Dude!
How many caught President Obama on “The Daily Show” Wednesday night with Jon Stewart? Reviews Thursday are somewhat mixed but then, how much heavy lifting are you really going to do on a comedy show, right? One exchange, perhaps, was symptomatic. Asked by Stewart about his administration’s performance on the economy, Obama claimed credit for stabilizing the financial system, the stock market and the overall economy — all at less than half the cost (in terms of U.S. gross domestic product) of fixing the S&L crisis in the 1980s, which by comparison was smaller and more localized than the recent recession. “I’d say we’ll take that,” the president said confidently.
He should’ve stopped while he was ahead. In the next breath, trying to credit his former economics adviser, Obama teed up a line no professional funny man could miss if he tried: “Larry Summers did a heckuva job …” As the studio audience started cracking up, Stewart pounced, deadpanning: “You don’t wanna use that phrase, dude!” Obama tried to yuk it off as an intended pun, but inadvertently comparing his performance on the economy to President Bush’s on Hurricane Katrina — using the same word to reference an ineffective underling — surely wasn’t the objective in what was supposed to be a friendly sit-down with Stewart.
He’s an expert
Juan Williams’ firing by NPR this week looks like it’ll be more than the typical, three-day Washington story. NPR terminated Williams as a “news analyst” after his remarks on Fox News Channel’s “The O’Reilly Factor” — basically, that seeing people dressed in Muslim garb during air travel caused him momentary anxiety and fear, given the realities of 9-11. Williams and millions of Americans. That was too much honesty for the higher-ups at NPR, who bravely cashiered Williams, a 10-year veteran, over the phone. There’s been lots of speculation that NPR long has wanted to be rid of Williams because he’s also a regular contributor on Fox, and that there was pressure from NPR’s liberal-leaning contributors to give him the axe.
Some of the back-and-forth over Williams is interesting, some is silly — like The (London) Guardian’s Michael Tomasky, who blogs that Williams basically had it coming. No self-respecting liberal would ever appear on Fox, Tomasky writes. “Fox News wants liberalism to perish from the face of the earth,” Tomasky writes. “Going on their air on a regular basis and lending your name and reputation to their ideological razzle-dazzle is like agreeing to be the regular kulak guest columnist at Pravda in 1929. For ‘balance’.” Here’s the silly part: Several paragraphs earlier in the same post, Tomasky writes he doesn’t watch Fox. So, you might ask, how would Tomasky know anything about Fox’s “balance” or Williams’ role as a contributor? Good question.
Hello, Anita?
OK, so here’s a follow-up question to reports Virginia Thomas, wife of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, left a voice message on the office phone of Anita Hill, urging Hill to apologize for accusing the justice of sexual harassment during his 1991 Senate confirmation hearing: Did Mrs. Thomas staff that one by Justice Thomas?
The story almost certainly will generate a buzz for at least a few days, mostly because it’s just so bizarre — the kind of publicity the quite-private justice could do without. He’s been on the court nearly 20 years and probably wishes the Anita Hill controversy had stayed in the rear-view mirror. So, what possessed his wife to call Hill, now a professor at Brandeis University in Boston, and assert that Hill should “consider an apology” and a “full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband”? Mrs. Thomas’ message (which she confirms leaving) said Hill should prayerfully consider apologizing and concluded with a sunny, “OK, have a nice day.”
Hill, born in Oklahoma and a former University of Oklahoma law professor, thought the message was a prank at first and then turned the recording over to campus police. She said she has nothing to apologize for and said that while Mrs. Thomas claims she meant no offense, she considers the call offensive and accusatory. Lots of people probably figured they’d heard the last of the Hill-Thomas controversy. Obviously not.
And your mama wears galoshes!
Kudos to Rand Paul, the Republican running for U.S. Senate in Kentucky. When his debate with Democrat Jack Conway ended Sunday night, Paul exited stage left without shaking Conway’s hand. That, after a bitter debate low-lighted by an exchange over a Conway campaign ad claiming Paul, as a student at Baylor University, belonged to a secret society that mocked Christianity and that one time Paul and another student bound and blindfolded a woman and tried to make her bow down to their god, “Aqua Buddha.”
Paul lit into Conway. “You know how we tell when you’re lying?” Paul asked, referring to Conway. “When your lips are moving. You’re accusing me of crimes. … You’re going to stand there and accuse me of a crime from 30 years ago from some anonymous source? How ridiculous are you? You embarrass this race,” he said. “Run a race like a man … instead of calling me names.”
Well now. The point isn’t Conway’s claim, Paul’s alleged collegiate exuberance or the relevance to Kentucky. It’s Paul’s refusal have a bunch of gunk dumped all over him and then pretend to like the smell. Politicians do it all the time: call each other every imaginable name, dig up muck (or stuff that’s muck-like) and spew it all around — and then shake hands. Really? Say this for Rand Paul: He was angry, but it was real.
Fire the communications staff!
You see it all the time in politics: Whenever things aren’t going well for a president or a party, they blame poor communications. “Voters didn’t understand our message,” is the familiar refrain. President Obama is playing that tune right now. In a New York Times Magazine piece due out Sunday, Obama reportedly says White House inattention to message and the public’s perceptions is the reason his administration has struggled in recent months. No surprise. Obama has to point to the message, PR and the voters themselves. Otherwise, the president would have to blame his policies. And politicians don’t do that.
But guess what: It is the policy. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released this week showed 55 percent of those surveyed don’t agree with Obama on the issues, compared to 42 percent who agree. Perhaps to underscore the point, the same poll showed 59 percent say Obama has the personality and leadership skills a president needs. People like Obama; it’s his policies they can’t stomach. That’s not a problem with message or with the communications staff. It’s a policy problem.
Going to pot
Democrats running for governor and U.S. Senate in California might get a boost from a ballot initiative that would make possessing and growing marijuana legal. Politico reports experts believe Proposition 19 will drive younger-voter turnout, which should help Barbara Boxer, running for Senate re-election, and Jerry Brown, running for governor. The state’s Democratic Party is neutral on the “Just Say Now” measure, and Brown, Boxer and fellow U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein oppose it. Still, analysts believe it will help Brown and Boxer because recent polling shows the under-40 demographic supports pot legalization 59 percent to 33 percent. Of course, that assumes pot enthusiasts actually get to the polls to vote.
What he meant was …
From the “My Collar Feels a Couple of Sizes Too Small Dept.”: Illinois Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias, on Sunday’s “Meet The Press,” trying to explain loans from his family’s bank to underworld figures. Three times NBC’s David Gregory asked Giannoulias whether he knew crime figures were getting loans from his bank, and three times Giannoulias offered dissembling answers. Twice the candidate said he and other bank officials didn’t know the extent of the loan recipients’ “activities.” Gulp! That sounds like Giannoulias knew these folks were crooks but didn’t know how crooked, and thus extended them loans. Stay tuned.
Prized possession
Talk about a study in contrasts. On Friday jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for trying to bring greater personal freedom and human rights to his homeland — efforts that currently have him serving an 11-year sentence in a Chinese jail. Liu has been in and out of prison over the years for his activities. He’s just the third Nobel winner to receive the award while imprisoned, and Chinese officials welcomed the news by implementing a blackout on his selection inside the country. Now the contrast — the one between Liu, recognized for a life of self-sacrificial (and dangerous) work for individual liberty, and last year’s winner, President Obama, recognized for … well, the potential to do great things.
Not a witch
Republican Christine O’Donnell has her work cut out in her run for Delaware’s open U.S. Senate seat. Democrats make up about 47 percent of the state’s registered voters, Republicans just 29 percent. Barack Obama captured about 62 percent of Delaware’s votes in 2008. So what is the message in O’Donnell’s first major ad buy of the campaign? That she’s not a witch.
Now, there’s a reason for that. Since winning her party’s nomination last month, O’Donnell has been bedeviled by video of herself from years ago, including a 1999 spot where she’s talking with cable host Bill Maher about “dabbling” in witchcraft when she was a high schooler. So, in a spot produced by Fred Davis, whose uncle is U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, O’Donnell tries to put the witch thing behind her. “I’m not a witch,” O’Donnell says, looking straight into the camera. She says she’s “nothing you’ve heard,” alluding to opposition spin that she’s extreme, nutty or extremely nutty. “I’m you.” The 30-second ad tries to focus voters on what she would do as a senator — fight waste, runaway spending and conventional politics. The ad’s best line will resonate with voters sick of Washington — in other words, the likeliest of voters this fall: “I’ll go to Washington and do what you’d do.” Hard to say if it will it be enough to get O’Donnell back into the race with Democrat Chris Coons. But it is effective.
By the numbers
The cake isn’t baked yet on the 2010 congressional elections, but it’s getting there. Gallup reports President Obama’s approval rating for September was 45 percent, one tick better than August’s 44 percent. Historically, when a president is below 50 percent approval it’s a storm warning for his party in Congress. In the House, a switch of 39 seats would give Republicans the majority. In the Senate the number is 10. Democrats from Vice President Joe Biden on down have been guaranteeing they’ll hold both their majorities in less than a month. You’ve gotta question Biden’s handicapping, at least in the House. People who get paid to produce forecasts think the GOP will get the 39 and might not look back until they’ve hit 45, 55 or even more. Dick Morris says 100 seats are in play. Crazy.
One case in point. In Northern Virginia, freshman Democrat Gerry Connolly is in a rematch with his 2008 opponent, Republican Keith Fimian. The only recent public poll shows Fimian ahead by about five points. Here’s the concern: Connolly’s district is flush with federal workers, who for some reason tend to vote for the party of big government (Democrats). If Connolly is lagging at this point it suggests bad things for Democrats on Nov. 2. Connolly has tried to distance himself from polarizing Speaker Nancy Pelosi, saying all of the Bush-era tax cuts should be extended for now. But he voted for Obamacare and surely would vote to keep Pelosi as speaker. So watch the Connolly-Fimian tilt. If the Republican wins, it could signal a GOP wave that’s going to wash away a lot of Democrats.
