Halperin & Heilman’s Excerpts From Game Change Epitomizes A Vacuous Press

The pundit and MSM buzz over Halperin & Heilman’s new book Game Change is expected considering the suggested content to date in the published excerpts. Actually, the buzz has been so great that a recent viewing of Chris Matthews’ Hardball with the two authors in question almost had the effect of making the viewer wonder if the host required an underwear change between segments. For the political junkie, such as myself, there are two fascinating aspects to the suggested substance of what has been made available to the public so far. First, is how much delight their narrative takes revealing to the world the salacious gossip they’ve uncovered from disgruntled campaign workers within the 2008 Presidential campaigns. The second and most glaring aspect is how little work and effort that seems to have gone into constructing this expose of personality flaws and the implosions that followed. Ax grinders have always been an easy source. This kind of easy access though usually comes with a high price: exaggeration and an agenda with slanted or prejudicial views. The only real news that will come out of the excerpts to date is the heavy water usage taking place from all the showers everyone will need if they chose to slog through this trash.

The most unsurprising aspect of what we have been teased with is just how much of a hack both Halperin and Heilmen seems to be. Their writing style comes straight out of the Maureen Dowd School of heavy handed and churlish dependence on a high school worldview of personalities. One can only imagine if Theodore White or Hugh Sidey were still alive today to see the road their profession has taken. They would both be reaching for Kevorkian’s work on painless suicide to escape the pain and crushing disappointment over how the profession they devoted their whole lives to is now pilloried with talentless hacks with juvenile deductive abilities and an appetite for the prurient.

Let’s take a look at two examples we’ve been teased with so far: John & Elizabeth Edwards and Sarah Palin. To be fair about my own prejudices and bias I was an Edwards supporter. He was my first choice over both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. There is no doubt there is some truth to the assertions Halperin and Heilman make. My question to both of these low life night crawlers is this: how really hard was it to attack and sully Elizabeth Edwards’ public persona? We are presented with a woman who has been handed a potential medical death sentence with the type of cancer she has and this was followed by revelations her husband was a philanderer. I’m not sure how hard it was to dig up dirt on a woman whose life and family are falling apart right before her eyes. How was she supposed to react to all of this? With dignified stoicism and emotionless aplomb? Not everyone is made the same way and we all have different ways dealing with life and death situations when we have been handed one. The question you will never hear from Chris Matthews or any of his ilk is how the deconstruction of the Edwards marriage gives us insight to the political dynamic that leads to electability and/or governing?

As for John Edwards, is it really news that he might have a somewhat phony public persona and isn’t really the humble southern lawyer he presented to the public? For students of the American political process and the junkies that follow this stuff its not news or a revelation that having a certain level of phoniness is inherent to the political profession. One might delve into the degree and level of phoniness the candidate possesses but is it really news? As a supporter of John Edwards I expected two things. First, that he had a progressive agenda he would follow through on if elected. Second, that he be as informed as possible about world affairs with some original ideas and the history of the American political process indicating an awareness of who and what we are as a people. He was fulfilling those requirements I was looking for. When it was revealed that the flaws he is endowed with not only made his electability problematic but would interfere with his ability to govern I was ready to move on. Yeah, I was disappointed and hurt but that’s part of being engaged in the political process and putting an emotional investment in a candidate.

John Edwards’ relationship with his wife isn’t for me to sit in judgment of. Everyone’s marriage is different and personal not open to public approval. These two guys write as though they are two junior high school students delighting and smirking over an intimate personal relationship and the fragile dynamics that take place when they don’t live up to the expectations between the two people involved. Again, writing about this stuff says volumes about who they are and who they want to appeal to.

Then there is Sarah Palin. If one is to take some of the things about the Edwards’ with a grain of salt the same has to happen regarding the right wing Wasilla Queen of the low informed voter. The picture they paint of her as being ignorant of basic American history and the political process is not news. I sure as hell didn’t need these two sewer dwellers to tell me she was the epitome of an incurious amalgamation of right wing cliché’s with little understanding of what they all mean coupled with an uninformed background of basic world affairs. The problem Steve Schmidt found himself with is it didn’t matter how much information they jammed her head with, it was all out of context for her because she never bothered to find out how the world works and how we as a people all arrived to where we are today. This is news? The Katie Couric interview alone revealed all of that in spades. I didn’t need these two dimwits to pile on more evidence. The descriptions reserved for her inside the dynamics of the McCain campaign would be easy to believe for anti Palinistas such as myself. But really, McCain’s campaign came to despise her and we should believe everything that comes out of their mouths?

These two night crawlers are what elements of the MSM want to have representing them? Here is a suggestion if you are even thinking about reading Game Change. Go pick up a copy of Richard Ben Cramer’s What It Takes. Open it to any page and read an excerpt. Once you do you will realize that you wouldn’t even uses the pages from Game Change for toilet paper.

The Decade Of Conservatism

Wow! Digby points us to a killer post by Devilstower over at Daily Kos and then throws in a last punch of her own. This is must read stuff:

"Here's the thing about the naughts: there was nothing magic about the numbers. It wasn't because of a double-zero in the middle of the dates that we launched an invasion that's cost the lives of thousands of Americans, the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and a trillion dollars plus out of the pocketbooks of taxpayers. We launched into that still unresolved idiocy because of bad policy based on the conservative
philosophy of smash things first, think never. We went there because of a extreme version of American exceptionalism, one that views America as above the the rules of law and exempt from questions of morality. A view that says not only if the president does it, it's not a crime, but that if America does it, it can't be wrong.

It wasn't the decade that caused the economy to come down in tatters. It was a conservative approach to the marketplace that views government as the enemy, greed as the only acceptable motivation, and the only solution for disasters brought on by a lack of regulation as still less regulation.

It wasn't the calendar that brought down the banks, or American manufacturing, or American's influence around the world. It wasn't the date that added torture to the list of growth industries while erasing our budget surplus.

Don't forget the naughts, because this decade, no matter what anyone on the right might say, was conservatism on trial. You want less taxes? You got less taxes. You want less regulation? You got less regulation. Open markets? Wide open. An illusuion of security in place of rights? Hey, presto. Think we should privatize war by handing unlimited power given to military contractors so they can kick butt and
take names? Kiddo, we passed out boots and pencils by the thousands. Everything, everything, that ever showed up on a drooled-over right wing wish list got implemented -- with a side order of Freedom Fries.

They will try to disown it, and God knows if I was responsible for this mess I'd be disowning it, too. But the truth is that the conservatives got everything they wanted in the decade just past, everything that they've claimed for forty years would make America "great again". They didn't fart around with any "red dogRepublicans." They rolled over their moderates and implemented a conservative dream.

What did we get for it? We got an economy in ruins, a government in massive debt, unending war, and the repudiation of the world. There's no doubt that Republicans want you to forget the last decade, because if you remember... if you remember when you went down to the water hole and were jumped by every lunacy that ever emerged from the wet dreams of Grover Norquist and Dick Cheney, well, it's not likely that you'd give them a chance to do it again.

And they will. Given half a chance -- less than half -- they'll do it again, only worse. Because that's the way conservatism works. Remember when the only answer to every economic problem was "cut taxes?" We have a surplus. Good, let's cut taxes. We have a deficit. Hey, cut taxes even more! That little motto was unchanging even when was clear that the tax cuts were increasing the burden on everyone but a wealthy few. That's just a subset of the great conservative battle whine which is now and forever "we didn't go far enough." If deregulation led to a crash, it's because we didn't deregulate enough. If the wars aren't won, it's because
we haven't started enough wars. If there are people still clinging to their rights, it's because we haven't done enough to make them afraid.

Forget the naughts, and you'll forget that conservatives had another chance to prove all their ideas, and that their ideas utterly and completely failed. Again."

Then Digby follows up with a little back hand of her own:

"I don't deny that the corporate Democrats are screwed up too. But they didn't invent this political world. As I
quipped before, they just learned to stop worrying and love the money. This world of graft and corruption and unfettered greed was the conservative movement's idea of utopia. And they got it. ."

Now for my own follow up. If you had been a follower of this blog you would know what I've been saying from the outset. The 1920's saw unfettered conservatism run rampant and counter to all forms of regulation ala Teddy Roosevelt and his trust busting progressives. And what followed? A Depression that brought us to our knees. We almost didn't get back up. Yeah, we've been down this road before. And then, as Devilstower has pointed out, we went down that road again. The only difference was in the 1920's we were isolationists. In the naughts we went in shooting just because we could.

There is no doubt conservatives live and breath the "we didn't go far enough" mantle no matter the consequences in the face of overwhelming evidence of the contrary. But there it is. Given a chance they will try it again and again like the insane person doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results. We've been there, done that.

In the name of all that's holy, let's not go down that road again. Ever.

Maureen Dowd: Irrelevance As A Virtue

I'm still wondering how Maureen Dowd, who writes like a juvenile with a thesaurus, manages to keep her paying job at the NYTimes. Her latest article only reinforces the notion she seems to harbor that journalistic irrelevance is a virtue. I thought one of the virtues of journalism was to make the reader more informed after reading the piece, not before it. Her latest on Janet Napolitano has to make one wonder if there are any virtues of having an editor or not at the paper of record. This piece starts out telling us the Dept. of Homeland Security head was hand wringing over the Christmas day terrorist attempt and was somewhat dismayed at the jumbled message she was trying to send about how safe airline travelers were. The piece then ends with us being told that Napolitano is kept awake at night by just such incidences.

Wow. Who knew?

Little Movement In Duval County Registered Voter Gains & Party ID's

Since I'm doing a little blog site cleanup and updating I was taking a look at the number of Duval County registered voter and party ID breakdown from May of 2008 and comparing it to the new year and found the results to be quite unsurprising. This would seem par for the course in light of how both Democratically controlled houses have performed since the 2008 election results.

The poor performance put forth by both houses only reinforces those voters' qualms about politics in general and makes a fine recipe for disaster at the polls this coming November for the Democratic party. Watching the party allowing the likes of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson to hold them hostage and then employing a strategy of pandering to Olympia Snowe and et al for the construction of a Potemkin village of bipartisanship was mind boggling. Watching this train wreck strategy that could only lead to a perfect storm for electoral disaster for the Democrats in the 2010 midterms was enough to make political junkies like myself along with local and regional political acolytes want to take the gas.

First let's look at the numbers for a comparative breakdown for 01/03/2010 vs. 05/30/2008:

REGISTERED VOTERS As OF 01/03/2010

Democratic: 240,688 (45.43%)

Republicans: 193,103 (36.45%)

Other: 96,023 (18.19%)Total: 529,814

REGISTERED VOTERS AS OF 05/30/2008

Democrats: 216,908 (44.65%)

Republicans: 184,174 (37.91%)

Other: 84,695 (17.43%)Total: 485,777

A 1% gain for the Democratic Party here over this 18 month period is nothing to write home about. In fact if there is any news in this comparative at all, it would be how the Duval County Republican party has managed to stave off disaster by avoiding a tsunami of voter registration discontent and it translating into a widening shift in the gap of party ID and growth. If the last eight years could not drive a widening gap in this regard then I'm not sure its possible to make it happen under any circumstances. George W. Bush by any stretch of imagination was an unmitigated disaster of a President and for Republicans in general. There is not doubt that this led to a loss of both houses for the Republicans but just barely when one takes the time to analyze the numbers for real world impact.

The Democrats still have a lot of work to do to redeem themselves. At this point in the game redemption would only mitigate losses to a minimum, not stop them. Let's hope the Democrats have it in them. Only time will tell.

A Decade With Few Intact Dignities

Is it me or isn't it fairly obvious that the only three American politicians to emerge from the first decade of the millennium with their dignities intact happen to be Democrats? In order they form a formidable trio: Al Gore, Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy. As for what the next decade holds in store for the Nobel laureate Al Gore, President Obama, and the legacy of Edward Kennedy that's to be seen. In the next decade their work is cut out for them as it follows what has to be one of the most disappointing decades in American history since the 1850's where convulsive and extremist political actions and a civil war nearly led us to our demise as a country.

When the mainstream media decided in the first Presidential debate of 2000 that Al Gore's sigh(s) determined the suitability of who would make a better President it turned out the joke was on the voters. Its as if Bush was representative of all the intrusive advertising practices of the last fifty years that Madison Ave. could dream up was forced upon us with an election result that wasn't quite what it seemed. Even though most of us didn't buy the bill of goods that was being marketed to us we still wound up with the lemon. Buyer's remorse for those who bought into the product's promises got the true meaning of what a lemon tastes like. Especially the families of the military who's loved ones were either killed or maimed. As for the Nobel Laureate Al Gore it turns out that he was as advertised: a deliberate intellectual who wasn't the guy you wanted to have a beer with but the guy you wanted running the country. Though the MSM kept pushing the "who would you rather have a brew with" meme as a criteria selection for the leader of the free world I thought it was an odd theme to run with since the guys I do have beers with on occasion would be the very individuals I wouldn't want anywhere near running a government. I'm still looking forward to his contributions for the next decade.

President Obama, who rolled into office with a wagon load of promise still has a long road to travel. Though he was not my first candidate of choice for 2008 I still felt I was casting a vote for the things I was hoping he would do, not for things I was certain he wouldn't do. I am very disappointed so far with his handling of health care reform and his, to date, awkward and lumbering governing abilities. Hopefully, he will regain the graceful stride he showed during the campaign and give me a promising reason to vote for him again instead of casting a vote for for the things I'm sure he won't do.

The legacy of Edward Kennedy is something that will seemingly take care of itself despite the failure of Democrats to enact the reforms Ted Kennedy envisioned. He was the last of a dynasty that literally gave their lives for what they believed.

We need more to hope for than intact dignities. Let's hope the next decade brings it to us.

CNN's Rick Sanchez lowering the bar on journalistic standards

I wanted to add to Digby's rant about Rick Sanchez on CNN this evening. In an earlier post I lamented the loss of jounalistic standards and ethics and Sanchez just made a bid for being its poster boy this evening. There is no doubt Sanchez was proded by some fringe winger of the GOP to get his questions out about Europeans liking President Obama being a liability. This just adds to the lunacy the wingnuttia keeps trying to put in the MSM that somehow the United States is a lone island of morality in a global sea of decadence and socialism. I have Republican family friends that can't say "Europe" or "France" (especially France) without using the word 'Socialist' in conjunction with an utterance of their name.

At first this was inexplicable to me as to why they felt the enmity and hatred was deserved until I realized that Europe (again, especially France) never really cared for Reagan and really hated GW Bush. Funny thing about the effects of that unilaterialism thing. Not only does it show disrepect to your allies, it tells them they aren't as righteous and good as we are (i.e. see Iraq and the Middle East).

Today I was listening to the BBC explain to an American journalist how the U.K. hangs on every action the U.S. takes regarding Anglo-American relations. Every nuance is intensely covered and written about extensively such as the perceived slight toward Gordon Brown during his visit here back in early March over the White House's gift of 25 DVD's. The U.K.'s "special relationship" with the U.S. is taken very seriously and includes a diplomatic dance unlike relations with any other country in the world (including Canada & Mexico).

There is no doubt Sanchez got twittered with that queston to Blitzer. There is also no doubt where it came from either.

Two reasons why the newspaper industry is in decline

I know the reasons for the newspaper industry's troubles have been discussed over the past year by any number of so called experts. Atrios points to the poor business model they used along with Athenae's rant about unchecked corporate corruption. As a former member of the industry itself for over 15 years I have my own explanation. Yes, I agree whole heartedly with both Atrios and Athena but only as it pertains to piling on to the real reason . And that real reason is simple enough: they stopped being journalist and began morphing into dictation machines. No matter who was sourced and/or quoted they were done so without question. It didn't matter what happened in the past or what was said. It only mattered for that moment. This journalistic "whiteout" whereas professional ethics and standards were thrown out the window was done so at the expense of accountability ensuring they were percieved to be "fair and balanced." No matter how ludicrous one side sounded regarding any issue it was treated with equal footing when contrasted with an opposing view. Eventually this practice of acting like cheerleaders for the local, state and the federal government without question comes at a huge expense: your credibility. Now journalist are seen to be no better than used car salespeople for their trouble. What a surprise.

Even now they don't get it. The MSM is still clueless why they are perceived as such. But make no bones about it. It is the reason they are dying. Why listen or read it if it isn't credible? (Like printing rants about weapons of mass destruction without calling them on it for proof or why it is a variable in the equation historically). Add to that the lousy business model as Atrios points out and you have an industry in deep trouble.

I think newspapers are a community necessity. Local government without a watchdog leads to corruption and bad policy. Once that voice and watchful eye is gone the bad times aren't just here to stay, they'll get worse.

NBC Nightly News' Chuck Todd getting it wrong - - again

Earlier this evening NBC Nightly News' Chuck Todd, NBC White House Correspondent, compared President Obama's firing of GM CEO Richard Wagoner (Ok, he insisted he resign) with Reagan's firing of PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization). Where do they find these guys? President Obama insisting that Wagoner step down after tanking GM during his decade at the helm is being compared to a union striking for better working conditions, higher pay and shorter working hours in a critical profession keeping our skies safely managed and known for intense professional burnout? What a complete idiot. For one thing, Reagan fired over 11,000 employees and broke a union in the process which was no doubt a wet dream for the right. Part of Reagan's "legacy" is firing and breaking a union where the profession experienced intense professional burnout due to the tremendous pressures of the job.

Chuck Todd seems to be demonstrating on a daily basis he has no clue to the substance of his so called "reports." I used to be impressed with his political analysis. But his skills as a reporter and connecting the dots on what he's reporting is sorely lacking. When you can't fill David Gregory's shoes, you've got a problem. If Gregory was any more of a light weight he'd be floating.

Cornyn & Bachman get their wingnuttia mojo on

Right wing loonies in the GOP seem to be a dime a dozen these days. But Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Michelle Bachmann seem to be defining the benchmark for wingnuttia in general. While Cornyn proclaims that Minnesota could be years without a Senator while the state supreme court decides on a date to certify Al Franken's 225 vote win for the U.S. Senate you have Bachmann calling President Obama's economic policy nothing more than "economic Marxism." It's as simple as that. What amazes me is not the rhetoric itself but the certainty of her proclamation.

When Barry Goldwater ambled up to the podium at the Cow Palace in San Francisco on July 16, 1964 and uttered his nomination campaign speech's most famous line, "Let me remind you that extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice" I'm sure he never imagined a GOP evolving into what you see today. While Goldwater called out to a nation to adopt a non conciliatory policy tone with regards to defense policy Cornyn and Bachmann are calling for actions that go beyond elected outcomes. One only has to wonder when lines of decency will be breeched before a voter back lash kicks in.

Glorius Johnson's Democratic Party Two Step

Glorious be! Now that the redoubtable Ms. Johnson of the Jacksonville City Council has seen fit to switch parties I find it quite amusing that Lenny Curry, the local Duval County GOP chair, is shocked and dismayed that a party member has jumped ship after her war chest was filled with GOP funds. The "Dixie" loving African American certainly knows how to get attention and seems to know a thing or two about timing.

As I read the article the Suzanne Jenkins party switch came roaring back to memory as she too jumped ship with DCDEC funds after a famous tearful appearance before the party's executive committee . There was no doubt she had plans to run for mayor. The DCDEC chiar at the time, Clyde Collins, tried to warn her if she jumped the GOP would marginalize her and she would never be heard from again. Other than her seeming campaign to be Wal-Mart's personal Duval County representative not much has been heard from her since. Looks like Clyde Collins was right.

On the other hand I'm not sure what Glorious Johnson is looking to gain here. David Hunt of the The Florida-Times Union seems to be speculating that Ms. Johnson is going to make a run for mayor. The local GOP has a nasty habit of cutting off competitors at the knees once they've decided on a favorite making their primary nothing more than a rubber stamp for their chosen one. Though one can only applaud the efforts of the current local DCDEC chair, Travis Bridges, the Duval County Democratic party is still no where near being on the same level as the local GOP as far as organization and funding for local candidates are concerned. If the DCDEC wanted to employ the same practices as the local GOP seems to do regarding favored choices for a particular office, the local DCDEC is in no position to do so even if they were inclined. One thing for sure is certain. Glorious Johnson won't be marginalized by anyone, especialy the DCDEC.

All one needs to do is read the comments left on the FTU online story and see that many jacksonville residents still live in the day of Lester Maddox and his bigoted perspective on race desptie the racial makeup of the current POTUS. The odds are not favorable for her. It will be interesting to see how she does in a primary.

John Boehner speaks out

You can't make this stuff up. Yesterday on C-Span I was watching the House of Representatives Republican minority leader, John Boehner (OH - Rep #8), bloviate at length about Gitmo, out of control spending, and right to life policies. Suddenly Republicans are concerned about out of control spending? I must have missed the last eight years. His impassioned assertion about his right to life beliefs was yet another hypocritical moment considering his position on SCHIP. Those Republicans. For you when you are a fetus. Forgotten after the moment of birth. Yes, a typical "family values" politician.

The most striking thing though was his rambling about the closure of the Guantanamo Bay U.S. detention facilities. These guys are incredible. For eight years under Clinton they screamed "rule of law!" right up until he was impeached. Then the USSC imposed George W. Bush on us and they followed in lock step with his shredding of the U.S. Constitution and the Guantanamo detention facilities flying in the face of American ideals. Yesterday, he does a hand wringing routine about the fate of the detainees after the base closure. Here's a suggestion for the impassioned minority leader. Crack open a book on U.S. military history. Look up the case of George John Dasch and his military commission trial from WWII. Bring those detainees left to the United States and let them have their day in court under the provisions of our Constitution. It's worked for us for 200+ years to date.

An Aerial View of Inauguration Day 1/20/2009

Somehow even this aerial view of one of the most seminal moments in American history does not do it justice. I'm still in awe of how we have arrived at this moment. I still have memories of going to school in the 1st grade in segregated North Carolina. I'm still pinching myself to know that now race has been put aside as a barrier to becoming POTUS. This by no means marks an end to racial barriers across the landscape. But it does mean we are closer to a racial reconcilliation that Lincoln could only dream about.