey sack) so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the gloves have come off in the Democratic race for President. Hillary Clinton’s campaign is running ads here in Wisconsin attacking Barack Obama for not agreeing to debate and for falling short of promising universal health care coverage for all Americans.

The interesting thing is that she is basically correct on the merits but it doesn’t seem to matter. Obama deftly dismisses her criticisms as old-style politics and calls attention to her past support for NAFTA and bankruptcy reform which were not in the best interests of the poor and middle class.

His rhetorical jujitsu is something to behold. He is such a natural politician, combining a remarkable personal history with an outstanding command of policy and a riveting speaking style that people are falling victim to the Obama swoon.

At one time, Bill Clinton was the reigning practitioner of this art. As recently as fall, 2006, the former President had the touch. He filled the Milwaukee Theatre at a rally in support of Gov. Jim Doyle’s bid for reelection and he was in fine form. The place rocked as Bill segued from praising Doyle to critiquing President Bush and the crowd loved him (the Clinton swoon was in the air).

Interestingly, Barack Obama also addressed a crowd here in support of Doyle’s reelection at Pere Marquette Park and his eloquence and ability to inspire was apparent.

Shift back to the present and the bloom seems off the Clinton rose; a development nobody could have predicted mere weeks ago. Obama is the rock star at this point in time and Bill Clinton seems like yesterday’s news.

Obama drew 18,000 to the Kohl Center in Madison, and thousands more in Milwaukee, Waukesha, Racine, Green Bay and everywhere he goes. President Clinton, the most popular Democrat since John F. Kennedy, has only been drawing much smaller crowds including 2-300 here in Milwaukee on Thursday.

Arguably, Bill Clinton has only himself to blame with comments about Obama like the “fairy tale” remark in New Hampshire and the comparison to Jesse Jackson in South Carolina. Here in Wisconsin he’s been more careful. He gave a fine speech Thursday but he comes across as a link to the past and that’s not a formula for success this year.

Obama still needs to finish strong and I know better than to count out the Clintons but there’s an undeniable feeling in the air that this Obama thing is the real deal.

The ad wars are nicely documented here by the New York Times. If you want to dig further and try to make sense of the differences on health care reform check out http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/theyve_got_you_covered.html.

Finally, Doyle’s appearance on Hardball with Chris Matthews is worth watching. Wisconsin is the center of the political universe for a few days so enjoy the ride.

Obama and Clinton are both scheduled to speak at tonight’s Democratic dinner at the Midwest Airlines Center. The fireworks may be visible all the way to Superior.

(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Thursday, February 14, 2008

It Doesn’t Take a Weatherman

The deluge has begun.

In case you haven’t noticed, Wisconsin’s primary is next Tuesday so our state is suddenly drawing attention from the candidates and the national media.

On some levels the race for the Democratic nomination is too close to call and nobody expects either candidate to deliver a decisive blow for at least for a month or so until Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania have had their say.

Those states, some say, are a firewall for Hillary Clinton and if she finishes strong she can still establish herself as the likely candidate prior to the convention in August.

But that’s not how it looks from here in the dairy state on Valentines’ Day. The momentum of the Obama campaign is palpable in Wisconsin and the evidence that he will win here is everywhere.

The crowds he is turning out across the state are amazing. The ads he is running are compelling. The money he is raising and the endorsements he is gathering are impressive. The groundswell of support for the first term senator from Illinois is dramatic and authentic.

Clinton’s campaign is struggling to reinvent her as the underdog insurgent in this race. I like and respect Hillary but this is yet another sign that she is destined to finish second. Not only are the voters clamoring for change but, perhaps more significantly, they are seeking authenticity. Both candidates are incredibly bright, hardworking and accomplished but Clinton loses to Obama on the intangible of being in sync with the times.

On Tuesday, Obama drew 18,000 to the Kohl Center in Madison with hundreds more in the Pavilion next door watching on two giant video screens. I drove from Milwaukee with my daughter and one of her friends and we ended up in the overflow.

The two teenagers with me were impressed by Obama’s speech and were excited that we were able to squeeze into the main arena after he was finished so they could catch a glimpse of the politician. What better sign of his impact? He is truly the rock star candidate.

Obama continued his march across the state on Wednesday with appearances in Janesville, Waukesha and Racine. I made it to the Waukesha Expo Center to see what effect he’d have on a smaller crowd in a largely Republican community. He delivered with flying colors. The nearly 2000 in the audience were treated to a tour d’ force speech combining detailed policy specifics with inspirational oratory. If people arrived with an open mind, the chances are good that he closed the deal.

Former President Bill Clinton addressed a much smaller crowd this morning at Milwaukee’s Italian Community Center. I couldn’t stay away because I was curious to see what he would say and what impact he would have on his audience.

Only part of the ballroom was filled, maybe two hundred. Many of those gathered appeared to be devoted supporters of Hillary Clinton and he gave a fine speech highlighting her accomplishments and pointing out her prescriptions for the future.

He took only the mildest of potshots at Obama. Tellingly, he contrasted the “excitement of the new” with “empowerment of all.” A neat turn of the phrase, yes, but voters seem to want both and that is the appeal of Obama.

The key substantive difference between Obama and Clinton revolves around their healthcare reform proposals and this is where a lot of people’s eyes glaze over. Both insist they would provide universal coverage but Clinton is accusing Obama of falling short of that goal. Since you’ve read this far, I will try to explain the nuance.

Clinton’s proposal includes a requirement that everyone sign up for some form of health insurance. Obama’s proposal mandates coverage for all children but avoids that requirement for adults. He says affordable health care will be offered to everyone who wants it.

This is not an insignificant difference. Clinton insists that Obama’s plan would leave millions of Americans without coverage. Princeton University economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman agrees and adds that the Obama plan will nearly be as expensive.

But as Hillary Clinton knows as well as anyone getting a national healthcare proposal through Congress requires compromise. She was unwilling to broker a deal in her husband’s first term even rebuffing Congressional leaders of her own party including Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan, George Mitchell, and Bill Bradley.

Unsurprisingly, many of the Democrats who were in Congress at the time are supporting Obama including Congressman Jim Cooper of Tennessee. He struggled to craft a more moderate health care reform plan at the time and experienced the Clinton stonewall firsthand.

True believers in health care reform may argue that her plan is better. They may also wish Dennis Kucinich became the party nominee since he was the only one to support the single payer approach that would replace all private insurance with a government plan. But, as I read it, Obama not only favors comprehensive reform but also has crafted a plan he can defend through the November election and beyond.

As I left I was asked if I was willing to sign up as a volunteer for Hillary. I demurred. Was I at least planning to vote for her, I was asked. Again, I demurred. The woman was aghast. Had I been sent here by the other side, she asked. Oh my God, I thought, I’ve ruined her day.

Things do not look good for Hillary here in Wisconsin. But the Democrats seem to have a winner in Barack Obama. Bill Clinton was famously influenced by John Kennedy and the parallels between the young Massachusetts senator and Obama can not be lost on him. In time, the party will coalesce behind him and begin focusing on November.

(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink