IMPALIN’ — Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012

On New Year’s Day, as Cubans celebrate the 50th anniversary of their Revolution, we in the United States should remember another milestone. January 3rd will be the 47th anniversary of President Eisenhower’s Cold War-era decision to break diplomatic relations with Cuba. Ike might be surprised that a veritable conga line of his successors stood by the policy of trying to overthrow, isolate, or starve Cuba for five decades — even after the Soviet Union ceased to exist and the policy had long since demonstrated its uselessness. This is a moment for President-elect Obama to decide whether he wants to be the 11th president of the Cold War to champion a failed policy or the first president of a new era to be an advocate for a far more sensible course. This is Obama’s Cuba opportunity, and this is the direction he should follow. On day one, he should take executive action to restore the rights of Cuban-Americans to visit their families on the island and to support them financially and without limitations. He should get the Treasury Department out of the travel business, so that the faith community, the business community, artists and academics, among others, no longer have to apply to a government bureaucracy on bended knee for permission to travel to Cuba - permission that under the Bush administration was routinely denied. The President has much of that authority already, but he should promise Congress that he will sign legislation to authorize travel by all Americans to Cuba as soon as they put it on his desk. He should then remove restrictions on trade so that the American economy and the Cuban economy can enjoy the benefits that freer commerce can bestow - an increase in jobs and living standards, and the opportunity to learn and share ideas about innovation, management, environmental standards, working conditions, and the like. Most of all, he should engage the government of Cuba in a manner that respects its sovereignty, just as our allies across the world do every day, especially if he believes - as he stressed in the campaign - in the kind of diplomacy that emphasizes negotiation as means for settling disputes and differences. It is time to talk to Cuba - about problems in the neighborhood, security, law enforcement, environmental protection, and migration, to name just a few - and to talk about these issues without preconditions. President Raúl Castro has signaled he’s ready to do this, and we should not let this moment pass. There is ample historical precedent for conducting such talks, as Peter Kornbluh and Bill LeoGrande, in particular, brilliantly establish in their new article for Cigar Aficionado “Talking with Castro,” and there is no shortage of subjects to discuss, as my organization demonstrates in our new report, “9 Ways to Talk to Cuba and for Cuba to Talk to US.” Were Mr. Obama to reunite families, he would lift an emotional burden from the Cuban-American community and give long-needed support to those who have worked so hard and in such difficult circumstances to reconcile the Cuban families on both sides of the Florida Straits. Were he to fully open travel, commerce, and diplomacy, the impact on Cuba would extraordinary, and he would give all Latin Americans a new reason to engage with the United States. Most of all, in doing these things, Obama would send an unmistakable signal to Latin America and nations everywhere that our country is ready to embrace this world not as we found it 50 years ago, but as it exists today. Few actions could make these two January anniversaries, more memorable or momentous, or give the Obama presidency such a promising start. Sarah Stephens, director of the Center for Democracy in the Americas, is co-editor of the forthcoming report: “9 Ways for US to talk to Cuba and for Cuba to talk to US”.

View original post here: 
Sarah Stephens: On the anniversary of Cuba’s Revolution, the case for evolutionary thinking here at home

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Israel rejected international pressure to suspend its air offensive against Palestinian militants whose rocket barrages are striking close to the Israeli heartland, sending warplanes Wednesday to demolish smuggling tunnels that are the lifeline of Gaza’s Islamic Hamas rulers. The diplomatic action was set in motion by the scale of destruction in Gaza since Israel unleashed its campaign Saturday, and a casualty toll that Gaza officials now put at 390 dead and some 1,600 wounded. Hamas says some 200 uniformed members of Hamas security forces have been killed, and the U.N. says at least 60 Palestinian civilians have died. Four Israelis have been killed by militant rocket fire, including three civilians. The chief of Israel’s internal security services, Yuval Diskin, told Cabinet ministers Wednesday that Hamas’ ability to rule had been “badly impaired.” Weapons development facilities have been “completely wiped out” and the network of smuggling tunnels has been badly damaged, a participant in the meeting quoted Diskin as saying. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was closed to the media. Overnight, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert discussed a 48-hour truce proposal floated by France with his foreign and defense ministers. The meeting ended with a decision to continue the punishing aerial campaign. “Giving Hamas a respite just to regroup, rearm is a mistake,” Olmert spokesman Mark Regev said. “The pressure on the Hamas military machine must continue.” Calls for an immediate cease-fire have also come from the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and Russia. President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice personally called leaders in the Middle East on Tuesday to press for a durable solution. Underlying the Israeli decision to keep fighting are the mightier weapons that Hamas has smuggled into Gaza through underground tunnels along the border with Egypt. Previously, militants had relied on crude homemade rockets that could fly just 12 miles to terrorize Israeli border communities. Now, they are firing industrial-grade weapons that have dramatically expanded their range and put more than one-tenth of Israel’s population in their sights. More than two dozens rockets and mortar shells were fired by mid-day Wednesday, including five that hit in and around the major southern Israeli city of Beersheba, 22 miles from Gaza. One hit an empty school. Another landed in a small farming community about 20 miles southeast of Tel Aviv. No serious casualties were reported. School was canceled in large swaths of Israel’s south because of the rocket threat. The 18,000 students at Ben-Gurion University in Beersheba, southern Israel’s only university, were also told to stay home. Early on Wednesday, Israeli aircraft pounded smuggling tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border in another attempt to sever the lifeline that keeps Hamas in power by supplying weapons, food and fuel. Israel and Egypt blockaded Gaza after Hamas violently seized control of the territory in June 2007 and have cracked open their borders only to let in limited amounts of humanitarian aid. A huge explosion rocked a tunnel that housed a fuel pipeline and aircraft also smashed the house of a smuggling kingpin. In all, two tunnels were destroyed in the raid, Egyptian security officials in Rafah said. An Egyptian official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak to the media, said Israel has destroyed 120 tunnels since the aerial campaign began. According to conservative estimates, there were at least 200 tunnels before Israeli warplanes began striking. In Gaza City, powerful airstrikes sent high-rise apartment buildings swaying and showered streets with broken glass and pulverized concrete. The Israeli military said government buildings were hit, including an office of Gaza’s Hamas prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh. A Palestinian medic was killed and two others were wounded when an Israeli missile struck next to their ambulance east of Gaza City, Palestinians said. The Israeli military said it did not know of the incident. Israeli navy ships also fired at Hamas positions along the coastline. Diskin, the Israeli security services chief, said Hamas was trying to smuggle out some of its activists to Egypt through tunnels that were still passable. Other militants were hiding in Gaza hospitals, some disguised as doctors and nurses, and in mosques, where militants had set up command and control centers, Diskin said. Although Hamas leaders have been driven underground, spokesman Taher Nunu said the Gaza government was functioning and had met over the past few days. “What our people want is clear: an immediate stop to all kinds of aggression, the end of the siege by all means, the opening of all border crossings, and international guarantees that the occupation will not renew this terrorist war again,” Nunu said in a statement. Israel has been massing troops and armor along the Gaza border in an indication the air campaign could morph into a ground operation. The government approved a plan to call up an additional 2,500 reserve soldiers late Tuesday, following a decision earlier this week to authorize a call-up of 6,700 soldiers. The call-ups have yet to be carried out. In two phone calls to Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Monday and Tuesday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner appealed to him to consider a truce to allow time for humanitarian relief supplies to enter Gaza, two senior officials in Barak’s office said. While rejecting the truce, Israel said it would allow 2,000 tons of food and medical supplies to enter Gaza on Wednesday, in addition to 4,000 tons the military says have been allowed in since the offensive began. Several dozen chronically ill Gazans have also been authorized to enter Israel for treatment Wednesday, the military said. The U.N. planned to resume food aid distribution on Thursday, after halting it two weeks ago because of shortages caused by the blockade. Most of Gaza’s 1.4 million residents rely on U.N. food handouts. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was to travel Thursday to Paris for talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has put his growing international stature to use in other conflict zones, most recently to help halt fighting between Russia and Georgia in August. Kouchner said Wednesday he and Sarkozy are considering traveling to Israel next week. A Hamas spokesman said militants wouldn’t halt their rocket and mortar fire until Israel ended its blockade. “If they halt the aggression and the blockade, then Hamas will study these suggestions,” Mushir Masri said. Israel fears that opening crossings with Gaza would allow Hamas _ which remains officially committed to Israel’s destruction _ to strengthen its hold on the territory even further. ___ Associated Press Writer Matti Friedman reported from Jerusalem and Sarah El Deeb reported from Cairo.

Read the original here: 
Israel rejects truce call, attacks Gaza

(excepted in Philadelphia Inquirer Opeds 12/31) 2008 provided an embarrassing, albeit sometimes disastrous cascade of evidence that so-called brilliant minds tweren’t so brilliant. One need not go any farther that former Federal Reserve chairman and former market genius Alan Greenspan who was “shocked” to find a flaw in his no-regulations-needed-here ideology or that the Gray Lady of Spoof, National Lampoon spoofed their stock value right into a federal securities fraud case. The good news is that all those mistakes, blunders and seeming outright failures hold much promise for the rest of us to gain something tangibly positive. “Learn from the mistakes of others,” said Eleanor Roosevelt. “We don’t have the time to make them all ourselves.” Here’s your somewhat skewed guide for making your own new years lemonade out of someone else’s old lemons. 2008 Failure: Sarah Palin may or may not have caused John McCain to lose the presidential election but her less than perfect performance certainly gave plenty of material to comics with SNL’s Tina Fey being the primary recipient. What Could Have Been Learned?: Before selecting the person who will be fifty percent of your team, make sure she can at least memorize the name of at least one paper she reads. Was It Learned?: Barack Obama will be sworn in January 20. How Can We Benefit in 2009?: No matter what kind of relationship you’re thinking of getting into, make sure you find out everything you can about who you’re getting involved with. If not, seriously consider a career in standup READ THE REST OF THE GREAT LESSONS TO BE LEARNED HERE Award-winning TV writer, Steve Young is author of “Great Failures of the Extremely Successful” blogs at the appropriately named, steveyoungonpolitics.com

Read the rest here:
Steve Young: Great Failures of 2008 and Their Potential Benefits For 2009

It’s the season of lists and, at The Nation , John Nichols adds one, Most Valuable Progressives of 2008 . Some excerpts with details on a few choices follow. For more details, click the link above. MOST VALUABLE UNION The United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America : The big players in the labor movement were trying to figure out what to ask of the first genuinely labor-friendly president since Harry Truman, and they weren’t doing a very good job of it in the weeks after the election. Then the Bank of America (having supped prodigiously at Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s bailout banquet) made the mistake of pulling the operating credit for an Illinois-based window manufacturing firm and a small independent union showed the rest of the movement what was possible. When Republic Windows and Doors announced it was shuttering its factory in Chicago, members of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America union who worked at the plant borrowed a page from the radical labor activists of the 1930s and refused to leave. Their sit-down strike earned headlines, solidarity support from bigger unions, an endorsement from President-elect Barack Obama and, finally, commitments by the bank and the company to pay the displaced workers what they were owed. The Rev. Jesse Jackson compared the UE members to Rosa Parks and described their bold response to the shutdown as “the beginning of a larger movement for mass action to resist economic violence.” Let’s hope he is right. MOST VALUABLE POLITICAL GROUP Progressive Democrats of America : Paul Wellstone’s “Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party” finally has a functional voice, in the form of PDA, a national group that has over the past several years struggled mightily – and often effectively – to pull the party to the left on issues of war and peace, health-care reform, economic justice and presidential accountability. … MOST VALUABLE ADVOCACY GROUP TransAfrica Forum … MOST VALUABLE POLICY GROUP The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy : The global food crisis that made a bit of news early in 2008 highlighted the economic pathologies that would come into stark relief as the financial meltdown accelerated in the fall. But most journalists and policy analysts don’t understand or much care about farm and food issues, so they missed the story. Steve Suppan, Shiney Varghese, Ben Lilliston and the rest of the team at the Minneapolis-based IATP were so far ahead of the curve that they rarely got the credit they deserved for recognizing and confronting the challenges posed not merely by the spread of hunger but by the financial gaming that underpinned the crisis. An institute report released in November, “Commodities Market Speculation: The Risk to Food Security and Agriculture” was a finer piece of financial journalism than anything produced by the Wall Street Journal or CNBC. … MOST VALUABLE STATE OR REGIONAL GROUP Policy Matters Ohio … MOST VALUABLE GRASSROOTS INITIATIVE The Green Festivals : This joint project of Global Exchange and Co-op America organizes huge events in major cities across the country to celebrate “what’s working in our communities–for people, business and the environment” with an emphasis on “safe, healthy communities and a strong local economy.” You have to attend a Green Festival in San Francisco, Washington, Seattle, Denver or Chicago to fully understand the scope and power of these events, which draw together internationally-recognized thinkers and activists (Van Jones, Cornell West, Barbara Ehrenreich, Majora Carter and Amy Goodman, among others), local small-business owners and thousands of citizens for remarkable explorations of what a sustainable economy can and should look like. MOST VALUABLE THINKER Anuradha Mittal … MOST VALUABLE CABINET PICK Hilda Solis : It has been a long time since the United States had a Secretary of Labor who had a record of walking picket lines. That’s what makes California Congresswoman Hilda Solis, Obama’s pick to fill this Cabinet post, so remarkable. … She is the right person for this job, and her selection serves as the single best signal from Obama that he intends to serve as a pro-worker president. Let’s hope that Solis is allowed to renew a Labor Department that has been neglected – and disempowered — by Democratic and Republican presidents. MOST VALUABLE HOUSE MEMBER Marcy Kaptur : When Democratic leaders in the House buckled in the face of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s call for a no-strings-attached bailout for big banks, it was Kaptur who rallied the opposition – successfully blocking Paulson’s first proposal in the House and forcing minor improvements in the plan. … MOST VALUABLE SENATOR Bernie Sanders : When just about everyone else in the Capitol was absorbed with the presidential race last fall, the independent senator from Vermont recognized that the biggest story of 2008 was not the election – it was the collapse of the economic house of cards that successive Republican and Democratic administrations had built. … MOST VALUABLE STATE OFFICIAL Mark Ritchie : Minnesota’s Secretary of State ran for his position in 2006 on a promise to assure that his state would have free and fair elections. … MOST VALUABLE LOCAL OFFICIAL Joe Moore : In a city that has been rocked by corruption scandals of the ugliest sort, Chicago Alderman Joe Moore stands out as an example of the sort of steadfast and effective grassroots progressive who has fought the powerbrokers again and again and frequently prevailed. … MOST VALUABLE HEIR TO WOODY GUTHRIE Dave Alvin : In hard times, we need a troubadour. And the former guitarist for The Blasters, X and the Gun Club has in recent years displayed the songwriting skills that are required. … MOST VALUABLE BOOK (ECONOMICS) : James K. Galbraith’s The Predator State: How Conservatives Abandoned the Free Market and Why Liberals Should Too (The Free Press) … MOST VALUABLE BOOK (CONSTITUTIONAL RENEWAL) : Peter Linebaugh ’s The Magna Carta Manifesto. Liberties and Commons for All (University of California Press) … MOST VALUABLE BOOK (INTERNATIONAL POLICY): Mike Marqusee ’s If I Am Not For Myself: Journey of an Anti-Zionist Jew (Verso) … MOST VALUABLE NATIONAL MEDIA PERSONALITIES : Rachel Maddow and Ron Reagan … MOST VALUABLE LOCAL MEDIA PERSONALITY CC (Camille Conte) : When Sarah Palin stumbled onto the national stage, after her selection as John McCain’s running-mate, everyone scrambled to figure out what was up with Alaska’s governor. A lot of the lower-48 blogosphere (and the major media that followed its lead) obsessed about Palin’s family life. But Anchorage radio host Camille Conte, who is universally known in Alaska as “CC,” steered the discussion toward Troopergate – the scandal that proved Palin was not the reformer her supporters claimed but a Cheney-esque abuser of power. CC’s daily “Cutting Edge” show on Anchorage’s Air America affiliate, News-Talk 1080/KUDO: Alaska’s Progressive Voice became required fare for journalists visiting the state – she had better access than anyone else to the key players, who trusted the veteran local host – and CC turned up on radio stations across the U.S. No one else contributed as much to 2008’s Palintological studies. Your turn to praise or rip Nichols’s choices, to substitute your own in his categories and add categories of your own. My choice for Most Valuable Organization Against Torture: Physicians for Human Rights . • • • The Overnight News Digest is posted and includes the story Holiday weakest since 1970, more retail cuts seen .

Read more from the original source: 
Open Thread for Night Owls, Early Birds & Expats

George Bush isn’t the only one who’s been a lame duck for the last couple of months of 2008. I have, too. I think all Americans have been lame ducks. We’ve been in limbo. We’ve been waiting to see how the financial crisis will be resolved, waiting to see what’s going to happen with the automakers, and waiting to see how things will be under President Obama. Like a lame duck, we’ve been treading water. And time doesn’t fly when you’re treading water. I can’t be the only person who feels that the end of 2008 has dragged on and on. It seems like 2008 will never end. Doesn’t it seem like it’s been the longest year ever? One of the reasons, of course, was because we had an interminable Presidential campaign. And the war continued without any hints of a dramatic ending. And we kept hoping that the bad financial times would be over. So it certainly was not a year’s end that zipped by. And to make it even longer, not only was 2008 a leap year, but scientists added a “leap second” to it. Apparently, they do this every once in a while when they notice that the earth’s rotation is slowing down slightly. In case you’re interested, the leap second will be added onto December 31st. Let’s all make the most of that extra second. Things that didn’t really happen that long ago seem like they happened ages ago. For example, can you believe that John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate only four months ago? Doesn’t it seem longer? Were we really able to live our entire lives, minus four months, without Sarah Palin? Were the Olympics really just this past summer? And were the John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer scandals really this year? They seem like something from a distant, more innocent past. Of course, they have been trumped by year-end scandals, but neither Blagojevich nor Maddof made the time pass more quickly. Think your memory of 2008 is perfect? Who won the 2008 Super Bowl? Not a sports fan? Who won the 2008 Nobel Peace Prize? (Hint: it wasn’t any of the football players from the Super Bowl). Remember when gas prices were ridiculously high? Remember when houses sold ridiculously fast? Remember when I lost my cell phone? (Okay, that’s a hard one). Remember when the polygamists’ ranch was raided? That really happened just this year. This was a year when some things were all turned around. I don’t know about you, but I can remember when people went to banks for money instead of the other way around. And didn’t you think pirates were a thing of the past? One of the most outrageous Congressional earmarks was $50,000 proposed by California Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon. He felt the money should go to the National Mule and Packers Museum. And they say government doesn’t support the arts. Speaking of four-legged animals, a Norwegian equestrian was stripped of his Olympic bronze medal because his horse had taken a “banned substance.” That’s right. The horse didn’t pass the drug test. With all the publicity about how harmful these drugs are, plus with every newspaper talking about how stringent tests are at the Olympics, how could a horse be so stupid and risk everything by taking drugs? What was he thinking? The news story that defines 2008 has to do with Burger King. In the beginning of this month, the fast food company came out with a cologne - actually a men’s body spray — that smells like “flame broiled meat.” “Who would want to smell like cooked meat?” But isn’t this a perfect move for a company to make in 2008? People are worried about not having enough money to buy groceries, and they think that men are going to spend their hard-earned dollars so they’ll smell like a hamburger? Maybe they’re going for the burger bailout. If “Flame” - as Burger King’s cologne is called — actually turns out to be a hot product, watch for the banks to follow suit. They could sell “Bucks,” a cologne that smells like money. That way, Americans can walk around in 2009 with nothing in their pockets, but at least they’ll smell like money. And if the banks’ cologne is successful, I’ll bet other fragrances will follow. I just hope those in charge of that mule museum don’t get any ideas. Happy New Year, and have a great 2009. Lloyd Garver has written for many television shows, ranging from “Sesame Street” to “Family Ties” to “Home Improvement” to “Frasier.” He has also read many books, some of them in hardcover. He can be reached at lloydgarver@gmail.com . Check out his website at lloydgarver.com and his podcasts on iTunes .

The rest is here:
Lloyd Garver: 2008: Not So Great

We’re big fans of Andrew Sullivan’s The Daily Dish, and during the election we enjoyed nothing quite so much as his tireless effort to demand Sarah Palin’s medical records, insinuating that details of Trig’s birth had been covered up. Sully was criticized by those on the right for being a wackjob conspiracy nut, while even many on the left counseled him to just give it a rest. But he would not be swayed. That’s why we’re certain he’s pissed that Bristol had her baby while he’s on vacation and his blog is nothing more than a series of “View From Your Window” posts. There’s already so much about this news to piss him off. The Dish posted a selection from the AP story reporting that no one from the Palin family or staff would provide details about the birth, which they consider a “private matter.” And what about the fact that the baby was born on Saturday but it didn’t get reported until Monday? What were they hiding?!

Go here to read the rest: 
236: Five Bristol Baby Conspiracy Theories For Andrew Sullivan To Push

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE… [ Bounce! Bounce! Bouncy Bounce Bounce! ] Ah, yes. The distinctive sound of the wheels coming off the Straight Talk Express. That was quite a thing to watch in the third quarter of the year, wasn’t it? Flashback to August 20, when John McCain raised eyebrows by asserting that “The fundamentals of our economy are strong.” When he repeated it on September 15—the day the Dow Industrials lost 504 points—he looked like an idiot. But McCain sealed his fate when he “suspended” his campaign so he could ride into Washington and save us all from the frighteningly weak fundamentals of our economy. He failed miserably and, worse, pissed off David Letterman by blowing him off and lying about it . The following Monday the Dow dropped 777 points and sealed his self-created image as a man wholly out of touch with…darn near everything. Meanwhile Sarah Palin kept the one-liners coming (”We’ve gotta keep an eye on Russia. … You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska!”), Rachel Maddow snagged her own show on MSNBC, the Netroots Nation convention rocked Austin, and flaming liberal Paul Newman inconvenienced us all by dying. And a bunch of other stuff happened, too, but surely you didn’t expect me to keep track of it all, did you? Oh…you did? Fine. I came prepared. Cheers and Jeers looks back at July, August and September in There’s Moreville… [ Swoosh!! ]  Right now!  [ GONG!! ]

More: 
Cheers and Jeers: 2008 Flashback, Pt. 3

I don’t know about you, but I’ve had it up to here with once-in-a-lifetime events. Katrina was once in a lifetime. The 2004 tsunami was once in a lifetime. This past year’s wildfires were the worst blazes in living memory. Every other month seems to bring an epic rain or snow that is said to be the storm of the century. And don’t get me started on the polar ice cap. George W. Bush, the worst president in American history, will turn out to be, God willing, once in a lifetime, as will the officially sanctioned use of torture by American interrogators, the subjugation of the Justice Department by a bunch of right-wing twenty-something hacks, and the grotesque intervention of Congress into the Terry Schaivo case. If Dick Cheney isn’t once in a lifetime, there is reason to doubt the existence of divine mercy. The depth of the unfolding recession, for those who did not experience the Great Depression, is now forecast to be once in a lifetime. Bernie Madoff’s breathtaking Ponzi scheme is - one can only hope - once in a lifetime. The demise of Lehman Brothers, founded in 1850, is once in a lifetime, as will be the extinction of Levitz, the 97-year-old furniture chain, and (as is plausible) of Dodge (b. 1914) and Kmart (b. 1962). Until this recession, India and China were poised to overtake the U.S. economy, which would surely constitute a once-in-a-lifetime development, like the fall of communism, tobacco, butter, girdles and Esperanto. The impending deaths of the print newspaper, the network evening news and the television networks themselves - like the prior deaths of the buggy, vaudeville and silent movies - are bound to be experienced as once in a lifetime. The demises of slide rules, typewriters, Polaroid instant cameras and VHS tapes each marked the end of an era. TV Guide is going the route of Colliers, The Saturday Evening Post, Look and Life; when either Time or Newsweek folds, its surviving competitor will doubtless send it off with a once-in-a-lifetime obit. September 11th was once in a lifetime, unless you lived through Pearl Harbor. It is wishful thinking to imagine that the malicious explosion of a nuclear device is not in the world’s foreseeable future, and if, kinahora, that happens, it will surely be labeled - optimistically - once in a lifetime. On the upside, the election of a black American president is totally without precedent, and it is not inconceivable that a woman will eventually follow him to the White House, though if it’s Sarah Palin, she stands a decent chance of wresting worst-ever laurels from Bush. My discomfort at being crowded by this surfeit of once-in-a-lifetime happenings is partly about hype, and mostly about mental hygiene. The mainstream news media have no vested interest in proportionality. With so many things competing for our attention, the only way for media-owning corporations to capture our eyeballs is to inflate everything to Armageddon dimensions. Every lurid local crime becomes a national melodrama; every flare-up on the planet is depicted as a precursor to World War III; every scandal is Watergate, or something else-gate. We are inundated with the Ten Worst This, and Ten Best That, while long-simmering atrocities truly deserving of notice, like Darfur or the tuberculosis pandemic, barely make it onto the radar screen. No wonder the world has the jitters. We are daily assaulted by so much hyperbole that it is nearly impossible to know what is important any more. It is undeniable that we live in a time of big change, but if we did not also live in a time of big media, I am not convinced that we would experience our lives as a relentless onslaught of cliffhangers, crises and catastrophes. To every thing, Ecclesiastes tells us, there is a season, but you wouldn’t know it from the media, which know only one season, which is BREAKING NEWS. Real life has natural rhythms; it plays out on many stages, from the personal and private to the public and historical. But the culture of THIS JUST IN homogenizes those differences. Its imperative is to monetize our attention, and the easiest way to do that is to see as much as possible through once-in-a-lifetime lenses. I don’t mean to diminish the pain of the economic meltdown, or the significance of climate change, or the symbolic breakthrough of the Obama inauguration, or the dizzying transformations being wrought by technology. But it does no good for us as citizens if everything is as screamingly urgent as everything else, and it does no good for us as people if our nervous systems are constantly being bombarded by superlatives. How can our leaders set priorities, how will we ever agree on trade-offs, if public discourse only consists of capital letters? How can we linger in the intimacies and mysteries of existence, how will we truly know what’s worth caring about, if shock and rupture is the only language our culture knows how to speak? This is my column from The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles . You can read more of my columns here , and e-mail me there if you’d like.

See the original post here: 
Marty Kaplan: Once in a Lifetime

WASHINGTON — Hurricane Katrina not only pulverized the Gulf Coast in 2005, it knocked the bully pulpit out from under President George W. Bush, according to two former advisers who spoke candidly about the political impact of the government’s poor handling of the natural disaster. “Katrina to me was the tipping point,” said Matthew Dowd, Bush’s pollster and chief strategist for the 2004 presidential campaign. “The president broke his bond with the public. Once that bond was broken, he no longer had the capacity to talk to the American public. State of the Union addresses? It didn’t matter. Legislative initiatives? It didn’t matter. P.R.? It didn’t matter. Travel? It didn’t matter.” Dan Bartlett, former White House communications director and later counselor to the president, said: “Politically, it was the final nail in the coffin.” Their comments are a part of an oral history of the Bush White House that Vanity Fair magazine compiled for its February issue, which hits newsstands in New York and Los Angeles on Wednesday, and nationally on Jan. 6. Vanity Fair published comments by current and former government officials, foreign ministers, campaign strategists and numerous others on topics that included Iraq, the anthrax attacks, the economy and immigration. Lawrence Wilkerson, top aide and later chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, said that as a new president, Bush was like Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee whom critics said lacked knowledge about foreign affairs. When Bush first came into office, he was surrounded by experienced advisers like Vice President Dick Cheney and Powell, who Wilkerson said ended up playing damage control for the president. “It allowed everybody to believe that this Sarah Palin-like president _ because, let’s face it, that’s what he was _ was going to be protected by this national-security elite, tested in the cauldrons of fire,” Wilkerson said, adding that he considered Cheney probably the “most astute, bureaucratic entrepreneur” he’d ever met. “He became vice president well before George Bush picked him,” Wilkerson said of Cheney. “And he began to manipulate things from that point on, knowing that he was going to be able to convince this guy to pick him, knowing that he was then going to be able to wade into the vacuums that existed around George Bush _ personality vacuum, character vacuum, details vacuum, experience vacuum.” On other topics, David Kuo, who served as deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, disputed the idea that the Bush White House was dominated by religious conservatives and catered to the needs of a religious right voting bloc. “The reality in the White House is _ if you look at the most senior staff _ you’re seeing people who aren’t personally religious and have no particular affection for people who are religious-right leaders,” Kuo said. “In the political affairs shop in particular, you saw a lot of people who just rolled their eyes at … basically every religious-right leader that was out there, because they just found them annoying and insufferable. These guys were pains in the butt who had to be accommodated.”

Go here to see the original:
Ex-Aides: Bush Never Recovered From Katrina

George Bush pretty much knows that his tenure has been a foreign policy disaster. (What’s more, he cares deeply about that conclusion despite his protestations to the contrary, the subject of a future article). One piece of evidence for that is the scanty list of so-called achievements Bush is claiming. The latest violence in Gaza is a tragic, but fitting, bookend to Bush’s failure to make any progress on the Israeli-Palestinian question. During the last 8 years, there have been plenty of opportunities to do so. Bush did not just miss those opportunities, he often acted specifically to prevent them from occurring. In his “exit interviews” Bush (and Laura) have repeatedly asserted that his major achievement is that “he kept us safe” after 9/11. Implicitly, then, he bears no responsibility whatsoever for 9/11. So there! It is a clever rhetorical ploy. Unfortunately for Bush, facts–those pesky inconveniences– once again get in the way. As the Bush/Cheney campaign reminded us over-and-over in 2004, the first “al-Qaeda attack” on the homeland occurred in February 1993, the truck-bombing of the World Trade Center. Their point was to accuse John Kerry of not increasing our defenses adequately, and thus John Kerry was responsible for 9/11. Bill Clinton, in office for less than one month at the time of the bombing, when al-Qaeda was hardly known even to Bush Sr’s intelligence agency, was cast by Republicans as the main culprit. But, as many of their phony campaign tactics, this claim now returns to haunt them. If ‘93 were, indeed, the first al-Qaeda attack on US territory, and if Bill Clinton’s crew caught the Millennium Bomber in 2000 (i.e., al-Qaeda had not been shy of its intentions to attack the US just 20 months before 9/11), then why is it that George Bush gets away with the notion that 9/11 doesn’t count and thus “he kept us safe”? Bush refused to heed the warnings of George Tenet (lights blinking red), Cofer Black (who sought an emergency meeting with Rice), Richard Clarke and others. He never even convened a meeting of the Principals involved in anti-terrorism. And, by the way, 9/11 was 8 months, not just one month, into Bush’s Presidency. Moreover, Bush did not even need secret briefings to know what was going on. Tom Friedman, on June 26, 2001, wrote a column in the New York Times, using the technique of making up a “speech” by, you guessed it, Osama bin Laden, mocking Bush for removing investigators from Yemen and removing the fleet from Bahrain just because of “chatter” picked up by intelligence, and castigating the Bush Administration for focusing on Star Wars and ignoring al-Qaeda. This was 10 weeks before 9/11. But, then again, George Bush does not read newspapers. Nor, it must be added, did George Bush “keep us safe” by beefing up our border security (it was, we were told, “too expensive” to inspect containers for radiation; after all, the tax cuts for the wealthiest were more important), or by compelling chemical plant security, or by firing Don Rumsfeld to show the world how seriously he took Abu Gharib that served as a recruiting tactic for terrorists, or by reacting to Katrina in a timely fashion or even providing a competent Director of FEMA after 9/11. George Bush did not “keep us safe” by refusing to take up Iran’s offer to improve relations (after Iran helped us in Afghanistan against the Taliban); by inhibiting Israel from fully engaging Syria in peace talks; by exhausting our military with the unprovoked attack and occupation of Iraq; by shifting our attention away from al-Qaeda to Iraq; by not sending in Army Rangers when they had bin-Laden cornered at Tora Bora; by weakening the US economy even before the financial meltdown; by reducing the status of the US all over the world. No, George Bush, you did not “keep us safe” before 9/11 or after 9/11. You ignored repeated, intense, passionate warnings before 9/11, all of which had a predicate in prior history. Even a mere columnist, without access to the intelligence briefings, understood what was happening. You pursued Star Wars at the expense of terrorism. You pursued Iraq at the expense of bin Laden and Afghanistan. Until the Democrats took Congress in 2006, you failed to enact the 9/11-Commission recommendations. Despite days of warnings, you failed to take pre-emptive action for Katrina. You failed to install competent leadership at FEMA. You incited more terrorism against the US by failing to fire Rumsfeld for Abu Gharib. You failed to send reinforcements when we had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora. Bill Clinton kept us safe from additional al-Qaeda attacks on the US homeland for 95 months. He did not shred the Constitution to do it. Would Bush et al. credit Clinton for protecting the country because of that record? And, when Clinton struck al-Qaeda, all the Republicans could do was claim it was a “diversion” from what was, for them, the critical issue of the time: whether Clinton diddled Monica. Yes, George Bush, you can claim credit for fighting AIDS in Africa. That was a fine achievement. A bit thin for 8 years @$400,000 per year, but an important achievement nonetheless. And, why, George Bush, do you not claim credit for your only major foreign policy success, the voluntary nuclear disarming of Libya? Yes, you compromised to get that result, allowing Qaddafi not to turn over high government officials involved in the PanAm 103 bombing. It would have been preferable to bring them to justice, but far better not to have a Qaddafi with nuclear weapons. As for the rest of your tenure, to quote Sarah Palin, “thanks, but no thanks.”

See the original post:
Paul Abrams: George Bush Claims He "Kept Us Safe". Really? Did History Begin on January 20, 2001?

It’s a boy! 17 year-old Bristol Palin gave birth to “Tripp,” making mom Sarah a 44-year-old grandmother. Menstruating grannies are a phenomenon most commonly found in Appalachia or the ghetto. It was a busy month for the Palins. Last week, the baby’s other grandmother, Sherry Johnston, was arrested on six felony counts involving the Rush Limbaugh’s weakness, oxycontin.

Read the original post:
236.com: Congrats To Bristol, Alaska’s Newest Teen Mom!

Vice President Dick Cheney has just told a Wyoming newspaper that he doesn’t know why he’s unpopular. His exact phrase was, “I don’t have any idea. I don’t follow the polls.” Well, okay, first of all, knowing why you’re unpopular has nothing to do with following the polls. The polls don’t ask “why” you dislike Dick Cheney, just whether you dislike Dick Cheney. And then all they do is just report that your approval is only 15%. Knowing why you’re unpopular is easy. It simply requires following the news. Or having a honest sense of your strengths and weaknesses. Doing both of these things would seem to be a great quality to possess for being a good vice president of the United States. Not having them risks getting you 15% in popularity. Further…of course Dick Cheney follows the polls. Politicians follow polls more readily than pigs follow a trail of garbage. That doesn’t mean they all act on what the poll says. But sure as the sun rises, politicians follow polls. And this Administration, perhaps more than any in U.S. history, has made polls its lifeblood and followed them in order to appeal to its base and find issues to divide the country. Of course, the biggest proof that Mr. Cheney was lying and that he actually does follow polls is that he answered the question. When asked to explain his low approval rating, he didn’t respond, “What??! I’m unpopular?? Really?!!!! No way. You’re serious. No way. Yipes, I had no idea.” No, instead, he answered the question. And acknowledged that he knew he was, indeed, unpopular. He just said he didn’t know why. Of course, two weeks ago, he did have an answer. (Okay, I’m not saying he had the right answer. Or even a plausible one. Just “an” answer.) Mr. Cheney explained to Chris Wallace on Fox, “”Eventually you wear out your welcome in this business.” Forgetting for a moment that he made himself and the Bush Administration sound like the last season of the sitcom, “Mr. Belvedere,” it disingenuously ignores the reality that Bill Clinton left office with his approval rating at 65%. And that’s after he had been impeached. Dick Cheney is leaving with his approval wallowing at 15%. Multiply that by four, and he’s still below Bill Clinton. So, maybe Dick Cheney really doesn’t know why he’s so unpopular. Since it’s the end of the year, and since I believe in public service and being a good, honorable fellow, I will provide a kindness for Vice President Dick Cheney. I will explain to him why he’s unpopular. Here are 25 reasons to begin with. I trust he’s taking notes for the next time he’s asked. 1. You pressured the CIA into falsifying information that got the nation involved in the Iraq War. 2. You admitted to approving torture. 3. You promoted spying on American citizens. 4. You repeatedly suggested that America would be greeted as liberators in Iraq and then after that lie became an embarrassment, lied and said you never said that. 5. You pressured the CIA into falsifying information that got the nation involved in the Iraq War. I know I said that before, but you can never say that one enough. Even if all the other reasons didn’t exist, it would be enough. It’s a really good one. 6. You lead the search team for finding a vice president for George Bush, and named yourself, ushering in an era of selfishness and political manipulation. 7. Your involving America in the Iraq War has cost the country $583 billion dollars. Well, for starters. This is money that could have been used for a good cause: like bailing out Wall Street CEOs. 8. You show a scorn of the U.S. Constitution by suggesting that you are not a part of the Executive Branch of government, nor a part of the Senate, but an island unto yourself. 9. Your involving the nation in the Iraq War has gotten 4,200 Americans killed. 10. You showed a heartless scorn and frozen coldness towards the American public and those 4,200 dead by responding “So what?” when informed that two-thirds of Americans opposed the Iraq War. 11. You held a secret meeting with the heads of oil companies for determining America’s energy policies. And you didn’t even include America’s top expert on energy, Sarah Palin. 12. You helped oversee the collapse of the American economy. 13. You have helped oversee the collapse of America’s high-standing around the world. 14. You come across as really mean. Also, snarly, angry and vicious, all qualities contrary to a public who elected your boss pretty much because they think he seemed like the kind of guy they could have a beer with. You seem like the kind of guy who would hit them on the head with a beer bottle. When they weren’t looking. After they’d bought you the beer. 15. You began the plan to out a CIA operative who was protecting American by working on counter-intelligence, simply because you didn’t like an accurate report her husband wrote. 16. You support the illegal detention of prisoners, eradicating the 1,000-year humanitarian tradition of habeas corpus. 17. Your saying that you don’t know why you are unpopular is why you are unpopular. It shows you to be either so cut off from reality as to be near-inhuman, or such a bald-faced liar as would make Pinocchio seem honorable. Saying you don’t know why you’re unpopular is like the person who punches someone in the eye and goes, “What??! What did I do?!” 18. Your abrasiveness, highlighted by crude swearing at opponents on the “gentleman’s club” of the Senate floor, is seen as a leading cause of the breakdown of decency and bi-partisanship in government. 19. You went into hiding and stayed in your undisclosed bunker at the very time America needed transparency and leadership. 20. You seem like you’re the real-life equivalent of Darth Vader. Just to be clear, this is different from coming across as “really mean.” Grade school principals are “really mean.” But after-class detention is different from trying to annihilate human life forms by sucking them into a universal Black Hole. 21. Your Administration ignored a briefing, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack U.S.,” and the U.S. got attacked by Bin Laden. 22. You ignore that the U.S. got attacked and that 3,000 people got killed under your Administration’s watch, while lying that you kept America safe. 23. You took a proud, honored nation and crushed it so badly that 81% of Americans say the country is seriously off-track. I particularly mention this since you say you don’t follow polls. 24. You have retained stock options and deferred salary to Halliburton, of which you were CEO, despite insisting you severed all ties to the company that has received several billion in government contracts from the Iraq War. 25. You shot your 78-year-old friend Harry Whittington in the face, didn’t rush with him to the hospital, didn’t instantly apologize, and got him to accept responsibility. Sort of like what you’ve tried to do to the United States. Anyway, now you know. In case it comes up again. Like at your war crimes trial. Or at lunch. Happy New Year, though. Same to America. And a happy one it finally is……

More: 
Robert J. Elisberg: Dick Cheney: the Only Person in the World Who Doesn’t Know Why He’s Unpopular

NEW YORK — It proved to be more than a joke when David Letterman said in late September that “the road to the White House runs through me.” Presidential candidates found late-night comedy shows a particularly valuable asset during the 2008 campaign, making more than four times the number of on-set appearances with Letterman, Jay Leno, Jon Stewart and the crowd than the 2004 contenders did, some new research has found. “Candidates have figured out that you can reach voters through entertainment venues even better than news,” said Robert Lichter, a George Mason University professor and head of the Center for Media and Public Affairs. Candidates made 110 appearances on the late-night shows, up from 25 in 2004, the center said. Fifty this time came before a primary vote was even cast, as a full complement of candidates in both parties looked for ways to get their faces in front of cameras _ something President Bush didn’t have to worry about four years ago. There’s a rich history of candidates using entertainment venues to show voters they can laugh at themselves: Richard Nixon went on “Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-in” in 1968, and Bill Clinton played the sax on “The Arsenio Hall Show” in 1992. Yet it wasn’t until 2008 that the appearances began to seem routine. Republican John McCain made 17 such guest shots on venues that relentlessly made him the butt of jokes, although one appearance he canceled _ with Letterman _ may be remembered longer than any of them. President-elect Barack Obama had 15 appearances, third behind Republican Mike Huckabee, who now has a talk show of his own on Fox News Channel. For the shows, it was a way to tap into a campaign that was a television hit from start to finish. Leno had 22 candidate appearances, while Stewart had 21, Letterman had 19 and Stephen Colbert had 15. Not only does a candidate have the chance to display a sense of humor to the late-night crowd, a good exchange could be magnified with endless repeats on YouTube or cable news networks the next day. The shows also give the candidates a venue to talk directly to voters than they might otherwise get. In 2000, candidate George Bush had more time to talk in one appearance with Letterman than he had during a full month on the “CBS Evening News,” Lichter said. And who wants to deal with pesky journalists, who always want to knock you off message? “It’s a lot more risky, as Sarah Palin will attest, to do an interview with Katie Couric than it is with Jay Leno,” said Howard Wolfson, a veteran campaign strategist and former Hillary Clinton adviser. They aren’t always puffball appearances, though. Letterman, in particular, has become a particularly sharp interviewer. When McCain backed off an appearance citing the economic crisis _ then did an interview with Couric later that day _ Letterman wouldn’t let him forget it until McCain came back and pleaded for forgiveness. At a crucial time, Letterman was repeatedly reminding viewers of McCain’s brief campaign suspension, a period the candidate would rather voters have forgotten, Lichter said. His running mate stayed away from the talk shows but made one memorable appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” getting in on some jokes about her.

View original post here: 
Study: 2008 Politicians Preferred Late Night TV

A Chip By Any Other Name . . . by Menachem Rosensaft What kind of a chip is a Chip Saltsman? A cow chip? Perhaps a sheep chip? You get my drift. In any event, as a progressive Democrat, I’m rooting for Horse Chip Saltsman, who used to be Mike Huckabee’s campaign manager, to be the next head of the Republican National Committee. In case anyone missed it, Mule Chip Saltsman is the sensitive soul who sent RNC members a musical CD featuring, among other offensive classics, a tasteless little ditty called “Barack, the Magic Negro,” which was first performed on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show in April of 2007. You’ve got to hand it to both Limbaugh and Goat Chip Saltsman. The song sure has catchy lyrics, like: “some say barack’s articulate and bright and new and clean the media sure love this guy a white interloper’s dream” Other numbers on this Yuletide CD, sung by right wing satirist Paul Shanklin, include “Love Client #9,” “John Edwards’ Poverty Tour,” and, just to make absolutely clear that he is an equal opportunity offender, “The Star Spanglish Banner” (”Jose can you see … cross the border we sailed as the gringos were sleeping”). According to Burro Chip Saltsman, “I think most people recognize political satire when they see it.” Actually, and more importantly, most people recognize insensitive bigotry when they see and hear it. The mere fact that Buffalo Chip Saltsman is a credible candidate for the RNC chairmanship speaks volumes. With him at the helm, the Republican Party will certainly get Ann Coulter’s vote. And Sean Hannity’s. And Diane Fedele’s. Diane Fedele? For those who haven’t memorized all the Republican tasteless gems of the 2008 presidential campaign, she’s the wit who produced the “Ten Dollar Obama Bucks” food stamp showing the then Democratic candidate’s head superimposed on a donkey’s body surrounded by a chunk of watermelon, ribs, a pitcher of Kool-Aid, and a bucket of fried chicken. Bison Chip Saltsman is also likely to get Marcia Stirman’s support. She’s the chairwoman of the Otero County Republican Women in New Mexico who wrote in the Alamogordo Daily News that “I believe Muslims are our enemies,” and that “Obama isn’t a messiah or a Democrat. He’s a Muslim socialist.” Another kindred spirit is Jeffrey M. Frederick, the Chairman of the Virginia Republican Party who likened Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden in a pep talk to campaign volunteers, explaining that “Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon. That is scary.” To their credit, some Republicans have reacted with appropriate disgust. “This is so inappropriate that it should disqualify any Republican National Committee candidate who would use it,” observed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. And Robert M. “Mike” Duncan, the current RNC chairman who is running for reelection, said that “I am shocked and appalled that anyone would think this is appropriate.” But so far we haven’t heard from George W. Bush, or Dick Cheney, or John McCain, or Mitt Romney, or Rudy Giuliani, or Tim Pawlenty, or Mike Huckabee, or, for that matter, Sarah Palin. As a partisan, I’d like nothing better than to see someone like Jackass Chip Saltsman, who gets his inspiration from Rush Limbaugh, head the GOP. But as an American, I recognize that such combination of bigotry, stupidity and insensitivity is not at all good for either our country or its body politic. In a recent interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Colin Powell counseled his fellow Republicans against continuing “to use polarization for political advantage,” and pointedly asked, “Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?” All those Republicans who have not yet spoken out about Generic Farm Animal Chip Saltsman would be well advised to give General Powell’s words some serious consideration. Menachem Rosensaft is a lawyer in New York City

Read the original post:
Menachem Rosensaft: A Chip By Any Other Name . . .

In a year when everyone was looking for a bailout, politicians did more for political comedy than any other industry. We had governors gone rogue, reverends gone wild, shoe-throwers, imaginary snipers and, of course, everyone’s favorite mavericky, Prada-wearing hockey mom. As a salute to those who made this the funniest year since, well, last year, here’s a look back at 2008’s most memorable feats and foibles, in words and glorious video: Worst photo op: Sarah Palin’s turkey pardoning fiasco — a.k.a. “wattlegate” — in which she pardoned a turkey at a farm in Wasilla, and then gave an interview while other turkeys were shoved into a cone of death and slaughtered in the background. As David Letterman joked, she can see Russia, but she can’t see what’s going on five feet behind her: Least likely to be invited for a sleepover in the Obama White House: Rev. Jesse Jackson, who was caught on an open mic talking about pitching Obama’s voice an octave higher , in a manner of speaking. Jackson was taking offense at Obama’s suggestion that African-Americans needed to take more responsibility for things like fatherhood and being responsible husbands. To which Jay Leno quipped, “Jesse thought it was insulting, not only to him, but to his former mistress and their love child.” Best typo: In a story about potential vice presidential picks, the AP referred to Joe Lieberman as “the Democratic vice presidential prick in 2000.” Shortest fuse: John’s McCain’s brother, Joe McCain, who called 911 to complain about being stuck in traffic. When the dispatcher asked if that was seriously why he was calling an emergency hotline, Joe the Hothead cursed him out and hung up. We might have never known about the incident, except when the dispatcher called the cell phone back, he got this message: “Hi, this is Joe McCain. I can’t take this message now because I am involved in a very important family political project.” And to think, he came within 8.5 million votes of becoming the next Roger Clinton: Worst exit strategy: John Edwards, who, upon being confronted by a National Enquirer reporter at the Beverly Hills Hilton after paying a late-night visit to his former mistress and her child, did what any self-respecting ex-Senator and presidential aspirant with nothing to hide would do. He fled into a bathroom and tried to hold the door shut. Edwards later admitted to the affair, but denied fathering her child. Or, as the humor site Fark reported it: “John Edwards: Billie Jean IS my lover, but the kid is not my son.” Best moment of Palinfreude: The prank call Palin received from a Canadian comedy duo, who convinced her she was talking to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France. Palin didn’t pick up on any of the hints that the conversation was a joke, even when the faux Frenchman said, “From my ‘ouse, I can see Belgium,” or when he complimented her on the documentary about her life, Hustler’s ” Nailin’ Palin .” “Ohh, good, thank you, yes,” she replied: Worst attempt to woo the Fox News demographic: Barack Obama, who was heard at a San Francisco fund-raiser saying that small-town voters are “bitter” and “cling to guns or religion.” The remark was so offensive to armed churchgoers, they didn’t know whether to turn the other cheek or lock and load. Most notorious member of the Hypocrites’ V.I.P. Club: Former Gov. Eliot Spitzer of New York, who rose to power as a sanctimonious crusader against ethics violations and corruption, but didn’t let that get in the way of his taste for high-priced hookers. As Attorney General, Spitzer had famously busted prostitution rings, apparently so he could keep them all for himself. Spitzer was forced to resign after being outed as Client No. 9 at the Emperor’s V.I.P. Club. Jay Leno was confused: “He’s the governor — who were the eight guys in front of him? You’d think as governor, you’d at least get to go first.” Worst con artist: Joe the Plumber, who John McCain called his “role model,” even though it turned out he didn’t have a plumber’s license, was unemployed, had cheated on his taxes, and his name wasn’t even Joe. As Jimmy Kimmel put it, “He’s the Sarah Palin of plumbing.” Best reflexes: President Bush, who dodged two shoes hurled at him by an Iraqi journalist with a dexterity that conjured comparisons to Keanu Reeves in The Matrix . Although, as David Letterman noted, “Too bad he didn’t react that way with bin Laden or Katrina, bin Laden or the mortgage crisis, bin Laden or Afghanistan, bin Laden or the Lehman Brothers”: Most courageous under imaginary fire: Hillary Clinton, whose account of dodging sniper fire after landing in Bosnia was debunked when video footage showed her being greeted on the tarmac not by gun shots, but by a young girl’s poetry reading. “If only she had channeled that active fantasy world into her marriage,” quipped Bill Maher. Biggest wardrobe malfunction: Palin’s $150,000 shopping spree, for which she was reimbursed with an endless barrage of jokes, like this one from Letterman: “The difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull: lipstick, Prada shoes, a Gucci handbag, and a few $3,000 suits.” Biggest talking-point malfunction: Obama’s run-in with Joe the Plumber, in which he gave a shout-out to Karl Marx by saying, “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” Off in the distance, his Teleprompter wept. Best use of expletives: Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, who, while allegedly trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat, was recorded saying, “I’ve got this thing and it’s [bleeping] golden,” “I’m just not giving it up for [bleeping] nothing,” and “Give this [bleep] Obama his senator? [Bleep] him. For nothing. [Bleep] him.’” Better still, a day before his arrest, the Governor invited authorities to tape his phone calls, huffing, “I can tell you that whatever I say is always lawful.” Not to mention bleeping insane. Best use of a Viking Grill, a vibrating Shiatsu massage lounger, and $250,000 in other gifts: Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, who became the nation’s highest-ranking convicted felon after lying on Senate financial disclosure forms. Naturally, Stevens received a 56-second-long standing ovation after delivering his farewell speech to the Senate, which, as Rachel Maddow of MSNBC noted, worked out to “eight seconds of heartfelt standing applause for each of his felony convictions.” Most brutal Palin insult: It was humiliating enough when McCain aides called Palin a “diva” and a “whack job,” while accusing her of “going rogue,” throwing temper tantrums, and not knowing that Africa was a continent. But the most devastating sound bite came from a McCain aide who described her shopping spree as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast.” Best attempt to win imaginary delegates: Barack Obama, who said at an Oregon campaign stop, “I’ve now been in 57 states — I think one left to go.” Best train wreck: The Sarah Palin-Katie Couric interview, which featured one laughable gaffe after the next, including Palin’s failure to think of any Supreme Court decisions other than Roe v. Wade … … her failure to name a single newspaper or magazine she reads other than “all of ‘em, any of ‘em” … … and her claim to foreign policy expertise because Vladimir Putin likes to rear his head and fly over Alaskan airspace. It teetered on such self-parody that all Tina Fey had to do on Saturday Night Live was repeat parts of Palin’s answers verbatim, gosh darnit, and also there too, you betcha! Worst campaign surrogate: Bill Clinton, who had to be muzzled during the Democratic primaries after playing the race card and the patriot card against Obama, growling and snapping at reporters, and saying unfortunate things like, “The country is groaning and moaning and screaming for change.” As Jay Leno joked, like a lot of women in Washington, Hillary soon realized she had slept with Bill Clinton for nothing. Cheapest campaign stunt: John McCain, who “suspended” his campaign to go save the economy, said the presidential debate had to be canceled, flew to Washington, screwed up the bailout deal, then un-suspended his campaign and flew to the debate, even though there was no deal. “Usually when a 72-year-old man acts this way, this is when the kids start calling nursing homes,” quipped Bill Maher. Best smackdown following a cheap campaign stunt: When McCain told Letterman he was canceling his appearance on the show because he had to fly to Washington, and then showed up instead for an interview with Katie Couric, Letterman mocked him mercilessly. “Hey John!” Letterman shouted as he aired the live CBS feed of the interview for his audience. “I’ve got a question: You need a lift to the airport?” It got even uglier for McCain, with Letterman saying: “This is not the way a tested hero behaves. Somebody’s putting something in his Metamucil”: Least likely to prevail at a sanity hearing: Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who burned up YouTube with his fiery rants imploring God to damn America for perpetrating genocide against chickens that came home to roost on 9/11 (or something like that). Despite being widely disparaged as a crackpot, Wright said he received over a million emails and phone calls telling him to keep on speaking out — “all of them from Hillary Clinton,” joked Jay Leno. Creepiest Palin crush: Rich Lowry, National Review editor, who reacted to Palin’s performance in the vice presidential debate thusly: “I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, ‘Hey, I think she just winked at me.’ And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.” Which left everyone wondering the same thing : When did National Review turn into Penthouse Forum? Creepiest Obama crush: Chris Matthews of MSNBC, who said that while listening to Obama speak, “I felt this thrill going up my leg “: Best evidence that the next four years may not be a total disaster for political comedy: While on the campaign trail, Joe Biden referred to his running mate as “Barack America”; implored a wheelchair-bound politician to “stand up”; recalled how Franklin Roosevelt addressed the nation on TV when the stock market crashed in 1929 (even though F.D.R. wasn’t president and few had even heard of TV at the time); and said Hillary Clinton would have made a better V.P. pick because she was more qualified than him. Thanks to Biden, comedians appear to be getting a stimulus package, too. Best epitaph on the Bush years: In his parting words at his final G-8 Summit, President Bush ended a private meeting with world leaders by saying, “Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter.” According to press reports, he then punched the air and grinned widely as the rest of those present looked on in shock. Who said he never had an exit strategy? This piece originally appeared in the New York Times’ Laugh Lines blog. Daniel Kurtzman edits the Political Humor page of About.com, which is part of The New York Times Company. He is author of the books “How to Win a Fight With a Conservative” and “How to Win a Fight With a Liberal.”

Go here to read the rest: 
Daniel Kurtzman: 2008’s Most Laughable Political Antics

Most people think of procrastination as a simple bad habit, but it’s often much more than that: it’s a strategy we employ when we’re afraid of the outcome of an activity or project. So, someone who hates his job might procrastinate on looking for a new one because he’s afraid of not getting any offers, or landing one that’s even worse than his current one. A novelist with writer’s block (blocks being an extreme form of procrastination) may be afraid of not selling her book, getting a bad review, or offending relatives or others with what she’s written. Someone whose lifelong dream has been to start a business may procrastinate on doing so because he’s afraid of failing - or succeeding and having many new responsibilities and demands placed on him. In the short term, procrastination works well: by not finishing (or starting!) your project, you are indeed protected from its scary potential outcome(s). In the long term, however, procrastination can lead to a bitter, unfulfilled life. So it’s a good idea to work with coaches, therapists or others to learn to cope with any fears holding you back. It also helps if you understand the specific form your procrastination takes. One common form, of course, is escapist or mindless activities such as video games, Web surfing or television. While a little of these kinds of diversions can be fun and a stress reliever, too much is a tragic waste of time - or a life. There’s also another, even more pernicious form of procrastination: activities that mimic productive work. So, the unhappy employee reads endless want ads and career books, but never gets around to applying. The novelist does endless research, but never gets around to writing. Or, he writes the same chapter over and over…and over and over…again - sometimes for years. The would-be entrepreneur takes business classes, but never gets around to doing her business plan. Or does the plan, but doesn’t carry it out. All these people probably believe they’re making progress toward their goal, so they don’t feel as guilty as if they had played video games. They may not even recognize their “faux productivity” for the procrastination problem it is. But they are still unlikely to reach their goal, and still at risk for a bitter, unfulfilled life. Faux productivity also takes two other common forms: 1) Good works, in which the procrastinator spends a lot of his or her time helping family members or friends, or doing volunteer or community work. I am not against good works! I’m not even against doing them full-time, if that’s what you really want to be doing. But it’s all too easy to get sucked into helping other people at the expense of your own needs and priorities, particularly if you’re afraid of possible outcomes. The solution is to budget and schedule your time so that you help other people AND take care of your own needs; and you will probably also have to learn, if you don’t know it already, that essential time management skill, saying “no.” And the other common form of faux productivity is…drumroll… 2) Housework. The way it works is often this: it’s your scheduled time to work on your project. Suddenly, however, you feel an irresistible need to do the laundry, mop the floor, shop for groceries, mow the lawn, or clean out the garage. Probably, the need isn’t truly urgent — or, at least, no more urgent than it was a few hours ago, or will be a few hours from now, after you’ve finished your work. The sudden, irresistible urgency is the clue that it’s not really the laundry itself that’s important, but your need to procrastinate and avoid making progress. Here’s the thing about housework: it’s really boring and unfulfilling. And often actively unpleasant. And then, after you’ve done it, you need to do it again in a week or two. Blech. 19th and 20th century feminists recognized housework for what it was: tedium, and an impediment to individual and societal liberation. Thankfully, it’s a lot easier to keep house today than it was 100 years ago; and yet, many people continue to fritter away their lives doing excess housework when there’s something more meaningful they’d like to accomplish. That’s partly because there’s usually something around that needs cleaning, so it’s a handy excuse, but also because some societal elements have long made a fetish of housework. For centuries, literally, social conservatives have promoted the idea of the selfless (in both senses of the word) wife and mother who devotes herself 100% to housework and others’ needs. And the media promotes an unrealistic, perfectionist view of what a “normal” home looks like because that view sells products and advertising. (The latter afflicts both women and men, as any guy who spends his Saturdays doing yardwork when he’d rather be doing something else can testify.) Of course, conservatives and the media rarely discuss the costs, in time, money and lost opportunities, of maintaining a showpiece home. (And these aren’t the only costs: doctors believe that antibacterial and other “hypercleanliness” products can actually make us sick by impeding immune system development and triggering allergies and chemical sensitivites.) And people do get the message. I have found that a major reason people do more housework than they want is that they’re fearful of family criticism. (Women seem particularly fearful of criticism from their mothers and sisters.) There’s also a lot of intra- and inter-family competition out there on this front. Another common problem is not knowing how to manage time. Many people think time management is about stuffing as much as possible into your schedule, so they think it’s reasonable to expect, for instance, that, even though they have a job, they should be able to do the same amount of housework as their stay-at-home mom did. What time management is really about, however, is eliminating as much as possible from your schedule so you can get the important stuff done. It’s also about making conscious decisions about how you spend your time. So, assuming you have 112 awake hours in your week (which you do if you get 8 hours of sleep a night), and 50 of those hours go to your job and commute, how will you spend the remaining 62 hours? That’s a huge amount of time, when you think about it: enough to create art, do civic work, or build a business, while also nurturing your family, having fun, staying healthy and, yes, doing some housework. But you will need to make deliberate choices about how you will spend your time and not procrastinate much. How many of your precious 62 hours will you devote to mopping, laundry, food shopping, etc? As few as possible, I hope, especially if you’ve put your life dreams, health, relationships, or other important values on the back burner. To be clear, I’m not against you doing loads of housework if that is indeed what you want to be doing. I only object to it when it conflicts with more important goals. I’m also not saying to give up the activities you happen to like. If you enjoy garden work or cooking, then go for it! Just make sure your motive isn’t procrastination. I am also not saying you should live in a dirty home. In fact, here are steps you can take to reduce the time you spend on housework and still live in a clean space: (1) Live simply, and don’t buy too much stuff. Everything you buy costs you twice: the initial purchase price, and the time and money you spend keeping it cleaned and maintained. For this reason, also be ruthless about getting rid of furniture, clothing, appliances and other possessions you no longer use. (2) Organize your space. A well-organized home with adequate storage space, and where everything is stored close to where it is used, takes much less time to clean than a disorganized one. (3) Organize your time. Treat housework not like an open-ended stream of chores, but a finite project you need to complete within a fixed period of time each week. Time-budget each chore (dishes, dusting, etc.), and also each room. Then keep track of your actual time use. By doing this, you will often work more efficiently. (4) Invest in quality tools and supplies. Buy a good vacuum cleaner that gets all the dirt on the first pass, or a powerful lawn mower that makes that chore go faster. (And let at least part of your lawn go au naturale .) Keep a broom or mop conveniently in every room that sees heavy traffic. Buy closet and other organizers, and any time you see a cleaning gadget you think will save you time, or make an unpleasant task easier, buy it. (5) Delegate. Everyone in the household should be helping with the housework. Everyone. Even two year olds can pick up their own toys. It can be difficult to ask people to take on chores you have been doing, but the key is not just to ask for help but explain why you need the help. Often, when we explain our cherished goals, and ask for help attaining them, people willingly pitch in. It’s also a good idea not to simply tell people what chores you’d like them to take on, but solicit their input on solving your (really, the household’s) time problem. That makes them feel more involved and valued, and they’ll also be more invested in a solution they helped create. So don’t just say, “I really need Bob to do the laundry, and Sarah to take charge of the dog, and Billy to cook two meals a week…” but something like, “As you know, I’ve always felt so bad about not finishing my degree, but I would really like to finish it by next year. To do that, I need to take two classes each semester, but to do that, I need to do less around the house. Could I have your ideas on how this could happen?” Then, during the brainstorming part of the ensuing discussion, you can list your ideas along with everyone else’s. And if Bob volunteers to do the laundry, and Sarah, to take care of the dog, and Billy, the meals — or, if they come up with even better ideas - so much the better. What if, despite your best efforts, people won’t help? That’s a sad situation, but doesn’t leave you optionless. You can still look at the way you spend your time, and make at least some changes to it. (6) Outsource. Of course, I know it’s a bad economy, but if you happen to have the money, then by all means hire a cleaning, laundry or lawn service. Or, get takeout meals or use a grocery delivery service so you don’t have to stand in line at the supermarket and lug heavy bags home. If you feel guilty doing any of this, (a) don’t, and (b) pay or tip the workers lavishly: I promise you they won’t mind. Don’t think that only rich or decadent people pay someone to help with household chores: plenty of “ordinary” people do as well, including plenty with impeccable progressive bona fides. Outsourcing is a key strategy for people with an ambitious life mission such as art, activism or entrepreneurship - or who simply would rather devote their time elsewhere than cleaning up. And, finally, (7) lower your standards! Yes, you want a clean, well-organized home - but do you need a fanatically, perfectionistically clean one? Is it really necessary for you to mop the floors every week? Is it a terrible thing to leave the sheets on the bed for an extra few days before laundering them? Is it a sin to serve your family a take-out meal or (my favorite) bring a store-bought dish to a pot-luck dinner? Is it necessary to keep your lawn trimmed to golf-course neatness? The answer to all of these questions, for many people, is “no.” Everyone’s situation varies, of course — and a high-density household generally requires more cleaning than a low-density one, just as one with companion animals requires more cleaning than one without. Or, if you are a highly visual person, you may require an exceptionally neat home, or a higher-maintenance one with more furniture or other design elements. All of these are fine reasons to do more than the minimum level of housework, but just make sure you’re not overdoing it, or doing it at the expense of more important goals. In general, if the only reason you are doing a household task is because, (a) you think you’re supposed to, or (b) “what will people say?” then get over it and start living your life comfortably and guilt-free according to your own values. I tend to be skeptical of New Year’s resolutions, which tend to be grandiose and built more around impulse than planning. But if you’re going to do one, how about this one: 10% less time spent on housework in 2009. Or, if you can achieve 20%, even better. Here’s to a happier, more relaxed, more productive — and slightly messier — 2009!

Read the original post: 
Hillary Rettig: Your Best New Year’s Resolution: Do Less Housework!

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE… It was a somewhat eventful year, I suppose. Speaking in Grant Park November 4th, Barack Obama summed up our situation in 2008 as “two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.” We would add one more seismic event to that list—the skinny guy with the big ears who dazzled a nation and gave us hope. I’m speaking, of course, of Michael Phelps. Oh, and then there was ” That one .”  The chosen one, the anti-Christ, the terrorist paller-arounder, the Muslim, the mega-celebrity, the too-black, not-black-enough, Madrasah-schooled foreign, exotic, elitist, occasional-cigarette-bumming, untested, un-American, half Kenyan, half British, half Kansan, three-pointer-dunking, crazy-preacher-huggin’ socialist Marxist commie hunk ‘o beefcake. He made some news, too. And then there was Sarah. Sarah Sarah Sarah. When she made her entrance on the public stage, horny men across the country fantasized about making sweet love to that pistol packin’, moose-huntin’, ass-kickin’, Russia-watchin’, winkin’ atcha hockey mom who really doesn’t know very much about very much. By the time she made her exit, they were having nightmares about getting their wieners stuffed into a turkey-decapitating machine. I hope we haven’t seen the last of her. Oh, and after Wall Street lost all your money, the government gave Wall Street a bunch more of your money. And not a single mob with torches and pitchforks appeared anywhere. Crazy. C&J kept tabs on all this hoo-ha, and tonight we humbly projectile-vomit the first of a four-part series that chronicles the highlights and lowlights of 2008 as viewed through a lens on which is stenciled: “WTF?” To get there just click your heels together and repeat after me: “There’s no place like Iowa in the middle of friggin’ January. There’s no place like Iowa in the middle of friggin’ January…” Cheers and Jeers looks back in There’s Moreville… [ Swoosh!! ]  Right now!  [ GONG!! ]

Here is the original post:
Cheers and Jeers: 2008 Flashback, Pt. 1

Two hours before the doors were set to open Friday morning, a Miami-area Wal-Mart parking lot was full of cars _ and possibility. But in a Christmas shopping season in which many Americans were unwilling to spend, even a packed lot doesn’t always translate into holiday cheer for stores. As stores offered rock-bottom prices and extended return policies, shoppers returned to the malls the day after Christmas. But many were on the hunt for big bargains on specific items or hoping to return unwanted gifts _ not looking to splurge. Brenda Peterson was looking for “flat-out bargains” after driving 35 miles to arrive at a J.C. Penney in Raleigh, N.C., at 5 a.m., a half-hour before the store opened. But she left empty-handed. A toy that she had spotted before Christmas _ a stuffed dog that rolls over and shakes its paw _ was gone. And even sales of up to 60 percent off clothing and other items weren’t too enticing. After all, she had seen those sales before Christmas, too. That was a common refrain among shoppers Friday, who appeared to be searching for a deal unlike any they had seen so far this year. Leona Mason of Bowie, Md., was scouring the Towson Town Center mall for a few after-Christmas gifts, including a holiday blouse for her sister. “I’m basically looking for bargains,” she said. “I’m looking for sales.” That kind of focus by shoppers could spell deep trouble for the nation’s stores, which are facing the worst holiday shopping season in decades. Holiday sales _ which typically account for 30 percent to 50 percent of a retailer’s annual total _ have been less than jolly. Job cuts, portfolio losses and other economic woes have led many Americans to cut back on their spending. Meanwhile, strong winter storms kept some would-be shoppers at home. According to preliminary data from SpendingPulse, which tracks purchases paid for by credit card, checks or cash, retail sales fell between 5.5 percent and 8 percent during the holiday season compared with last year. Excluding auto and gas sales, they fell 2 percent to 4 percent, according to SpendingPulse. More people did appear to shop online, particularly in the last two weeks of the season, when storms hit. Online sales dipped just 2.3 percent, SpendingPulse said. A fuller indicator of how retailers fared will arrive Jan. 8, when major stores report same-store sales, or sales at locations open at least a year, for December. Many stores are likely to report a loss for the fourth quarter, said NPD senior retail analyst Marshal Cohen. Stores were hoping that big discounts the day after Christmas could lure people out and help stem those losses. And although some malls appeared to be busy with bargain-hunters and gift-returners, analysts said traffic appeared to be lighter than in years past. The parking lot of a Wal-Mart in Milwaukee was less than one-third full Friday morning, with many shoppers appearing to stock up on groceries and small household items. Gigi Johnson, a special needs teacher, bought laundry detergent and some clothes for her twin 14-year-old daughters. But she said she was not planning any large purchases for the next few months and would put the money she received from Christmas in the bank. “Maybe I’ll wait until tax time and get a computer or TV,” Johnson said. “But until then, I’m resisting the temptation to buy anything else.” Newlywed Anthony Guites, 32, planned to stop at three Miami-area stores to return gifts from his wife. He had three things to exchange at Wal-Mart for a fishing rod he wanted. “She got me a fishing rod that I don’t like. She got me this tool set that I already have. And she got me workout clothes that, let’s just say, are way too colorful for me,” he said. ___ Associated Press Writers Sarah Skidmore in Portland, Ore., Betsy Vereckey in New York, Damian Grass in Miami, Mark Pratt in Boston, Dinesh Ramde in Milwaukee, Wis., Emery Dalesio in Raleigh, N.C., and Ben Greene in Baltimore contributed to this report.

Read the original here:
Stores cut prices to entice post-holiday shoppers

10. Jews feel the financial and image pain of Wall Streeter Bernie Madoff as his money lies damage Yeshiva University and Elie Weisel as well as smaller stakeholders. 9. Sarah Palin’s witchcraft video. 8. Rev. Jeremiah Wright appears at the National Press Club. By playing the fool Wright makes his defenders, including Barack Obama, look foolish. 7. Prosperity Gospelers add to the foreclosure crisis by preaching that Jesus had provided poor congregants with a house they could not afford. 6. Elizabeth Dole runs the “There is No God” campaign ad accusing opponent Kay Hagen (who teaches Sunday School) of atheism. 5. The Catholic Church, Mormons and Rick Warren join in a theologically unlikely alliance to pass Proposition 8 and revoke the right of Gays and Lesbians to marry. Rick Warren is tapped by Obama to offer the invocation at his inauguration. 4. The anti-Muslim rhetoric in the presidential election , coupled with a persistent belief that Barack Obama was a Muslim was bad enough. But it was topped off by the Obama campaign’s insistience on the candidate’s Christian faith rather than condemning the religion-baitng. 3. Buddhist Monks and nuns are slaughtered in Tibet as China cracks down in anticipation of the Olympics and similar violence in Burma by the dictatorship. 2. Islamist terrorists take the city of Mumbai hostage killing people of all faith and especially targeting Jews. 1. With all of the power of the world religions in 2008 we did not muster the political will to stop the daily starvation of thousands of our fellow human beings. Cross-posted from Beliefnet’s Progressive Revival blog

View original here:
Paul Raushenbush: The Ten Worst Religious Stories of 2008

WASILLA, Alaska — The mother of Bristol Palin’s boyfriend sent text messages discussing drug transactions less than a month after the young woman’s mother, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, was nominated as the Republican vice presidential candidate, according to court documents filed this week. An affidavit from an Alaska state trooper, filed Monday, states that Sherry L. Johnston referred in her messages to two police informants to “coffee” as a code for the drug OxyContin. Johnston, 42, was arrested on felony drug charges last week after state troopers served a search warrant at her Wasilla home. She allegedly sold OxyContin tablets to the informants on three occasions this fall, the affidavit states. Police said two of the meetings were recorded by a hidden camera and a microphone. Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston, 18. Sarah Palin announced in September that her daughter Bristol, also 18, was pregnant and that Johnston was the father. Their child was due to be born Dec. 18, her grandfather Chuck Heath told the Anchorage Daily News recently. Authorities say the case against Sherry Johnston began in the second week of September, when drug investigators intercepted a package containing 179 OxyContin pills. That led to the arrest of the suspects, who agreed to be informants. According to the affidavit, Johnston sent a text message to one informant Oct. 1, writing: “Hey, my phones are tapped and reporters and god knows who else is always following me and the family so no privacy. I will let u no when I can go for cof.” The trooper’s affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin’s candidacy factored into the investigation, with state officials delaying execution of a search warrant until this month, when Johnston was “no longer under the protection or surveillance of the Secret Service.”

Here is the original:
Bristol Palin’s Future Mother-In-Law’s Drug Arrest: Trooper Says Election Delayed Case

In a tumultuous year, ten political events stood out. The Worst 5. “Just say no.” Republican Senators Block Critical Legislation: The 110th Congress saw Republican Senators invoke cloture motions - to limit debate and head off filibusters - a record 138 times, more than double the previous ignominious standard. The do-nothing GOP killed legislation with broad support - bills that had already passed in the House of Representatives - including renewable energy tax credits, a windfall profits tax on oil companies, negotiations with drug companies over Medicare drug prices, DC voting rights, and withdrawal from Iraq. As a result Republicans lost eight Senate seats in the general election. 4. “Gimme the money.” Paulson Demands $700 Billion Bailout Blank Check: On September 18th, in a one-page memo to Congress, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson proposed the Troubled Asset Relief Program , demanding $700 billion to purchase mortgage-backed securities, as well as unlimited discretion spending the funds. Congress modified his proposal to release funds in stages and provide oversight. Nonetheless, many believe the TARP program has been a waste of tax-payer funds . 3. “Running on empty.” McCain Suspends Campaign: While the conventional wisdom claims John McCain lost the presidential election because of the economy, he failed because he ran a terrible campaign, consistently making bad decisions. In early September, at the end of the Republican convention, McCain was surging: his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate had galvanized the Republican base and some national polls showed him ahead of Obama. Then came the Paulson’s TARP proposal, which many Republicans refused to support. McCain “suspended” his campaign to return to Washington and broker a deal. And then did nothing. Instead of being viewed as a strong leader, McCain was revealed as confused and erratic. 2. “He’s a terrorist.” Palin Accuses Obama of Being a Terrorist: On October 4th, Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin accused Obama of “palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.” This charge, repeated by McCain, prompted shouted death threats at Republican rallies and the waving of pitchforks. While most Americans - and the Secret Service - saw the terrorist charge as contemptible and incendiary, Palin and McCain persisted for more than a week. 1. “I’m the decider.” Economy Slides into Recession, Bush Does Nothing: For the first six months, President Bush pronounced the American economy “sound” and spurned calls for action. In mid September, Bush reversed course declaring the US was on the brink of economic collapse. On December 1st, economists announced what most Americans had known already, the economy had been in recession since December of 2007. First Bush lied and then he panicked. The Best 5. “No McCain.” Clinton Endorses Obama: After a sometimes bitter campaign, where Hillary Clinton continued her candidacy long after most observers had written her off, Democrats worried the New York Senator might offer only a half-hearted endorsement of Barack Obama. On August 26th, speaking at the Democratic Convention, Clinton strongly supported Obama giving one of the most memorable speeches of her career. 4. “I can see Russia from my house.” Tina Fey Mimics Sarah Palin: In 2008 Saturday Night Live reinvented itself as a bastion of political comedy. Tina Fey’s dead on imitation of Palin mocked Alaska’s Governor as a vapid airhead totally unprepared for the vice-presidency. 3. “Respect, Empower, Include.” Obama’s Field Organization From the Iowa caucuses on January 3rd to the twenty-five-state get-out-the-vote effort on November 4th, Barack Obama put together the most impressive field organization ever seen in U.S. politics. First, Obamacons took down Hillary Clinton, the prohibitive favorite to win the Democratic nomination. Then they defeated John McCain, despite his despicable attempt to label Obama a terrorist and closet Muslim. On Election Day, Obama won the critical swing states because he had a ground game and McCain didn’t. American politics will never be the same. 2. “This is a goodbye kiss, you dog.” Bush insulted by Iraqi journalist: In a vain effort to resurrect his reputation, George Bush took a December “victory” tour of Iraq. In the middle of a Baghdad press conference, where he touted the “success” of his strategy, Bush was the target of two shoes thrown by Iraqi journalist Muntathar al Zaidi, who cursed him in Arabic. The incident symbolized Bush’s Iraq legacy. 1. “Yes we can.” Obama wins Presidency: When was the point you knew Barack was going to be America’s 44th President? Was it after his Iowa victory? Or when it became clear he had out-organized Hillary? Was it his speech on race? Or when we knew Obama was going to win all the debates because of his thoughtful, unflappable demeanor? Or did you bite your nails until the evening of November 4th, expecting something awful to happen that would snatch victory from his grasp? However you experienced the campaign, Barack Obama Obama’s candidacy was an once-in-a-lifetime political thrill; capped by his dazzling victory speech on November 4th. We can and we did.

More:
Bob Burnett: 2008: The Best and Worst

As the year comes to a close, 23/6 takes a moment to say goodbye to all the bit players and historical footnotes who helped make 2008’s news extra special. We’ll probably never see them again, so before they go we’d like to say… “We’re gonna miss you buddy.” Okay, so Joe the Plumber didn’t quite work out for McCain-Palin. It ended up that he wasn’t really a plumber, that he doesn’t pay his taxes, but if he did he would be much better off under an Obama tax plan than McCain’s. Live and learn, right?

Read the original here: 
236.com: Tito The Builder…We’re Gonna Miss You, Buddy

This week as been dominated by girls, which is reflective of 2008 - a year that has been mostly about girls. I use the politically incorrect word “girls” in an ironic sense because it used to be a pejorative, dismissive term used by many America men - in the same category as “broads.” However, the “girls” have now taken over the media and its headlines and many of the men in media are puffed-up, strutting boys, like Illinois Governor Blagojevich. But not David Gregory, who on his second week of hosting “Meet the Press,” had all female guests. His main interview was with Condoleeza Rice and his panelists were Michele Norris of NPR, Erin Burnett of CNBC, Andrea Mitchell of NBC, and Carol Marin of the Chicago Sun-Times . The women were brilliant. Gregory held his own and asked intelligent, probing questions, but it was clear the women were the smartest people at the room. I’ve not been a fan of Condoleeza Rice in the past, but I was dazzled by her communication skills and fluency, by her charming and confident camera presence, and by how skillfully she handled Gregory’s tough questions and stayed on message. She almost had me believing the Iraq conflict had been a war of freedom that had been good for the Iraqis - on the same week an Iraqi journalist threw his shoes at President Bush. The first question to the all-female panel was about, guess what, a woman - Caroline Kennedy’s bid for Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat in New York. Michelle Norris was very smart in her discussion about bloodlines and money dominating politics today. The next topic was about the economy and the Bernard Madoff scandal, which was handled with ease by the brainy Erin Burnett who added insight and context to the situation. Andrea Mitchell added some smart comments about the SEC’s role in the mess. Mitchell may have had one too many face lifts, but she represents the new era of female reporters - brains first. Unlike Fox News and the Fox Business Network, no bimbos are allowed on “Meet the Press.” Carol Marin took the lead discussing Illinois Governor Blagojevich. She, too, was smart, informed, and insightful. All the panelists politely added insights and analysis. I give Gregory and the “Meet the Press” producers credit for being gender agnostic and not saying, “Hey, we ought to put at least one man - preferably a black man - on the panel for balance.” They didn’t think about being politically correct; I’m guessing they wanted the smartest, best-informed guests, and they all happened to have been women. This was an all-star panel that I hope might be permanent members of the “Meet the Press” discussion roundtable - maybe NBC could rename the program “Gregory’s Girls.” But, on second thought, that doesn’t really work. But what struck me is how much smarter, better informed, insightful, cordial, polite, and collegial this group was than the macho dopes and interrupting loudmouths on the O’Reilly, Hannity, and Chris Matthews’ shows are. And the week before “Meet the Press,” Katie Couric had her best week in almost a year on the “CBS Evening News,” reaching an average of 7.4 million people. The story on The Huffington Post read: “The improvement could be a result of the positive feedback Couric received for her interview of GOP Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, during the presidential campaign. Palin fumbled on a question about which publications she read regularly, and the interview was a launching point for one of Tina Fey’s ‘Saturday Night Live’ spoofs.” In 2008 Hillary Clinton was the first female to run for president; Sarah Palin overshadowed running mate, John McCain, only to be made notorious by another female, Tina Fey; Katie Couric gained in the ratings; Oprah dominated daytime TV; Rachel Maddow was the best talk show host/commentator on TV; and Michelle Obama became the smartest, most articulate first lady in generations, except for Hillary Clinton - think Pat Nixon, Betty Ford, Nancy Reagan, Barbara and Laura Bush. So it looks like 2008 was the year of the girls, and, except for Sarah Palin, it’s about time. And if the news media and politics are improved so much by women, it makes me wonder if we’d be in this economic mess if women had been in charge of Wall Street and the banks instead of the greedy, arrogant, riverboat-gambler males who took the economy down the tubes. What America needs now is another Margaret Thatcher, or at least some smart woman who no one with any sense would dare call a “girl.”

Here is the original post:
Charles Warner: Gregory’s Girls

Earlier this week, I asked for your suggestions on what gifts we should give to some of our favorite — and not so favorite — public figures. You responded with a flying sleigh’s worth of great gift ideas. Even Santa’s elves couldn’t have been more industrious. Now it’s time to unwrap the presents. Here are our favorite suggestions for what we should stuff into the stockings of some of 2008’s naughty and nice, starting with a few gift ideas of my own: Alan Greenspan, Phil Graham, Chris Cox, Richard Fuld (Lehman Brothers), Franklin Raines (Fannie Mae), James Cayne (Bear Stearns), Angelo Mozilo (Countrywide), Joe Cassano (AIG): Hallmark’s new “Sorry I Collapsed Your Economy” card to be signed and sent to the American people Sarah Palin: A good time-slot for her inevitable reality show — and an editor able to translate Palin-speak into actual sentences for her new book (if they can translate Greek-speak into English, I’ll hire them too) Norm Coleman: extended unemployment benefits Karl Rove: a dustpan and broom to sweep up what’s left of his reputation as a Boy Genius Joe the Plumber, Reille Hunter, Levi Johnston, Ashlee Dupre, The Pregnant Man: a 16th minute And here are your suggestions: Henry Paulson: my bills (harobamason) Rick Warren: Melissa Etheridge’s greatest hits CD (jcgrim) Gay Americans: equal rights (kelkelly) John McCain: a new plumber (callmemara) Rod and Patti Blagojevich: a swear jar (by the time Blago goes to trial, he’ll have enough money to pay his attorneys) (IamaGApeach) Rod Blagojevich: a haircut that doesn’t make him look like the naughty next-door neighbor (auntcloud) Mike Huckabee: On The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin (jcgrim) Jim Bob Duggar: a vasectomy (sonomarc) Plaxico Burress : rubber bullets, a holster, or a specially designed bulletproof vest for his leg (stewmaj) Our Overseas Troops: next Christmas safely at home with their families (edenjones) “Shoeless” Muntader Al-Zaidi: a Major League tryout (surely there is a club out there that could use a late-inning reliever who isn’t afraid to throw the bean ball when some bum tries to crowd the plate (LaFajita) Sarah Palin: a lifetime membership in Planned Parenthood (Family Plan, of course!) (2008CaliforniaFan ) Rep. Tim Mahoney: a chastity belt (SurrealPumpkin) Ted Stevens: a visit from Santa’s brother, Escape Claus (Expatessa) Elizabeth Dole: a Sunday school refresher course (grateful4thedead) Rachel Maddow: a White House post (harobamason) William Ayers: an apology from the media (Kingbreaker) The People of Connecticut: a special election to recall Joe Lieberman (LMPE) Illinois and New York: special elections to decide who should fill their open Senate seats (AliMB) Minnesota: “Senator Franken” (Letterman) Every Senator and Congressperson: plaques for their desks that say, “Remember: Serving the people should be an honorable profession.” (offred) Howard Dean: a big 50 state “thank you” (Kingbreaker) Barack Obama: steel for his spine — he’s going to need it (Virginia Plain) Condoleezza Rice: some respect — she lost hers while spouting the views of George W. (2008CaliforniaFan) Dick Cheney: a soul to replace the one he lost — or never had. (SeeDaddy) George W. Bush: a sudden realization of all the damage he’s caused the world (offred) The American Public: a well-deserved break (TurkerB) And there was this collection of board game gifts suggested by Miralo: Bush: “Clue” Cheney: “Sorry” Condi: “Chutes ‘n Ladders” The MSM’s punditocracy: “Trivial Pursuit” Ordinary Americans: “Payday” Obama (and I mean this in the best possible way) : “Monopoly”

Go here to see the original:
Arianna Huffington: Ho, Ho, Ho: What You Told Us to Stuff Into the Stockings of 2008’s Naughty and Nice

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

Go here to read the rest:
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

See the original post here:
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

Read the original here:
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

Read more here: 
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

More here:
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

Original post: 
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Dateline: Washington, D.C., Christmas Eve, 2008 I fully admit I would rather be at home now than covering the annual “sit on Santa’s lap” photo-op for politicians, but I seem to have annoyed my editor, so here I am — your intrepid holiday reporter. While I fully admit that I did spike the punch at our annual holiday party, I explain this away in traditional Washington fashion — by stating that I was young and irresponsible when this occurred. Last week, I was much younger and much more irresponsible than I am now. Ahem. Besides, nobody got hurt (much) and I think everyone had a much better time at the party as a result… the “Elf Incident” aside…. Anyway, this explains why I was assigned to cover this particular event — instead of being snug at home in my bed, wondering what a sugarplum looks like (in case one should dance in my head tonight). So what can I say about this annual event that you don’t already know? Santa Claus arrives from the North Pole for this very special lap-sitting event once a year on the night before Christmas. All the politicians flock to get their photo taken on Santa’s lap, and ask him for their biggest wish for the coming year. We have received word that Santa’s sleigh has been escorted in to Andrews Air Force Base by an honor guard of F-16s and his motorcade is approaching the building. The jolly old elf enters the ballroom to great applause and cheerful greetings. Because I’m lazy and didn’t want this assignment in the first place, I’m just going to transcribe the proceedings for you here. SANTA: Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! [Santa seats himself and addresses the long line which has formed at one side of the stage] Who’s first? Who wants to sit on Santa’s lap first? GEORGE BUSH: [Pushing to the front of the line] I’m still president! I get to go first! Everybody else stand back! [Leaps into Santa's lap with a grin] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas, Georgie? BUSH: Well, Santa, this year’s been pretty rough, and I’m out of here soon, so Dick told me to ask you for… a legacy. SANTA: A legacy? BUSH: Yeah, I had to look it up too, big guy. It means “something you leave behind that people remember you for.” SANTA: [Rolls eyes] Oh, I don’t think that’ll be a problem. I think we’ll all remember your administration for a long time to come . BUSH: No, no! Something GOOD they remember me by! SANTA: Um, well, I’ll work on it George, but I really can’t promise anything… [Hands Bush off to the elves distributing candy] OK, who’s next? BARACK OBAMA: Hi, Santa! SANTA: Well hello there, Barry! What do you want for Christmas? OBAMA: I want my supporters to keep their shirts on for a few more weeks, and judge me by what I actually do — rather than rampant speculation about what I’m going to do. SANTA: You said that just to get the “keep their shirts on” joke in there didn’t you? OBAMA: Well, hey, can you blame me after that photo hit the tabloids? [Flexes abs] OK, seriously… what I want is to pass most of my agenda intact. I want you to make Congress do what I want them to next year. SANTA: Um, well, like I told George, I’m not sure I can promise anything, but I’ll try [Hands Obama off] …and look at these two adorable girls! Have you been good little girls this year? SASHA AND MALIA: Yes! Of course we have, silly! SANTA: And what do you girls want for Christmas? SASHA AND MALIA: A puppy!! SANTA: Well, I think you’ll be getting one soon [turns and winks at Barack Obama], but Santa’s got to find a hypoallergenic one — so it might not arrive until after you move into your new house. I hope that’s OK… SASHA AND MALIA: That’s OK, we understand. [They exit] SANTA: Have you been a good girl this year, Michelle? MICHELLE OBAMA: As good as I could manage. SANTA: And what do you want for Christmas? M. OBAMA: As normal a childhood as possible for my girls next year. SANTA: I don’t blame you. Well, I’ll try my best, I promise. Who’s next here? DICK CHENEY: OK, fat man, this is how it’s going to be. You’re going to give little Georgie his shining legacy, or we’re going to lean on your elves. SANTA: [Sighs] Dick, every year I have to explain I live in a magical realm and you simply cannot threaten me. CHENEY: I’m telling you, any elf without a green card is going straight to Guantanamo… [he is removed by Santa's Elf Security] SANTA: [turns to Head Elf] Thank goodness this is the last year we’ll have to put up with that! HEAD ELF: The usual stocking of coal? SANTA: No, he just uses it to convince the EPA to approve mountaintop removal in West Virginia. Put him down for all the Obama photos and cheesy merchandise we’ve got. Stuff his stocking full of that! Ho ho ho! [Turns back to the line] Next! CAROLINE KENNEDY: Hello, Santa. SANTA: OK, I don’t even have to ask. Here’s a piece of candy, and please tell your friends to stop faxing the North Pole with press releases making your case for your uncle’s Senate seat. I’m running out of fax paper! KENNEDY: Well, I never! SANTA: That’s the problem, Caroline, you never… oh, forget it… who’s next? HARRY REID: Are you ready for me now Santa? SANTA: That’s right, Harry, come on up and sit on Santa’s lap! REID: Oh, I don’t know, are you sure it’s OK? Maybe I should let someone else go first… SANTA: Harry, there are a lot of people waiting, you’ve got five seconds or you go to the back of the line. REID: [Hastily jumps on Santa's lap] I’ve been an awfully good boy this year, Santa! I’ve been ever so nice to everyone this year, even Joe Lieberman and the Senate Republicans! I could have been mean, but I let them have their way most of the time! SANTA: Which is why I don’t really care what you’re asking me for this year, Harry, because I’ve already picked your present out… a brand new backbone. It’s made of titanium and if you would only use it, President Obama could get some things done next year. REID: Wow, a shiny new backbone! I’m going to keep it in its original packaging and never use it, so it’ll be worth more in the future! SANTA: [Sighs.] Well it was worth a try… who’s next? NANCY PELOSI: What I want this year is for Harry Reid to use his backbone! SANTA: I just gave him a new one, but he said he’s not going to take it out of the package. PELOSI: [lapses into very naughty language which, no matter how many times I type it, magically disappears from this transcript] SANTA: Get her out of here, elves! [Turns back to line] Next! [A minor scuffle breaks out in the line] JOHN MCCAIN: [emerging from the scuffle] I get to go first! What is the matter with you, woman? [Shoves Sarah Palin out of the way, climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: John, you’re being naughty! MCCAIN: But I’m not! I’m a lovable maverick! Didn’t you get my press releases on the subject? SANTA: [Rolls eyes] What do you want for Christmas, John? MCCAIN: I want to live long enough to see her defeated in 2012! [Points to Sarah Palin] SANTA: That’s not a very nice thing to wish for. [Santa beckons, and Elf Security removes McCain] MCCAIN: [Kicking and screaming, as he is dragged away] I want a recount! No, wait, a do-over!! SARAH PALIN: [Climbs on Santa's lap] I want respect, Santa, from all the press, so I can get my 2012 campaign together. SANTA: Well, Sarah, you have to earn the press’ respect. PALIN: Don’t give me that, maybe that worked in some 50s version of reality, but we’re talking about today’s press here, Santa. SANTA: Well, which newspapers in particular? PALIN: [Eyes suddenly going wide and blank] Gotta go, you betcha! [Exits quickly] SANTA: [To Head Elf] Are we almost done here? [Tina Fey climbs onto Santa's lap] Tina! What do you want for Christmas? TINA FEY: Absolutely nothing, Santa, I just dropped by to say “thank you” for not having to impersonate Sarah Palin for the next four years. I mean, I had to take a shower after every time, just to be able to breathe again afterwards… SANTA: Ho ho ho! That was a good one, Tina! I tell you what, I’ll try to get your show better ratings next year, OK? FEY: Thanks, Santa! [Exits] SANTA: Hey, what the… [thousands of Democrats pile on his lap] Who are all of you? DEMOCRATIC MOB: We’re the Democratic Party! SANTA: Um, OK HEAD ELF: [leans in close and whispers to Santa] We’re trying to move the line faster by doing whole groups at a time… SANTA: Well, what do you all want for Christmas? DEMOCRATIC MOB: Change we can believe in! SANTA: But that’s what I got you last year! DEMOCRATIC MOB: But this year we can actually get it done! SANTA: Well, OK, I’ll see what I can do. [Mob leaves, only to be replaced by a similar, but smaller, group of Republicans] REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all at once] Hi Santa! Hey, move over! I want to ask first! Stop pushing! He’s not the real Santa! Tug his beard! I hafta go to the baa-aaa-aathroom!! SANTA: So what do you folks want? REPUBLICAN MOB: [Talking all over each other, starting to squirm and shove] We want to become more conservative! We want more social conservatives! We want Sarah Palin! Good Lord, no, no more of that woman! We want Bobby Jindal! We want to have our Congress ba-aa-aa-ack! SANTA: I can’t hear you people if you’re all going to talk at once. What is the one thing you want next year more than any other? REPUBLICAN MOB: [All together, at the top of their lungs] RELEVANCE!! SANTA: That’s going to be tough, sorry. If you’re really lucky, I might leave some cohesion under your tree, or perhaps some new ideas. But relevance you’re going to have to do on your own. You’ve been very naughty, doing nothing but block every idea that comes along, so you’re going to have to do better next year if you don’t all want a big stockingful of coal, I have to warn you. REPUBLICAN MOB: [Starts to weep and wail] Waa-aaa-aah! SANTA: Elf Security! [Mob is removed, only to be replaced by another, except this one is beautifully coiffed to a man and woman] MEDIA CIRCUS: We’re here on this festive occasion reporting live from Santa’s lap… SANTA: We don’t have time for this. What do you people want? MEDIA CIRCUS: [in unison] An exclusive!! SANTA: Talk to Mrs. Claus, maybe she can do a video tour of the North Pole for you. But I’m not giving any interviews. I’m very disappointed in you people, since I gave you an election chock filled with ideas and issues and serious things to report on, and what did you do? Lipstick on a pig? Hair styles? Bill Ayers? You people are just going to have to do a better job if you want an exclusive with me. [Media Circus leaves, dejectedly] Who’s next? [David Gregory sneaks away from the crowd, jumps back on Santa's lap] DAVID GREGORY: Please, Santa, please make my version of Meet The Press a success! SANTA: You know what I’m leaving you under your tree? A memory that works. Seriously, Davy, you can’t just pretend to be Timmy Russert with quotes and prepared questions and stuff. You have to actually listen to what the person you’re interviewing is saying , and then use your new memory to remember whether they are flat-out lying to you or not, and then you have to actually ask a follow-up question or two to call these politicians on their reindeer poop. Just reading the next question on your list is not going to do it . So, unless you want to kill the longest-running show in television history , please, for everyone’s sake, use this new memory well. [David Gregory, in shock, is escorted off Santa's lap] SANTA: Oooof! [as hundreds of thousands of people, all clutching résumés, pile on his lap] What do you all want for Christmas? INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We want a job in the Obama administration! SANTA: Um, well, seeing as how there’s only a few thousand jobs to hand out, and you feel like about a half a million people, I’m afraid not everyone’s going to get what they want. INSPIRED DEMOCRATS: We don’t care! We’ll take any job! Or we’ll volunteer for the party during the next election cycle! Hey, everyone, let’s start planning for the 2010 midterms… [crowd exits exuberantly, making future plans] SANTA: [Watches them go] Amazing… just amazing. [Turns back to line] AUUUGH! [Two and a half million people pile on Santa's lap] Who are… urk .. you all? JOYOUS THRONG: We’re the crowd that’s going to show up for the Inauguration! SANTA: OK, well what do you want? JOYOUS THRONG: INAUGURATION TICKETS! SANTA: Well, we’ve got a problem with that. There are only 250,000 and they’re being handed out by members of Congress… JOYOUS THRONG: But some Congressmen are handing them out only to their big donors! There’s no rules! Only the favorites get to go! And the Presidential Inaugural Committee is offering them up in a package deal with Inaugural Ball tickets for $50,000 ! No fair!! This is not change we can believe in! This is nothing but cronyism! SANTA: Is this true? I’ll have to check my naughty/nice list. Um, what else would you like instead? JOYOUS THRONG: Inaugural Ball tickets! SANTA: How about a nice, springlike day in D.C. on January 20th? Would that make you happy? JOYOUS THRONG: Sure, Santa! We’ll happily stand in freezing rain, but some sunshine would be great! [The teeming millions exit] SANTA: [Turns to lonely blogger, assigned to cover the festivities against his will]: I’ve got time for you, son. CHRIS WEIGANT: Me? But I’m supposed to be a disinterested observer… well, OK, Santa. [Climbs on Santa's lap] SANTA: What do you want for Christmas? WEIGANT: How about some press passes for Inauguration events? SANTA: You really think they’re going to give you that after what you just wrote about them half a page ago? And after the “Elf Incident” last week? WEIGANT: [Sighs.] Well, one can dream. How about an Al Franken interview, the day after the announcement that he’s won the last Senate seat? SANTA: Ho ho ho! I will see what I can do, that’s all I can promise. [Santa, at this point, turned to his Head Elf and whispered intensely, after I climbed down from his lap and put my "reporter" hat back on. I turned to the line, which was almost done. I could see several people still waiting, although there were a few at the back I probably missed. There was Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Stevens, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller IV, William Jefferson, Jesse Jackson Sr., Mark Penn, Rick Warren, and what appeared to be all of Wall Street.] SANTA: [Stands up and addresses remaining people in line] Give it up, all of you! You’re all getting a big fat stocking of coal this year, and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves! You don’t even get the chance to ask me, because I’ll tell you right now, you’re not getting what you want. It’s lumps of coal all around for you folks! If you want a pardon, go ask Georgie on his way out of office! That’s it, show’s over folks… [Exits the stage, followed by Head Elf with a clipboard, and the shadowy Elf Security, professionally maintaining a perimeter.] SANTA: [To Head Elf] This just gets harder and harder every year. Call Mrs. Claus and tell her to have some hot chocolate ready for when I get home, and… AL FRANKEN: [Standing just outside the door] Santa? SANTA: Al! Why weren’t you inside? Oh, that’s right, you’re still waiting to join the club, aren’t you? [Puts a finger aside his nose, twinkles his eye] I’ll see what I can… FRANKEN: [Grinning] Actually, I’m Jewish, Santa. Don’t worry about it, though. I think we’re going to win without your help, but thanks for the thought. SANTA: Well, good luck anyway, Al! Santa was bundled into his red and white limousine at this point, and no more was to be heard. Although later that night, looking at the skyline over towards Andrews, I could have sworn I heard a merry laugh and a “Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!”   [ I got my own wish earlier this year, on November 4th, so in reality I didn't ask Santa for anything this year. If you feel I've been a good boy, you can always make a contribution towards the "Help Send Chris To The Inauguration" fund, so I can afford to travel next month. But to ALL AND SUNDRY a Merry Happy Whatever this year! Hope that whatever you wish for you receive! Program Note -- No column tomorrow, but join us Friday for Part II of our annual "McLaughlin Awards." ]   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

See the original post here: 
Chris Weigant: Mr. Claus Goes To Washington

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

Original post: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

Read more here: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

View original post here: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

The rest is here: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

View original here:
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

See original here: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

Many sharp journalists, such as Michelle Goldberg , Sarah Posner and Max Blumenthal , are cranking their talents into exposing the angry underbelly beneath Rick Warren’s carefully airbrushed and polished public persona. And, a number of political bloggers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] have noted Rick Warren’s support for the virulently anti-gay Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, but the story has lacked some needed historical context; In 2006, Warren publicly lionized (literally) Akinola three months after the Archbishop had endorsed legislation more draconian than comparable anti-gay statutes passed prior to World War Two under the Third Reich . As I described in a December 18, 2006 Talk To Action story , a schismatic faction of Virginia Episcopalian churches had just voted to align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, who earlier that year had thrown his substantial political weight and religious authority behind draconian Nigerian anti-gay legislation to, among other strictures, “make it illegal for gay men and lesbians to form organizations, read gay literature or eat together in a restaurant.” Although I missed it at the time, the proposed legislation was apparently denounced, according to the current Wikipedia writeup on Akinola, by the US State Department: “The proposed legislation was formally challenged by the United States State Department as a breach of Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It was one of those rare examples from the last eight years, it would seem, in which United States foreign policy clearly aligned in support of basic human rights. Rick Warren, however, appeared to be on the other side of the issue. In my post, I went on to chart, in very specific detail, the ugly reality that the Akinola-supported legislation was actually harsher than similar anti-gay legislation, 1935 revisions to Paragraph 175 of the German penal code, applying to homosexuality, voted into law during the early years of Hitler’s Third Reich. As described on an activist blog that specialized in covering the controversial anti-gay legislation [and whose author has contributed to Talk To Action], in February 2006 “the Primate of All Nigeria and leader of the Anglican Communion’s largest Province, Archbishop Peter Akinola, endorsed legislation that would ban most basic civil rights for gay and lesbian Nigerians, and enforce that ban with a 5 year prison sentence.” The Nigerian anti-gay legislation in question was introduced in February 2006. On April 30, 2006, pastor Rick Warren wrote an op-ed, for Time Magazine, which lavished praise on Akinola , likening the cleric to Nelson Mandela: “Akinola personifies the epochal change in the Christian church, namely that the leadership, influence, growth and center of gravity in Christianity is shifting from the northern hemisphere to the southern. New African, Asian and Latin American church leaders like Akinola, 61, are bright, biblical, courageous and willing to point out the inconsistencies, weaknesses and theological drift in Western churches.” “…Akinola has the strength of a lion, useful in confronting Third World fundamentalism and First World relativism.” “…I believe he, like Mandela, is a man of peace and his leadership is a model for Christians around the world.” Rick Warren’s support for Akinola is not an anomaly but appears to be, rather, the rule. As detailed at Talk To Action by Richard Bartholomew (author of the exceptional Bartholomew’s Notes On Religion ), The Kampala Monitor reports: Dr [Rick] Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. “We shall not tolerate this aspect at all,” Dr Warren said. Warren was speaking in support of Ugandan Anglicans who intend to boycott the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, and this harsh rejection of tolerance for gays and lesbians may have serious consequences in a country where homosexuals face harassment and and the threat of imprisonment. Warren’s comment is of a piece with his support for Martin Ssempa, the Ugandan evangelist who has been a keynote speaker at a Warren conference, and who has received US global AIDS prevention funds. As I wrote in August , Ssempa wants to ensure that homosexuality remains illegal and that gays and lesbians are identified in the public mind as sexual abusers. Ssempa calls for media censorship against opposing views and the dismissal of dissenting academics, and last summer he organised a rally with the theme “A Call for Action on Behalf of the Victims of Homosexuality”, at which he railed against “molestation and sodomy.”

More here: 
Bruce Wilson: Warren-Endorsed Nigerian Archbishop Backed Anti-Gay Laws Worse Than Pre-WW2 Third Reich’s

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Read more: 
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Read the original post: 
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Original post:
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Original post:
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Continued here:
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

See more here: 
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

My mother’s name was Lilly. She was a born escape artist. At three she escaped the murderous pogroms of Tsarist Russia, arriving at the Lower East Side of New York where her family of eight lived a desperate hand-to-mouth existence in a one room tenement on Hester Street. When her mother Sarah, her older sister Rebecca, and her brother Sam came down with the tuberculosis that eventually killed them, Lilly miraculously escaped that disease. School had been Lilly’s escape from the impoverished immigrant life that was destroying her family. School had taught her to speak English correctly, write with a lovely penmanship, and learn of life beyond the ghetto. The years before the First World War had seen one recession after another, and Lilly’s father, my grandfather, a tailor by trade, was often unemployed. After her mother died, Lilly was obliged to leave school early to work towards paying for the care of her dying brother and sister in the Colorado sanitarium. There was only Lilly to supplement her father’s meager income. But hard times do not necessarily make hard people. My mother escaped the callousness, and the bitterness that many poor children developed as armor against an indifferent, if not a cruel world. Lilly escaped that ruinous bitterness because of Miss Emily Stokes, her last school teacher, a young African American. Miss Stokes, discovering that Lilly’s mother had recently died, and that the girl would soon be obliged to leave school for work, hoped to keep the sad child from despair. The teacher gave Lilly a cloth doll at Christmas, one with a long calico two sided skirt that featured a white baby on one end and a black baby on the other. She would buy her promising student food for lunch so she was sure the child had one good meal. Because of Miss Stokes’ kindness Lilly escaped the casual bigotry that so many European immigrants felt towards the children of former slaves. Even as a child Lilly had a rare, luminous beauty. That beauty helped her to escape the sweat shops that swallowed so many poor girls alive. At fourteen, tall and slender, with large brown eyes set in a movie star’s face, she bobbed her long black hair and became a fashion model in the new garment district of Manhattan. My genial, joking, and temperamental father Nathan came from a similarly impoverished family. He was put to work as a ten year-old boy to help feed the six younger children, eventually owning his own business and achieving middle class comfort in the midst of the Great Depression. When I was little I once asked him what he did for fun as a child. He replied, “Son, when I was a boy they hadn’t invented childhood, let alone fun.” I was seven years old in the Christmas of 1939 when my mother took my sister Simone and me downtown to see the decorated windows of the Fifth Avenue department stores. We were captured by the beauty of the Christmas trees with their glittering lights as we listened to the carolers near Rockefeller Center. I watched in wonder as my mother gave a bell ringing Salvation Army Santa a twenty dollar bill to help feed the hungry. In my child’s mind it seemed that she was throwing a fortune down a fake chimney for people she didn’t even know. She called it “helping out,” never charity, when she gave cash and food to the needy; not only to her struggling family members but to any strangers down on their luck who crossed her path in those hard Depression times. On the way home by taxi-cab that evening my mother stopped the cab, told the driver to wait, and impulsively bought a small, scrawny four foot Christmas tree from a shivering vendor. He wrapped it in burlap at her request so that it could not be seen for what it was by curious neighbors as she carried it into our house. I figured that my mother had bought the tree out of pity for the poor man who was making few sales that night, or perhaps she felt pity for the tree itself, a loser pine if ever there was one. She now had the cab driver take her to the local five and dime where she bought some silver tinsel, cellophane garlands, glass ornaments and peppermint candy canes. “All we need now is for it to snow tomorrow,” my mother said as she smuggled the tree into our house. My father was not at all religious but he questioned the propriety of that tree when he came home from his downtown office. “What’s that bush doing here?” he asked. “It’s for the children,” my mother replied. He knew better than to argue with that. “For the children” was her final word, never to be disputed. She told him that Chanukah was taken care of; we had the brass menorah on the fireplace mantle whose candles she lit for the festival of lights, when she remembered to do so, but that was no reason to keep a Christmas tree out of her children’s lives. As ever she made up her own rules as she went along, advising him that one thing had nothing to do with the other. The tree stayed. Despite her defense of that paltry tree my mother hoped to keep it a secret from her pious older sister Ida who was troubled that Lilly had broken with the kosher dietary laws, and no longer observed the Sabbath. Lilly held a skeptical view of the Almighty; oh, she believed He was there alright, but for reasons she couldn’t fathom God was off napping during her desperate childhood prayers, and certainly fast asleep in Europe in 1939. A few years earlier my mother had stopped keeping a kosher home when our pediatrician, the magisterial Dr. Herbert Jackson, advised her to introduce bacon strips and malted milkshakes into our everyday breakfast to add some flesh to the bones of her two skinny children. Ida protested that there were other ways to fatten up the children that would not offend God and Ida. Large bowls of lumpy oatmeal and teaspoons of cod-liver oil had kept her Gertrude plump and healthy. Mother, always merciful, chose to ignore Ida’s breakfast menu. The sizzling, delicious bacon stayed in our diet, topping our French toast in warm maple syrup and melted butter. Christmas morning arrived with a light snowfall as if by my mother’s command. We children got up early and raced into the living room, dazzled by the decorated tree, all its spindly faults concealed by the garlands of glitter, tinsel, gold and silver glass ornaments, and the many wrapped gifts my mother had placed under it. I had received the new wooden fort and the cavalry of painted French Legionnaire soldiers I longed for, and my sister Simone had not one, but two Shirley Temple dolls. My mother confessed that she was unable to decide between the everyday Shirley and the Shirley dressed for a fancy ball, so she bought both for her young daughter. But more important to her were the books she bought for us. She had taught us to read early by first reading aloud to us and every so often pointing out the words on the page, and later by making up flash-cards on cut up shirt cardboards with new words printed in block letters for us to recognize. It worked. My smart sister read at four, and I trailed behind her lazily, reading at six. There was a motivational book, Young Mozart , for my sister, who was often found struggling with her five finger exercises on our baby grand piano. There were two Jerry Todd books for me, juvenile novels, hugely popular at that time, which allowed a city boy to imagine that he lived in a small town with a gang of loyal friends who had exciting yet comical adventures. And there was “Treasure Island” in the brilliantly illustrated N.C. Wyeth edition, promising me days of escape with young Jim Hawkins in a world of pirates, mutiny, and buried treasure. Into this scene of torn wrappings and cries of joy came an ominous ringing, someone with a heavy finger was pressing it hard against our doorbell. Lilly knew at once that it was her older sister Ida accompanied by Ida’s young daughter Gertrude, standing outside impatiently in the now heavily falling snow. Ida had brought Gertrude over to our house to play with my sister during this school holiday. It had been arranged on the telephone days before, and forgotten by my mother in the excitement of getting the children’s gifts wrapped and the tree set up for Christmas. My mother loved her homely, old fashioned sister, who had awkwardly but dutifully stepped into the role of mother for her during Lilly’s bleak childhood. But she knew that Ida would be shocked, more likely horrified by the Christmas tree. It would be another sign of Lilly, “the American one,” drifting away from the customs of their forefathers. In this time of murderous crimes against the Jews in Europe, and everyday nasty anti-Semitism in America, my mother didn’t want to be regarded of as one who rejected her own people in their time of trial. Lilly, who was always calm, suddenly panicked at the sound of that persistent doorbell. She didn’t want a confrontation or even a conversation about that tree with her disapproving sister. She hastily picked up the tree, embracing it as she might a child to be rescued from a raging fire, and rushed towards the hall bathroom as pine needles, glittering garlands, and a fragile glass ornament fell and scattered in her wake. Hiding the tree safely inside the bathtub - its banishment was to last only as long as the visitors stayed - she closed the shower curtains concealing it from view. Only then did she answer the front door. Ida stood there in the cold complaining that they had been forced to wait so long in the freezing snow that her Gertrude risked frost bite and pneumonia. My mother, who had a wonderful way of ignoring such complaints, praised ten year old Gertrude on her healthy complexion and her thick brown curls as the glum child removed her wet woolen stocking cap and gloves. Snow on coats was hastily shaken off outside. When Ida went to hang their coats in the nearby hall bathroom, the customary place for wet outdoor clothing, Lilly told her sister to hang them on the wall hooks nearby, so that the steam radiator would dry them. Another close escape. Galoshes were carefully placed on the inside doormat by our visitors to show their respect for my mother’s spotless carpets and in homage to our gleaming hall linoleum scrubbed to a high shine with Murphy’s Oil Soap. Ida was known to say that “you could eat off Lilly’s floors,” her highest compliment about my mother’s housekeeping. Mother offered Ida a cup of hot tea to take off the chill with a slice of marble pound cake, but Ida, as ever, refused; you might be able to eat off Lilly’s floors but not her china. God alone knew if there was bacon fat clinging to our tea-cups and pork rinds concealed in the Drake’s cake. Ida entered the living room and delivered a noisy wet kiss on my warm cheek and one for my sister which we wiped off discreetly with the sleeves of our bathrobes. I whispered to my sister that thanks to Aunt Ida’s kisses we wouldn’t have to bathe for a week. Ida then surveyed the Christmas stockings hanging from the mantle stuffed with candies, crayons, miniature playing cards, wooden spinning tops, jacks and little mesh bags of marbles; the trinket laden stockings that my mother had forgotten to remove in her haste to hide the tree. The stockings seemed to evade Ida’s scrutiny and it appeared that my mother would entirely escape censure today, thanks to the menorah which acted as her shield of righteousness. Lilly now gave Gertrude a new Nancy Drew book she had bought for her niece’s Chanukah gift. Gertrude looked at it sadly and said, “Thank you Aunt Lilly but I read this one already. Give it to Simone.” Ida glanced at the new toys that littered our living room floor and fired her first round of armor-piercing questions, “Lilly, what is this? A toy shop? Don’t you know that you’re spoiling your children?” My aunt continued to condemn her younger sister’s child-rearing methods, contrasting them with her own superior mothering. “Gertrude only gets one doll a year, and that’s on her birthday, and she’s so careful with that doll you’d think it was never played with. She’s not spoiled. I could give her more, we did okay this year, but I won’t spoil her. You give them too much. You love them too much. You make them too happy. You’re spoiling them rotten.” My mother now reached the limits of her patience. This was one argument she could not escape. She replied that her children were not spoiled, trying hard not to show the great annoyance that she felt. “Ida, we were spoiled. We had nothing, and there’s nothing like nothing for spoiling children. Toys don’t do that, and happiness doesn’t do that. And love certainly doesn’t do that.” Soon the evidence was piling up before Ida on the floor, that incriminating trail of tinsel, the suspicious scattering of pine needles, and the tell-tale shards of gleaming colored glass from a broken ornament on the Persian rug. “Do you have a Christmas tree here, Lilly?” Knowing that the game was up my mother calmly replied, “Yes, there’s one growing in the hall bathtub. Go look. I’ve got a real pine forest in there.” “You wouldn’t?” Ida protested. “I would. And I did,” my mother said, refusing to apologize for her frail tree. She had not risen from the depths of that ghetto on her beauty and her smile alone. Lilly’s loving nature was tempered by a will of iron, and when challenged she could stand up to anyone, even her older sister, the hanging judge. If Ida was going to make a fuss over this Christmas tree Lilly would not back down. For my mother the eleventh commandment was “mind thy own business.” Ida started towards the bathroom to see that odious tree but was stopped by Gertrude’s sudden cry of dismay. The child had seen the two Shirley Temple dolls cradled in their packaging amidst the torn Christmas wrappings. “It isn’t fair,” Gertrude lamented. “It isn’t fair.” “No it isn’t,” my mother agreed. “Simone, please give Gertrude one of your dolls.” When my sister protested, tears forming in her eyes, ready to match Gertie sob for sob in any misery competition my mother said something that I have never forgotten. “I know. Sometimes it’s hard to be kind. But it’s just like playing the piano. It gets easier with practice.” My sister picked up the doll in the modest polka dot cotton dress and reluctantly handed it over to her anguished cousin, keeping the Shirley in the fancy chiffon ball-gown for herself. There are limits to any child’s generosity. Two of my toy soldiers, Corsairs on horseback with ingenious, removable sabers, were thrown in with the doll when the insatiable Gertrude eyed them longingly, despite my protest that I needed them to fight for the French Foreign Legion. Satisfied at last, Gertrude stopped her insidious and very productive crying. A smile of triumph appeared on her thin lips for these acts of generosity imposed upon her younger cousins by our mother. Soon, we were on the floor playing together, all resentment dissipated; even Ida relaxed, sat down in a club chair, and graciously accepted a glass of tap water as she began to complain about our other relatives. I believe my mother got back as much as she gave to us that Christmas. My bright, sparkling sister filled the house with mischief and laughter, and needy, nervy me was always good for a wisecrack that made her smile. We were Lily’s protection against a cruel past which threatened to break through like a flood, bringing with it the debris of those old childhood sorrows. Christmas was also a time to recall Miss Stokes munificent gift of that double sided doll. I suppose my mother was surprised by our protests when she made us share our gifts with Cousin Gertrude. Generosity was as natural for her as breathing and loving. Now, whenever the holiday come around, I think of my mother Lilly, long gone, with her great smile, her generous heart, her spindly Christmas tree, and her talent for kindness which never needed practice. “A Christmas Lilly” is adapted from “Spotless” a memoir by Sherman Yellen, a work in progress. Read more Holiday Season commentary from HuffPost bloggers

Read more here: 
Sherman Yellen: A Christmas Lilly

On Sunday, I argued that the US presence in Afghanistan was inextricably entwined with a set of disastrous foreign and domestic policies favored by right-wing ideologues and dubbed, as a whole, “The War on Terror.”  Freeing ourselves as a nation from a permanently above-the-law Unitary Executive requires, I argued, getting out of Afghanistan — and that is true whether President-elect Obama wants to be a “Commander Guy” like his predecessor, or not.  I think all of that is true. However, Sarah Chayes, a former NPR correspondant who decided to move to Afghanistan to focus her life on helping the people there, has recently argued in several venues that leaving quickly is not the right idea.  (A blog entry at PBS , an appearance on Bill Moyers Journal , and an op-ed in The Washington Post .)  She lives there, I don’t, and she wants only good things for Afghanistan; so in the spirit of never being too satisfied with one’s own opinion, I’d like to relate hers. In Chayes’s view, the fundamental factor that is ruining efforts to make Afghanistan a decent place to live is the Afghan government.  She writes , “The word ‘corruption’ does not do justice to the scale of the phenomenon.”   It is the people’s objection to their treatment at the hands of government officials that explains the headway the Taliban “invasion” has made. In some cases, Afghans are making a calculated judgment: the Taliban are threatening all those who collaborate with the Afghan government, and the Afghan government is abusing the people. So why take the risk that allegiance to Kabul entails? In other cases, the Taliban are actually providing services in a more respectful and equitable fashion than the government. Chayes’s point is not that the Taliban is better than advertised; they’re not.  Her point is that the government we’ve set up in Afghanistan is so shockingly inept, corrupt, and abusive, that the Taliban seems to many people like a better deal. In fact, Chayes argues strenuously against any kind of reproachment with the Taliban: Why, after seven years of effort, are we thinking about inflicting the Taliban, again, on the long-suffering Afghan people? Why does that seem like a solution to this problem? Instead, she would like to see NATO countries provide more concrete assistance.  When pressed by Moyers to state exactly what she would like to see President-elect Obama do in office, they had the following exchange : BILL MOYERS : So how does he use that? SARAH CHAYES : Well, it’s not just in Afghanistan. I think he needs to use it here and with our NATO allies. For example, rather than berating some of our NATO allies about how come you’re not sending more combat troops? I would suggest that he tell, for example, Germany or Norway, some of our staunch NATO allies who have some difficulty sending combat troops to the south, instead of berating them, tell them, “I understand your capacity constraints. I understand your public opinion problems with this mission. If you can’t send us combat troops, send us some retired mayors. Send us some water department officials. Send us some agriculture department officials. You guys know how to administer cities and regions and things like that. And we need”- BILL MOYERS : Send in the Peace Corps, you’re saying. SARAH CHAYES : Yeah. But a senior Peace Corps. Senior Peace Corps. Experienced- BILL MOYERS : People who know how to run things. SARAH CHAYES : Yeah. And for them to come in and mentor. And that means rigorous mentoring of Afghan public officials. And I think this would both be tremendous for Afghanistan and it would help re-knit some of the somewhat frayed fabric of our friendships with our European allies that- BILL MOYERS : I understand that. I hear you. But isn’t there a basic need for real services? You know, electricity, sanitation, public hygiene? Isn’t infrastructure really what you’re talking about? SARAH CHAYES : Yes. But you don’t get infrastructure if you’re passing it through corrupt channels. I don’t want to be in unthinking disagreement with Chayes; as I say, she lives there and I don’t and she wants what is best.  However, whatever we do in Afghanistan, it must be divorced in a concrete way from the “War on Terror” mentality which birthed our invasion there.  I would just as soon give Canada the money and resources to assist Afghanistan, in order to get our Presidency the hell away from the circumstances that Bush lodged it in.  This is not, on my part, a statement of doubt about President-elect Obama’s goodwill or ability.  It is a statement rather about the toxicity of the War on Terror to the United States Constitution. Tellingly, Chayes says that the best thing that America has, and Afghanistan lacks, is not mere democracy but a democracy with checks and balances: SARAH CHAYES : Our democracy is famous for one thing in particular, checks and balances. That was the genius of the American system. BILL MOYERS : Rule of law. SARAH CHAYES : Rule of law but also recourse. If one branch of government is abusing you, you’ve got other branches of government that you can turn to. BILL MOYERS : And Afghanistan? SARAH CHAYES : Doesn’t. Afghanistan lacks the rule of law and checks and balances.  Well, they’re not alone.  Rule of law, checks on power, recourse, are all things that the United States will lack for as long as the “War on Terror” continues.  So predict I, at any rate.   A way must be found to do both: alleviate the Afghan people’s very real plight, and return our country to the rule of law and the system of checks and balances that makes the rule of law work.  The United States cannot be in charge of the first while accomplishing the second.  We have lost our way and must regain it, first.

Read the original here:
Sarah Chayes on Afghanistan

He won’t exactly say his feelings are hurt, but Whispers hears that former President George H.W. Bush is a bit miffed that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin hasn’t returned his phone calls of congrats for a good effort in the presidential election. Our source ran into the 41st prez recently at a Texas restaurant. When the subject of Palin came up during their chat, Bush told of twice phoning her office but never receiving a call back.

Originally posted here: 
Palin Too Busy To Return George H.W. Bush’s Calls

He won’t exactly say his feelings are hurt, but Whispers hears that former President George H.W. Bush is a bit miffed that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin hasn’t returned his phone calls of congrats for a good effort in the presidential election. Our source ran into the 41st prez recently at a Texas restaurant. When the subject of Palin came up during their chat, Bush told of twice phoning her office but never receiving a call back.

Go here to see the original:
Palin Too Busy To Return George H.W. Bush’s Calls

There is something very ugly happening out there in the hinterlands these days–a brewing cauldron of racist anger being directed at President-elect Barack Obama as he and his family get ready to move into the White House. It’s a mean-spirited bigotry that is finding its way onto the internet and right-wing blogs across the country. It makes for a troubling portrait of a significant cross-section of the American polity as Obama prepares to take the oath of office as the 44th President of these United States. Nowhere have these tendencies been more out-front and prominent than at TeamSarah.org , a website organized by “a coalition of women dedicated to advancing the values that Sarah Palin represents in the political process.” Men, according to an exclamatory notice, are welcome, too. The web site is funded–and hosted–by the Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund Project , a national right-wing, pro-life Political Action Committee headed up by one Marjorie Dannenfelser, an ardent pro-life advocate. I know about Dannenfelser and the Susan B. Anthony group because earlier this year, the San Francisco Chronicle pitted Ms. Dannenfelser and me against each other in an op-ed page debate over the qualifications of Governor Palin to speak for families with special-needs children. Needless to say, Ms. Dannensfelser championed the activities of Governor Palin in this regard, while I did not . I have a special needs child and I find the idea of Palin speaking on my child’s behalf an absolute outrage. No friend of special needs families is she. So I was not surprised to find that the Anthony group was behind the Team Sarah web site. According to Ms. Dannenfelser “Team Sarah was formed to capitalize off the enthusiasm of the Palin Vice Presidential candidacy with the goal of reaching women voters and urging them to support John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. Our goal was to win the Election. Several prominent women are involved with the project, including D.C. veteran Barbara Comstock, former First Lady candidate Jeri Thompson, FRC Action Vice President Connie Mackey, and actress Janine Turner , formerly (appropriately) of Northern Exposure .” Now they are carrying the banner of Palin for President in 2012. (According to their website, membership is 62,639 and counting.) Nor was I surprised when I went to the site to find all sorts pro-life and anti-abortion links, with lots of Christian hyperbole. There are also links to “Catholics for Sarah,” “Christians for Sarah,” and, of course, obligatory links to Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. There’s also a good amount of “clinging to our guns and our religion” in rhetoric that sounds straight out of the 17th century. You can even find out why so many people hate Sarah Palin–”Her husband is a masculine hottie ,” writes Dana. “Now I’m a straight guy, but I know when a guy is hott and Todd is hott. [sic] The left usually views masculine hotties as wife beaters who oppress their woman.” Okay. And you are correct to presume that spelling and grammar do not seem to be highly valued on the site. (And, because of that, all spelling from the site is left exactly as it appears.) There’s also an incessant whine about the left-wing media bashing Palin, especially on the Huffington Post . Says Ronald: “Most people (like the media) who try to make others believe that Sara is dumb and stupid or inexperienced actually fear her because of her faith and goodness.” So that’s it. But what’s interesting is that there are actually more blog topics about “Obama” than about “Palin.” Of course, Obama’s citizenship, birth certificate, and alleged Muslim upbringing are constantly questioned, along with his youthful drug use (though funny, Palin’s admitted use of marijuana is not, and we won’t even mention Levi Johnston’s mother). There are also a lot of references to Obama being the anti-Christ: “He is the antichrist sent here to destroy America. Nobody knows who he is or where he was born.” And then there’s some plain, downright nastiness and plenty of good ol’ fashioned racism that, well, certainly doesn’t sound Christian, if you catch my drift. When a blogger named James asks if anybody has bought the new Obama coins, SavantNoir responds: “[Y]es James, and i melted it down to see the look of agnoy on his face, made it a BB pellet and shot it into a pile of shit.” On one blog Heather describes Election Day as the “most terrible” in history and asks “how long until obama is shot??????” Josie responds: “There are plenty of people that would like to see Obama end that way.” Nice. Then there’s the “Obama the Snowman” song: Obama the Snowman Was a very scary soul With a marijuana pipe And two eyes made out of skoal Obama the Snowman Is a Kenyan they say He liked his white nose snow But the Americans know How he stole their country one day And guess what? It sounds exactly like the kind of racist remarks that were being sent recently on State of Alaska government emails . Under a post entitled “Police prepare for RIOTS,” by one BarbaraJo, one concerned blogger named Tommygun responded: “For people in urban/Obama areas–do this now: 1. Stock up on some basic supplies–food, health and hygiene, water, etc. 2. Keep track of where your family members are. 3. Work up meeting points in your community for your family (different spots in town where members are to go if problems occur). 4. Check and prepare any weapons you may have.” In response, a blogger named Johnny got more to the point: “Well niggers will occasionally chimp out like this, am I right?” While several Team Sarah members condemned that particular post, it’s remnants are still up on the web site. Then there’s the probing political analysis you can find on Team Sarah: “Funny thing, when voters are offered the chance, they always vote to ban gay marriage. What I really find hilarious though, is the gays supported Barry Obama in force. And yet, thanks to Barry’s “blackness” the negroes came out in force in California to vote for him! And negroes are pretty conventional when t comes to values. Most are rather conservative, which is why I can’t understand for the life of me why the vote for democrats.” There’s also a lot of Michelle Obama bashing, too, where she is often referred to as “Bitchelle.” Take this current thread: GaryP : This Obama worship has got to stop! Politico is now saying that since Michelle “gave up so much”, that she should get a salary as well! Biruta : She should be paid millions of counterfeit money, just as fake as her husband and as worthless as herself. AmericanDog: Pay her the sum of $1.oo and then tax her at the rate of 53 % to appease her husbands new tax plans. And she would still be over paid……. Ava M: I have never actually HATED anyone in politics before now….She is stupid, mean, power hungry, manipulative, corrupt, essentially ignorant–a poster girl for Institutionalized Black Racism and Agression, a take-no-prisoners warrior for Political Correctnes aka Socialist Realism and a racially driven Communist fellow traveller. Let her go run an African country. She doesn’t fit in here with the American People. Apparently, she, like her husband, isn’t one of us . Sound familiar? Then there was the musing about the Obama Inaugural, first reported in the Alaska Dispatch by its fine reporter, Amanda Coyne: Wendell : I just can’t wait to see the Inaugeral ball… I heard the Presidential Waltz will be replaced by Barack and Michelle “Crumpin”. tami : I am sure michelle will dance like a horse Wendell: followed by the new cabinet break dancing… Christopher: Not trying to get too racial, but I have never met a black woman who could not dance. tommykb3grz: the 4th of july watermellon roll on the south lawn Wendell: a 4-inch diameter Presidential Seal in gold hanging from Obama’s neck Surely, by now, you get the point. And just when you think you’ve seen it all, “Team Sarah” member Jarhead comes up with this: “Aside form Obama being an utter Moron I suppose he is a nice enough person. I personally put his happy little smile on every Terrorist face in Rainbow six [a video game], just before my cross hairs line up…” So much for Christian charity. As for Sarah Palin herself, she has yet to officially sign up for the web site, though she did send a note to the founders of the organization. “I received the packet of letters through Team Sarah and am inspired!,” she wrote. “Thank you for all you are doing for women, families, children… America!”

View post: 
Geoffrey Dunn: ‘Watermelon Roll’: More Racism from ‘Team Sarah’

As much as it pains me to admit it, we owe Sarah Palin an apology. And not only Sarah Palin, but, the entire state of Alaska. It all stems from announcement last week that Sarah Palin’s daughter’s baby’s father’s mother had been arrested in Wasilla . If you haven’t been following along, or have misplaced your Palin scorecard, Sherry Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston. Levi Johnston is the father of Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol’s unborn baby. So, when I heard that Johnson had been arrested at her home as part of an undercover narcotics investigation, I thought what I’m guessing 95% percent of those reading this thought. She was arrested for crystal meth. In fact, I bet she’s running a meth lab in her house. All of my friends thought so. In fact, 23/6, Huffington’s comedy site, even ran a poll about the likelihood of her house being a meth lab. Little did we know how wrong we were. It turns out, she wasn’t running a meth lab. In fact, it wasn’t meth at all. The drug in question was the prescription pain killer Oxycontin . And what led me to believe that Sherry Johnston was a toothless, drooling meth junkie/ dealer? Prejudice. My own prejudice towards small towns and the goobers that live in small towns. Sarah Palin actually addressed this prejudice in an interview. Take a look. Sarah Palin is right. It was wrong of me to automatically assume that it was crystal meth. Of course Alaskans can be addicted to other drugs! And they should be! I mean, what else is there to do in Wasilla other than drugs? And residents of Wasilla should be especially addicted to Oxycontin! I mean, it’s known on the street as ” Hillbilly Heroin “. So, it’s marketed right to them. So, let me state this unequivocally to Sarah Palin and all the residents of Alaska… I apologize. Also, Sarah, if you could give Rush Limbaugh Sherry Johnston’s phone number, that would be great. I’ve heard he’s on the hunt for a new Oxy dealer .

View original post here: 
Matthew Filipowicz: We Owe Sarah Palin An Apology

Maybe it’s just my imagination, but I don’t think so. The run-up to Christmas this year, with each passing day, just keeps getting odder and weirder, more dangerous and dreary, but somehow compelling nonetheless. The markets are crashing left and right, and it’s been impossible for me (admitted financial moron that I am) to keep from logging on to Marketwatch.com every eight seconds or so, to see what’s happening to my now nearly non-existent 401(k). I find myself surfing over to Zillow.com to check out the ever-shrinking value in my home. At work, my colleagues and I stoically keep our heads down, breathless with anticipation of layoffs and cutbacks in an attempt by my company to hang on to every last penny. The death knell for the industry , publishing, to which I have devoted most of my professional life as writer and editor, has been tolled. The civility-inclined man I helped elect as president has just selected to give the Inaugural invocation a pastor who has likened my committed, 9-year relationship to one of incest and pedophilia. Sometime back, in a previous post, I compared the Palin campaign to Alice-Gone-Down-the-Rabbit-Hole . It seems, now, that I grossly underestimated how unnervingly upside-down the world has become for all of us, regardless of political stripe or density of bank account; just this morning, I got word that a neighbor around the corner–a mom, and the owner of a large, friendly golden retriever who spends warm days asleep on the middle of her front lawn–discovered two bow hunters in her backyard and was told by the local police to let them hunt, or that she would be arrested. The icing on the cake? An existential smack-down so fierce and stultifying that it feels as though it came straight from the bony finger of the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come as it strolled down Main Street in Pottersville : be too greedy , it says — let the poor starve and the homeless freeze, turn a blind eye to ignorance and need, ignore the elderly and the sick, perpetrate war for profit and let your soldiers suffer upon their return– do all this, and I will send to you the devil himself . I will send you Bernard Madoff. It’s been a little difficult, then, to find the jolly in Christmas this year; instead, I’ve found myself looking inward, wondering long and hard about how I live now, and how I could live better (not materially, mind you) . I wonder about all of those inane, ridiculous gifts I’ve given over the years that sit around somewhere, gathering dust, long forgotten in some great landfill earmarked specifically for pointless holiday excess. And I think, as a food writer, about all of the supposedly impressive meals that I’ve attempted to make around this time of year; I think about the filets and the lobsters, the duck and the caviar, the champagne and the good Burgundies. This holiday season has slapped me around like I was one of those inflatable Bozo punching bags from the 1960s, dressed in drag, like Julia Child. Today, I am cooking much, much differently than I did at this time last year. Now, I find myself shopping the way my grandmother (and yours) might have in the 1930s and 40s: I’m buying lesser cuts, and finding a not insubstantial spark of joy in knowing that I can stretch one hunk of pork for five completely different meals. I’m remembering that when my grandmother made brisket, she reserved a portion of the leftovers for tucking into the kreplach that would go into her soup a few days later. I’m making miroton with leftover top round; black bean cakes from one can, a chopped onion, a jalapeno, and topping it with a poached egg. All is right with the world, at least in the confines of my kitchen. Christmas dinner this year will be spent with my partner’s family; well into their 90s now, they all lived through the Great Depression and World War II on a farm in the northern part of Connecticut. They’ve all fought various cancers, many were widowed very young. When we asked this year what they wanted for dinner, the answer was unanimous: turkey. Nothing too big. Nothing too fancy. Just for us to be together, and to listen to Mitch Miller. This, in their book, will set the world right. When I asked my mother-in-law what she thought about Madoff and the general state of the world today, she shook her head and said “I’ve seen it all before. This too, shall pass. It always does.” Pray that she’s right.

Read more from the original source:
Elissa Altman: Christmas on the (Bi-) Polar Express

WASILLA, Alaska — Wasilla resident Sherry L. Johnston, mother of Bristol Palin’s boyfriend, faces a Jan. 6 court date for an oxycontin-related arrest at her home by Alaska State Troopers. Little additional information was available Friday on the case as authorities remained unusually tight-lipped about details. But Palmer court records listed Johnston’s scheduled court date and a troopers spokeswoman said in a release late Friday afternoon that the charges “are in relation to the drug oxycontin.” Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston, who Gov. Sarah Palin said was the father of Bristol Palin’s unborn child. Levi Johnston joined the Palins at the Republican National Convention when Palin was running for vice president. It was during the convention that the governor nad her husband, Todd, announced Bristol’s pregnancy.

More here: 
Levi Johnston’s Mom Drug Details Revealed

Welcome to our annual awards! For the past three years, this column has paid homage (translation: “ripped off their gimmick”) to the McLaughlin Group television show by handing out our own year-end awards (while using the same categories). This will be a two-part column, with the second installment appearing one week from today. And feel free to watch the McLaughlin Group on your local PBS station this weekend, to compare my picks with theirs. Also, just for comparison’s sake (to see how many things I got wrong, in other words), here are the previous two years’ columns: [ 2006, Part 1 ] [ 2006, Part 2 ] [ 2007, Part 1 ] [ 2007, Part 2 ] Without further ado, let’s move on to the awards!      Biggest Winner of 2008 While the knee-jerk response to this question is undoubtedly “Barack Obama,” there are plenty of other categories where Obama will likely take home an award this year. And I do have a tradition of awarding this one quite literally. Which means we must look outside the political world for “biggest winner” this year. Because Olympian Michael Phelps wins this award, which he can put next to his eight gold medals from the Beijing Olympics — more than anyone has ever won before. Sure, the Olympics were oversold commercially. Sure, they were put on by a repressive regime. Sure, by the time Phelps actually started swimming we were already sick of him (due to NBC proclaiming him some sort of godlike being in the massive buildup to the event). And sure, there was some trash talking in the pool. But you know what? None of that matters. Phelps won more than any other human being has ever won. Meaning he must be acknowledged as “Biggest Winner of 2008.” Because nobody else came close to such an achievement last year.      Biggest Loser of 2008 The left wing lobbied heavily for either George W. Bush or John McCain as the Biggest Loser of 2008, and the right wing (out of spite) lobbied hard for Cindy Sheehan (who ran as an independent against Nancy Pelosi and lost by 55 points), but neither one of these gets it. Because this year, The American Taxpayer was the Biggest Loser of 2008. Adding to the insult of having to pay $12 billion a month on George Bush’s wars, and after being told over and over again “there simply isn’t the money” for ANY good idea progressives might have (single-payer health care, for instance) — when Wall Street came begging (or extorting, depending on how you view it), Congress snapped their fingers inside of two weeks and made seven hundred billion dollars appear out of thin air. “Thin air” in this case means “China and other countries who hold our debt.” Which Henry Paulson then proceeded to hand out like Hallowe’en candy to anyone he felt like, for any reason he felt like. Meaning, on a purely fiscal scale, The American Taxpayer got screwed the worst this year. Personally, I would have been happy if we had made each and every company who got one thin dime from the Treasury agree to cease all lobbying for all reasons for five years. Then we wouldn’t have to hear them whine about legislation geared towards the average guy and gal, and not the fat cats (for once).      Best Politician Again, while Barack Obama’s name springs to mind, be patient. We’ve got plenty of other awards to hand out here, and I have a sneaking suspicion Obama’s name is on more than one of them. Because truly the Best Politician of 2008 was Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki. In the year-long talks over the Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with America, Maliki played George Bush like a fiddle. His masterful use of leaks to the press, and playing to his own domestic audience, got him just about everything he demanded in the final document. And Bush had to give up pretty much everything he wanted, in increasing desperation to get any deal signed. Which is pretty amazing, when you think about it. Iraq is an occupied country, and many call Maliki an “American puppet.” But by turning around and yanking back on the puppet strings, Maliki made Bush dance to his tune. And for such a masterful political stroke, Maliki wins the Best Politician award (interesting note — I gave Maliki the “Worst Politician” award last year).      Worst Politician Joe Lieberman was considered for this ignominious award, as was Rod Blagojevich. From the other side of the aisle, Sarah Palin, for her entire performance on the national stage, almost won as well. But by a nose, Ted Stevens takes the award for Worst Politician. Stevens is an old, old man, and was going to have to retire (or die in office) soon anyway. Instead of standing aside when he was indicted on federal charges, he thought he could beat the rap, and win re-election. He did neither. He made a purely political decision, and he blew it. Because if he had resigned, Governor Palin could have appointed some staunch Republican as a temporary replacement, and he or she could have then run as an “incumbent” in the 2008 election. Instead, the seat went to Democrat Mark Begich (who won an extraordinary victory). Meaning Stevens didn’t just lose his own seat, he also lost the seat to the other party . Not even Blagojevich’s shenanigans is likely to have that result. Meaning Stevens was the Worst Politician last year. I’m still trying to figure out which federal prison to send the award to, but I promise it’ll be in the mail soon, Ted.      Most Defining Political Moment While it is indeed tempting to give the award for Most Defining Political Moment to the guy who chucked his shoes at George Bush on worldwide television, and while a good case can be made that in the future we will indeed look back at this as symbolic of his entire Iraq adventure, it wasn’t quite defining enough to win this category. My wife suggested the so-called (at least by me) “Super Duper Tsunami Tuesday” in the primary season. But while SDTT did indeed wind up defining the nominee for the Republicans, the only thing it “defined” for Democrats was the long primary slog ahead for the nomination between two almost-equally balanced candidates. So if there was a “most chaotic moment” award, I might consider it for that, but (not to get too Clintonian here) as I define “define,” I didn’t think it made the cut. No, the Most Defining Political Moment this year can be exactly pinned down, almost to the second. Shortly after the clock struck 8:00 P.M. on the West Coast, every single news announcer on television announced that we could all now start calling him “President Elect Barack Obama.” Obama had other great moments during the year, including his acceptance speech in front of a throng of 80,000 cheering supporters, but I know I speak for many Democrats and other Obama supporters when I say that until it was “officially announced” it wasn’t quite real somehow. It was hard to believe that he had actually won until the talking heads made it official.      Turncoat Of The Year For the third straight year there is just no competition for Turncoat Of The Year. Joe Lieberman can put his 2008 award right next to his 2007 and 2006 awards in this category. It’s such an obvious and unanimous decision that there is little else to say here. All the sniping between the Hillary camp and the Obama camp were small potatoes indeed when held up to the standard of Joe Lieberman’s lips being permanently attached to John McCain’s nether regions during the entire campaign season. Thanks for nothing, Joe.      Most Boring While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is a perennial favorite in this category, and while Bill Richardson gave “Most Boring” a run for the money, this year the award just has to go to Fred Thompson. Thompson’s un-spectacular campaign had even seasoned political reporters falling asleep in their chairs. Thompson’s support was actually at its highest peak the day before he officially threw his hat in the Republican ring for president. It was all downhill from there. It didn’t really have to be this way (Republicans, after all, elected our only movie actor president previously, and they seem pretty happy with the way that turned out). But Thompson’s lackluster phone-it-in campaign style bought him nothing but a quick road to obscurity in the nomination race. So, for boring to tears people who might have voted for him, Fred Thompson walks away with the Most Boring award this year. Better luck next year, Harry.      Most Charismatic For the third year in a row, Most Charismatic goes to Mr. Charisma himself… (drumroll)… Barack Obama! Seriously, there is just nobody else in Obama’s class. The only other person who even was considered for this award was Sarah Palin. Like her or not, Palin’s only redeeming quality was her charisma. It certainly wasn’t her eloquence or her deep knowledge of foreign affairs (or, for that matter, her deep knowledge of just about anything ). Palin’s best virtue was the fact that she drew big crowds on the campaign trail. Fawning crowds. At one point, even rabid crowds. Palin had so much charisma that McCain was even scared to campaign without her — because the press would then see how obvious it was that most people were turning out to see her , and not him . But Obama’s shine is the power of the sun next to a dimly sputtering candle in comparison. Meaning it really wasn’t even close.      Bummest Rap I kind of struggled with this one, so if you’ve got a better suggestion, let me hear it. A case could be made for Eliot Spitzer (did the punishment fit the crime, in other words). Or for Hillary and Bill Clinton being painted as racists (if you believe they were just repeatedly misunderstood on the campaign trail). But, even though the “rap” was twelve years ago, John and Patsy Ramsey earned the award this year for being exonerated by the police in the murder of their daughter Jon Benet. Patsy did not live to see this exoneration, but for twelve years of living under a shadow I think the Ramseys deserve this year’s Bummest Rap award.      Fairest Rap This category, unlike the previous one, was jam-packed this year. Ted Stevens. Rod Blagojevich. Iraqis hucking shoes at President Bush. A decent case for Fairest Rap can be made for any of them. Or, for that matter, Hillary and Bill Clinton being painted as racists (if you believe they really did know what they were doing and saying during the campaign). But I have to say, the fairest rap this year was “Sarah Palin is not ready to be Vice President.” Her supporters say she was just over-handled. They also say she’s a lot smarter than she appeared in those interviews. And they told us all ad nauseum during the campaign that she had “executive experience.” But all of that wasn’t worth a fart in a windstorm, to put it bluntly. The woman was so obviously out of her depth that she became a laughingstock as quickly as she deserved. Now, I am not saying she’s not going to get better, or that we’ve seen the last of her. Not by a long shot. But for spectacularly proving a bit of inside-the-Beltway wisdom wrong this year, Sarah Palin deserves Fairest Rap. Because before now, and throughout the campaign, we were told over and over again by the punditocracy that “nobody makes their mind up who to vote for based on the veep selection.” Polls showed this to be utterly false when it came to Palin. McCain shored up the hardcore Republican base by picking Palin, and enthused the heck out of them — but he lost millions of votes in the center by doing so, after America got a good look at her. She may have singlehandedly cost him the election. Meaning “Palin is a drag on the ticket” was the Fairest Rap of all in 2008. As I was putting this column together, I heard a song on the radio which deserves (except for the bland choruses) to be quoted here in its entirety, as it was seemingly written for Sarah Palin. The song is called “Miss America” by the 70s band Styx, and was written about a beauty queen. Now, Styx isn’t exactly known for deep thinking, but it is truly eerie how close this comes to the Palin reality we all saw: You were the apple of the public’s eye As you cut the ribbon at the local mall A mirage for both you and us How can it be real? We loved your body in that photograph Your home state sure must be proud The Queen of the United States Have you lost your crown? Are you really who we think you are Or does your smile seem to wear your down Is the girl who you once were Screaming to jump out? Is the dream that you must live A disease for which there is no cure This rollercoaster ride you’re on Won’t stop to let you off Well it’s true just take a look The cover sometimes makes the book And the judges did they ever ask To read between your lines? In your cage at the Human Zoo They all stop to look at you Next year what will you do When you have been forgotten?      Best Comeback Another patently obvious category. A case could be made for “the Taliban,” due to the situation in Afghanistan. An even better case could be made for General Shinseki, who spoke truth to power at the beginning of the Iraq war (which he essentially got fired for), and who will now be elevated to a cabinet post — an impressive comeback indeed. But there is really only one contender for the prize this year. For the journey from being “inevitable” to losing caucus after caucus, for hanging in long past when she should have quit, for refusing to concede her loss for almost a week… and then for being a true Democrat out on the campaign trail, and for her speech at the convention, and for being named to the most prestigious cabinet position there is — nobody can touch Hillary Clinton’s comeback this year. Hillary Clinton’s fall and rise in 2008 was just miles ahead of anyone else’s comeback. So Best Comeback of the year is hers without question.      Most Original Thinker I think I’m going to award this one as a tie. From the right, Ron Paul shook the Republican Party to its foundations during his eclectic run for the nomination. He actually outraised every other Republican candidate for campaign cash one quarter during the election season. He also stood up for the truly Libertarian wing of the party, which astonished Washington by its size and fervor. If Republicans manage to turn their party around in the coming years, and tap into the internet for fundraising, they may do it on the Ron Paul model. Stranger things have happened. And from the Democratic side of the aisle, we have Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich was not afraid to say what he felt on the campaign trail — often speaking without notes and without a prepared speech — and he stood up for what he believed was right, not for what he thought would get him votes. He pushed the other candidates further left, and became a moral voice for change within the party. The media ridiculed him mercilessly for doing so. But Dennis Kucinich stood up for what he thought was right, instead of following conventional wisdom. And for that, he has earned the award. So Most Original Thinker of 2008 goes to both Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.      Most Stagnant Thinker Rush Limbaugh and the entire world of right-wing talk radio certainly comes to mind here. Their way of thinking is so stagnant that the swamp has turned into a marsh, which has baked in the sun until it is a hard crust of cracked and broken solid slime. Rush and his ilk have gotten so bad that even some Republicans are starting to warn that following their way of thinking any further is just going to head the entire party over a cliff. From the left, I would have to consider the Reverends Jeremiah Wright and Jesse Jackson. Their civil-rights-era way of looking at race relations in this country was overwhelmed by the generational change Obama brought this year, and exposed it for the stagnant thinking it truly is in the twenty-first century. But the worst example of stagnant thinking wasn’t even George W. Bush this year (although his “thinking” was as stagnant as it’s ever been) — but rather John McCain, for running his entire campaign as an extension of all the disastrous Bush policies. McCain didn’t break with Bush on anything of real note, meaning that he was running on the concept “Bush’s thinking is great — we just need four more years of it!” Which is about as stagnant as you can get. Call it “stagnant squared.” For his entire campaign’s kowtowing to Bush’s way of seeing the world, John McCain gets the Most Stagnant Thinker of 2008.      Best Photo Op This one was tough, so I just punted the decision and am awarding a three-way tie. The opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics is the first to get the nod. Say what you will about totalitarian systems, one thing they know how to do well is put on a spectacle. And the opening ceremony (and much of the rest of the games) qualifies as one of the most spectacular Olympic events ever. Now, nobody will ever top the archer lighting the cauldron in Barcelona, but for overall photo-op-ness, Beijing has to be acknowledged here. Barack Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention was one of the most stirring political speeches of my lifetime. For all the petty and small-minded taunting about the columns behind him and the crowd size and his celebrity appeal; when Barack Obama took the stage, none of it mattered. The whole Obama family at the end of the speech was unquestionably the best photo op of the entire campaign (although I still think Michelle’s dress was kind of strange-looking, but what do I know about fashion?). But I just had to also sneak in here the image of shoes hurtling towards President Bush. Now, to give the man credit, he did an amazing job of ducking the incoming footwear. The man is 62 years old, and I would not bet against him in a dodgeball game after seeing him get out of the way of the flying shoes. And even though in these year-end awards I try to resist whatever is fresh and recent in order to take a longer view, I truly think this image will be one of the defining ones of Bush’s presidency. Much like the image of his father barfing on the Japanese Prime Minister at a state banquet, at almost the same point in his lame duck period. Two images will bookend the history of George W. Bush and Iraq: the “Mission Accomplished” banner, and an Iraqi journalist throwing his shoes at Bush’s head.      Enough Already! As usual, there’s a bunch of things which easily qualify for the “Enough Already!” award. O.J. Simpson? Enough already! “America doesn’t torture” — enough already! The View — enough already! Hillary and Obama hardcore supporters sniping at each other? Enough already! The endless, endless election campaign season? Enough already! Sarah Palin? Enough already! But the true winner of this award was not some fleeting moment during 2008, and didn’t even last just the entire year, but has been bedeviling this country for the past eight years . So everyone join in with a gigantic ENOUGH ALREADY!! for President George W. Bush.      Worst Lie John Edwards certainly deserves a mention in this category. He lied to his wife, he lied to his campaign staff, he lied to the cameras, and he lied to the American public. But, seriously, it was just about sex. It wasn’t earth-shattering, mostly because he didn’t get the nomination. Sarah Palin and John McCain’s last-ditch attack on Obama (”pallin’ around with terrorists”) certainly also deserves a mention here. McCain’s “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” doesn’t really qualify, though, because he may have actually believed that to be true (in which case, to him, it wasn’t a lie, it was just being spectacularly out of touch with reality). But the Worst Lie of the year was contained in chain-letter emails that found their way into millions of inboxes during the campaign. They had all kinds of lies about all kinds of subjects, but only one target — Barack Obama. Just for convenience’s sake, I will summarize this mountain of lies into the most memorable one: “Barack Obama is a secret Muslim.” I hate to say it, but such email mudslinging is going to become routine and pervasive in every single future campaign. History will show that Obama was the first to be attacked in such a widespread fashion by email spam — but he certainly won’t be the last. Which wins the whole tactic “Worst Lie” of 2008.      Capitalist Of The Year 2008 was not a good year for capitalism in general. So it’s kind of hard to pick the best capitalist this year. A strong case could be made for the oil companies, who treated us all to gasoline for over four dollars a gallon this summer. Or for Madoff, for playing the capitalism game to enrich himself (on a previously-unheard-of scale). Or for Paulson and Bernanke, because they got to hand out all the capital ( our capital, by the way) they felt like, with virtually no oversight whatsoever. But for return-on-investment alone, I have to award the Capitalist Of The Year to the Somali pirates. For putting up a few guys, a small boat, and some machine guns, they have reaped rewards of millions of dollars. And isn’t that what capitalism is all about? Increasing revenue for your shareholders, and the consequences be damned? Defined that way, the Somali pirates have shown even the Wall Street bandits how to play in the big leagues.      Person Of The Year I have to agree with Time magazine this year. 2008 will forever be known in America as Barack Obama’s year. Barack absolutely defined this year in American politics, and in most other phases of American life. His reach went beyond our shores, as well (the biggest campaign rally he gave was actually in Berlin, Germany). I forget who said it, but the quote has stuck with me — Barack Obama has done more to improve America’s standing in the world just by his existence than George Bush did in eight years. Obama’s victory is already seen by the rest of the world as a complete repudiation of Bush’s policies. And they are breathing an enormous sigh of relief as a result. For this and so much more, Barack Obama is clearly Person Of The Year.   As usual, for anything or anyone I’ve forgotten (or otherwise inadvertently omitted), please feel free to let me know your choices in the comments. Until next week…   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground  

See the rest here:
Chris Weigant: My 2008 "McLaughlin Awards" [Part 1]

The Obama transition team is asking you to help create a new health care policy. Really. Host a meeting , invite friends and associates, look at the Obama team’s proposal , and let the transition team know what you decide . If you are among a lucky few, Senator Tom Daschle, Secretary-designate for Health and Human Services, may show up at your meeting. This may be more important than it sounds. The key dividing lines over how to fix our country’s broken health care system are becoming clear. It may take the same sort of grassroots involvement that got Obama elected president to keep the private insurance industry from hijacking the process as they have during previous reform efforts. Here’s one of the key decision points. The Obama plan calls for giving everyone the option of signing up for a public or private insurance plan. But according to The New York Times , the private insurance industry is lining up against that option. It’s no small matter. According to a report released Wednesday by health policy analyst Jacob Hacker , having a public option could make the difference between a system that covers everyone and controls costs, and one that will continue to leave millions out while costs soar. As Americans are painfully aware, our health care system is broken. 45 million Americans or more are without health care coverage. Half of all bankruptcies are caused, at least in part, by unaffordable health care bills. We’re spending more — 16 percent of U.S. GDP (gross domestic product) to cover 85 percent of our population, while Canada and France each spend less than 10 percent of GDP to cover everyone. The harm to our economy of our backward health care system is especially evident today, as all three U.S. auto makers suffer from the competitive disadvantage of covering health care costs that their overseas competitors can leave to more effective government-run insurance programs. Americans voted for change this November. But what system makes sense? According to the research we did at YES! for our special coverage of health care reform , government involvement is critical. A majority of Americans agree — two out of three believe the government should provide national health care coverage , even if it would mean higher taxes. Other wealthy countries have adopted various methods , but a system like Canada’s is one of the most efficient at providing good coverage for everyone while keeping a lid on costs. Under this system, the government is the insurer, but patients choose their doctors from private, public, or non-profit health care providers. Having a public system is the way to cut bureaucracy and cost. But government involvement is where things get controversial. The private insurance industry opposes such a move. And some say that the switch to national insurance is too big a leap for Americans. People will be afraid to give up the coverage they know for an unknown system. So the Hacker proposal , which was adopted in part by Barack Obama, may be the perfect compromise. Keep your private insurance if you want. But if you aren’t covered, or if your premiums are too high, or your deductions and exclusions are too onerous, you can opt for the public insurance system. You would still choose your doctor. Subsidies would insure the plan is affordable to all. At the lowest income levels, it would be free. Including a public system in our range of options is what it will take to control costs, and thus make sure everyone is included, according to Hacker. The private insurance industry has made a lot of money by excluding things that are expensive, shifting costs on to individuals and families by, for example, excluding pre-existing conditions, and working to write coverage only for those who are less likely to need health care. They have a big incentive to figure out how to exclude a treatment or test and little incentive to invest in our long-term health, since people tend to shift insurance companies over time. Their business, after all, is not keeping us healthy. It’s generating profits for shareholders. Medicare has kept costs under control more effectively than either private insurance companies, or pools of private insurers, like those who contract with the federal government to provide health insurance to federal employees. According to Hacker’s report , Medicare spending per enrollee increased only 4.6 percent per year from 1997 to 2006, while the cost of private insurance increased 7.3 percent each year during the same time period. Innovations in the public sector have helped contain costs, and there are substantial additional savings to be had from better use of information technology, care coordination strategies, and databases of practices and outcomes, according to Hacker . And public health insurance agencies are in a better position to negotiate for reasonable prices from private health care providers. The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimates that Hacker’s plan would save the U.S. economy $1 trillion over 10 years, while covering 99.6 percent of Americans. The Massachusetts system, enacted in 2006, is a stark example of what happens when there is no public option. Everyone in the state is supposed to be covered, but their choices are limited to private plans. Premiums have been rising 8 to 12 percent per year, which means the system will soon be out of reach of individual families, employers, and the state government. A public option assures that there is a benchmark against which private companies must compete. Without such a benchmark, private companies have no incentive to contain costs or improve services. It’s hard to argue with giving people a choice. But the health care industry is arguing. The New York Times says medical associations are encouraging their members to attend the health care discussion groups being organized by the Obama transition team around the U.S. Past efforts to reform the health care system stalled in the face of powerful health industry lobbyists with huge campaign war chests. Will the industry be as adept at dominating the health care policy discussion when it’s happening in living rooms and coffee shops around the country? Here’s how President-elect Obama put it at his December 11 press conference: Year after year, our leaders offer up detailed health care plans with great fanfare and promise only to see them fail, derailed by Washington politics and influence peddling. If Obama is able to bring together ordinary Americans, who so clearly are desperate for change, and if they get as engaged in health care reform as they were in the bottom-up presidential campaign, perhaps this time we’ll get the change we need. Maybe people power will overcome corporate power, and we’ll finally be able to join the rest of the developed world who enjoy health care security. So far, more than 4,000 meetings are scheduled around the U.S. Here’s where you can sign up to lead a session. All the information you need is online, including the moderator’s guide and instructions for reporting the results back to the transition team. Note: If you are part of such a discussion, please let YES! know. We’d love to read your report and post a selection. Send us an email at editors [at] yesmagazine.org. Put the phrase “health care discussion” in the subject line.

Read the original here: 
Sarah van Gelder: The Health Care Debate: What It Will Take to Cover Everyone

Crap, did I really jump back into polling Alaska? Crazy, since everyone was wrong about the 2008 results. People said they wouldn’t vote for the two crooks — Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young — and then they did ! It was a bizarre “Wilder effect” at play. But Alaska is far too entertaining politically to swear off, so we jumped right back in. Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 12/15-17. Likely voters. MoE 4% (MoE 5% for Republican over-sample) (No trend lines). Republican Primaries Senate Murkowski 31 Palin 55 House At-Large Seat Young 33 Parnell 27 Harris 11 Undecided 29 Young and Parnell faced off this year, and Young narrowly pulled it off. Harris is the Speaker of the Alaska House. Harris has indicated he’s running, while Parnell is likely to reprise his challenge from this year. He came just inches short. Palin would crush Daddy’s Little Girl in a primary. Remember, Lisa Murkowski was appointed to the seat by her father when he was elected to his ill-fated term as governor. Palin’s successful primary challenge to father Murkowski was aided in great part by the backlash to that nepotism. The voters passed a ballot initiative stripping the governor of the power to make such appointments in the future. So given a credible Republican challenger, Murkowski melts. Since Palin vanquished Murkowski’s father, there would be some poetry to also taking out his daughter, but I suspect Murkowski would be vulnerable to other top Republicans. I’d guess at this point that even if Palin passes on the Senate, Murkowski will have to fight for her party’s nomination. As for general election matchups: Governor Palin (R) 55 Knowles (D) 38 Re-elect Palin? Reelect 51 Consider someone else 33 Replace 16 There’s no indication that Knowles will run again, but as a stand-in for “strong Democrat”, he still fares poorly against Palin. Alaska still sees starbursts. Indeed, while her approval rating is off its highs, it’s still pretty darn strong at 60-38 . Last time we polled the state, October 28-30 , she was at 65-35 . So it’s down eight points, but she has a long way to fall before she’d be considered in trouble. Incidentally, Knowles approvals clocks in at 52-37, which isn’t too shabby. But given a choice between the two, it’s currently not much of a contest. Senate Murkowski (R) 49 Knowles (D) 41 Palin (R) 53 Knowles (D) 39 Murkowski (R) 56 French (D) 27 Palin (R) 58 French (D) 27 Murkowsi’s approval ratings are at 51-43, which is middling. Knowles, which again is a stand-in for “strong Democrat”, keeps her under 50 percent, but the far likelier candidate — Alaska Sen. Hollis French — has a long way to go. Given his name ID is about zero, this poll tells us that the Democratic floor in Alaska is 27 percent. Note that Knowles does slightly better against Palin in a Senate matchup than in the governor matchup. Not a significant difference, but there’s a tiny contingent of respondents who prefer her in the governor’s mansion than in DC. House Young (R) 49 Berkowitz (D) 46 Re-elect Young? ? Reelect 37 Consider someone else 27 Replace 36 Young’s approval ratings are at 44-54, Berkowitz clocked in at a much better 51-43, which means people don’t like their crooked incumbent, but they’ll still vote for the sunofabitch. Don’t ask me to explain it. Apparently, as distasteful as the crook is, voting for the Democrat is even more distasteful. At least this poll is showing Young in the lead. In the lead-up to this past election, Berkowitz consistently clocked in big leads over Young. It appears some poll respondents are being more honest in their responses this time around. (Young beat Berkowitz 50-45.) Bonus finding: Mark Begich’s approval favorability numbers are 54-38, so he heads off to DC well liked. Tons of crosstabs below the fold.

Read the original here: 
Alaska 2010 poll cornucopia

Bristol Palin’s future mother-in-law was arrested on drug charges Thursday: Levi Johnston’s mother hit with drug charges WASILLA — A 42-year-old Wasilla woman was arrested Thursday at her home by Alaska State Troopers with a search warrant in an undercover drug investigation. Sherry L. Johnston was charged with six felony counts of misconduct involving a controlled substance. Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston, the Wasilla 18-year-old who received international attention in September when Gov. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, announced their teenage daughter was pregnant and he was the father. Bristol Palin, 18, is due on Saturday, according to a recent interview with the governor’s father, Chuck Heath. Troopers served the warrant at Johnston’s home at the “conclusion of an undercover narcotics investigation,” said a statement issued Thursday by the troopers as part of the normal daily summary of activity around the state. Troopers charged Johnston with second-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance — generally manufacturing or delivering drugs — as well as fourth-degree misconduct involving controlled substances, or possession. Maybe one day the GOP will realize that neither the drug war nor their ‘moral values’ are actually getting them what they want. Unless what they want is sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll — Wasilla-style.

Original post:
Republican Family Values

Kathleen Parker, one of the first conservative writers to call foul on Sarah Palin as a VP pick, is back this time seizing up Caroline Kennedy in comparison to Palin. It is a legitimate question: Why is the resume-thin Caroline Kennedy being treated seriously as a prospective appointee to the U.S. Senate when the comparatively more-qualified Gov. Sarah Palin received such a harsh review?… …In Kennedy’s case, those actors would be senators, not heads of other, potentially belligerent, nations. If appointed, she would be a single vote among 100 and otherwise a placeholder until 2010, when she would have to run for election as any other. Parker helped turn a conservative tide against Palin during the election when she wrote “Palin Problem: She’s Out Of Her League” for The National Review . See and excerpt below: It was fun while it lasted. Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League. No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

Excerpt from: 
Kathleen Parker: Caroline Kennedy Is No Sarah Palin

From the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal to the National Review Online, Republicans are working furiously to develop a comeback strategy. The range of proposals and tactics runs the gamut from abandoning the religious right, to staying the course, to purging traitorous big-government conservatives lured by pork and power. “Republicans walked away from the principles that minted our governing majority in 1980 and 1994,” declared Mike Pence , the newly elected chair of the House Republican Conference. “There is a way out of the wilderness. But it will require humility, vision, positive alternatives and a willingness to fight for what makes America great.” That’s not enough, counsels the American Enterprise Institute’s David Frum : “College-educated Americans have come to believe that their money is safe with Democrats–but that their values are under threat from Republicans. And there are more and more of these college-educated Americans all the time. So the question for the GOP is: will it pursue them? To do so will involve painful change, on issues ranging from the environment to abortion. And it will potentially involve even more painful changes of style and tone: toward a future that is less overtly religious, less negligent with policy, and less polarizing on social issues. That is a future that leaves little room for [Sarah] Palin–but it is the only hope for a Republican recovery.” Evidence available now suggests, however, that whatever advice the GOP takes, it better not hold its breath. In all likelihood, Republicans can look forward to a considerable period on the sidelines. Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi could stumble badly in the face of a disastrous economy and under the constant threat of terrorist assault, but without such an opening, the Republican Party is not yet in a position to engineer its way back to dominance. Why? First, party strength moves in cycles and the Democratic Party’s turn has only just begun. Thus far, the Obama administration-to-be has demonstrated a commitment to avoiding the pitfalls of its Democratic predecessors, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, giving the GOP little, or no, negative material to work with. Second, memories of the Bush years, of the war in Iraq, congressional corruption, and above all, the trillion-dollar meltdown will require years to fade. That does not mean the Democrats are secure. Sixteen years ago, in the wake of the 1992 election, support for Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party nosedived. But in 1994, the GOP had not been as tainted as it has been today. “This is a very bad point in the cycle for Republicans, in terms of demographic trends in voter support, the timing of the cycle, and the overall image of the party,” said the AEI’s Norman Ornstein. “Republicans can hope that Obama and congressional Dems screw up, or that voters are less patient about economic recovery than they were in the 1930s. But that is a thin reed on which to base long-term hopes when neither geographical bases nor emerging voter groups are moving in your direction.” Democratic consultant Bill Carrick noted that in 1993-94, his party’s setbacks followed the 1992 election in which Bill Clinton won only a plurality in a three-way contest, and in 1994, “the Ross Perot voters went for Republican Congressional candidates. Right now, there is no similar large group of alienated and unaligned voters capable of changing the partisan balance.” Carrick argues that “we are likely at the beginning of a Democratic-dominant period. Republicans are confronted with multiple problems–regional, demographic, and ideological. So far, the GOP leadership barely acknowledges most of these problems. The first part of building a healthy Republican Party would be to recognize the seriousness of your problems. The political climate could be very hostile to the GOP for several more years. The severity of the current economic crises is much better suited to Democratic solutions like stimulating the economy with government spending or dealing with government help on mortgage foreclosures.” Republican pollster Whit Ayres was more optimistic about GOP prospects, noting not only the brevity of the 1992 Democratic surge, but also the quick collapse of Democrats’ Watergate-driven gains in 1974 and 1976, quickly followed by major Republican congressional pickups in 1978, and the GOP take-over of the White House and Senate in the 1980 election. “The electorate can switch gears very fast,” he said. Ayres shares the widely-held view that “what really matters now is how Obama governs.” But he believes that “Republican failings will seem like ancient history compared to Obama’s struggles to deal with the economy and looming terrorist threats.” Looking at these questions from a long-term historical perspective, Yale political scientist David Mayhew contends that “perceived management success or failure by an in-party, involving the economy or national security, has been more important in motoring parties in or out of office. On the economic front, governing parties as well as their entire doctrines of political economy have been discredited by bad economic troubles that the in-parties didn’t deal with well. Consider the Grover Cleveland Democrats (small state; free trade) in 1894-96, the Hoover GOP in 1930-32, the Carter Democrats (the great inflation; stagflation; the demise of Keynesianism, etc.) in 1980.” This suggests, according to Mayhew, that “on occasions like these, a new in-party has a priceless opportunity to enact policies its activists would have wanted to enact anyway by wrapping them in a package of relief, recovery, and needed structural reform. That window is opening up for the Obama Democrats.” In the meantime, Obama and his advisors are going out of their way to demonstrate that their decisions will not be designed to accommodate ideological interest groups, but rather to secure a centrist footing, a strategy demonstrated most explicitly by Obama’s top Cabinet-level appointments and by the choice - some say centrist, some say too far to the right - of Saddleback Church’s Rick Warren to give the invocation at the January 20 inauguration.

More:
Republican Purgatory: How Long Will It Last?

Sunday is the first day of Hannukah and we know you can buy them at the deli, but we always like to make our own. Serving them with homemade applesauce and sour cream or caviar works to, but this might not be the year for it. So we’ve put up a latkes extravaganza with a bunch of great recipes to hopefully inspire you to make your own, including Amy Ephron’s, Zabar’s and Grandma Sarah’s! Traditional Potato Latkes   Zabar’s Latkes Latkes with Pomegranate Syrup Melanie Chartoff’s Mother’s Mother’s Latkes Almost Traditional Potato Pancakes Amazing Potato Latkes  Amy’s Potato Pancakes Grandma Sarah’s Latkes  Thin and Crisp Potato Pancakes Bill’s Latkes   Chunky Homemade Applesauce

View original here:
One For The Table: Latkes Extravaganza

A series of racist emails sent out on State of Alaska email accounts have targeted President-elect Barack Obama. In one, the concluding line assessed Obama’s victory and impending move to the White House as: “Another black living in government housing!” According to the Associated Press, three of the racist messages were confirmed by the state’s information technology division after an electronic search of the government’s e-mail system, Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer said Wednesday. One of the emails, entitled “Night Befo Crizzmus,” was forwarded dozens of times. Whether Governor Sarah Palin had knowledge of the emails in advance of the AP story is uncertain. She has so far not commented on the email. Her spokesperson, Bill McAllister, who is of African American descent, indicated that there was an ongoing investigation and has “nothing to do with the governor’s office.” But sources that I have spoken to in Alaska acknowledge that there is a pervasive “atmosphere of racism” throughout pockets of state government. “You hear it all the time,” said one. “It’s accepted as part of normal conversation. No one can be surprised by this. Sarah has done nothing to stop it.” Palin’s failure to condemn the emails immediately is troubling–but not out of character. When supporters at her rallies shouted out threats about Obama, such as “kill him” or “off with his head,” she similarly failed to condemn such outbursts at the time. One supporter at a McCain-Palin rally was caught on tape declaring about Obama, “I’m afraid if he wins, the blacks will take over. He’s not a Christian! This is a Christian nation! What is our country gonna end up like?” Palin refused to distance herself from such remarks. Palin has long had strained relations with Alaska’s African American community. “Blacks don’t have the levels of access to the governor and state commissioners as with past administrations,” said African American attorney Rex Butler and an Alaska resident since 1983. “It seems the posture of (Palin’s) administration with Blacks is: Don’t need them, don’t worry about them.” During the presidential campaign, Gwendolyn Alexander, the president of Alaska’s African-American Historical Society, detailed controversies such as Palin’s staffing practices, Palin allegedly stating she “doesn’t have to hire any Blacks” for major projects and her refusal to attend that state’s major African-American celebration - Juneteenth. “Gov. Palin was the first governor not to send out a congratulatory letter or assist us in any way with our Juneteenth activities,” Alexander wrote. “I didn’t have the courtesy of receiving a reply when I asked for a representative from the Governor’s office to come and speak at our Juneteenth Celebration.” To see how those in the right-wing Republican circles responded to the news of the emails, one need only go to FreeRepublic.com. “This what you get [sic] with an affirmative action fraud who has gammed the legal systems all his adult life,” wrote one respondent. “This fraudulent leftist is the end result of allowing affirmative action and political correctness to destory [sic] the nation and sissify our governement [sic] and courts.” Palin, herself, was accused of making such comments about Obama herself prior to her receiving the VP nomination. Those who know her are split about whether they believe she made them or not. “I don’t think she did,” said one longtime resident of Wasilla. “But my husband thinks she could have. Who knows? I’ve never heard her say anything like that.” But on the campaign trail, Palin ramped up the rhetoric about Obama to the point of being incendiary. “This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America,” she declared. She also charged him with”pallin’ around with terrorists” and declaring that “he’s not one of us.” As many people noted, Palin’s rhetoric was racially coded–and the implications were clear. “He’s ‘not one of us?’” observed African American congressmember Gregory Meeks of New York. “That’s racial. That’s fear. They know they can’t win on the issues, so the last resort they have is race and fear.” Even her positioning herself as a “hockey mom” had racial implications. “Who are these hockey moms?” asked New York Representative Yvette Clarke. “Is that supposed to be terminology that is of common ground to all Americans? I don’t find that. It leaves a lot of people out.”

Read the original post:
Geoffrey Dunn: Racist Emails on State of Alaska Accounts: A Palin Connection?

Can we declare 2008 over a few weeks early, before even more of the world economy collapses? If we hit the fast-forward button, maybe we can skip the plague of locusts, the slaying of the first-born, and the rain of frogs. But before we mumble a premature Auld Lang’s Sine, I have a suggestion. Every year Prospect magazine conducts a stock-take of the past twelve months, asking who - or what - we misunderstood. It should be part of everyone’s New Year routine to ask: who did we over-rate in ‘08, and who didn’t get their due? Here are my proposals: Most over-rated American politician: Sarah Palin . Has the right learned nothing from the Bush years? You betcha! Once again, they fawned over a know-nothing incompetent because she could sound like a Bible-lovin’ Ordinary Joess while screwing them over on behalf of Corporate America. It turned out she thought Africa was one big country, believed global warming wasn’t happening, and couldn’t name a single Supreme Court judgement except Roe. vs Wade - but have her cheer-leaders apologised? It ain’t so, Joe. They still insist the only reason anyone would condemn this book-banning dim-wit is snobbery and sexism. Chant with me now: Palin 2012! Palin 2012! Most under-rated American politician: John Edwards . In the Democratic primaries, this bouffant-centrist New Democrat announced he was sick of the corporate influence-buying he had watched for years in Washington. He exposed how both parties were serving the financial elite, not the people. His populist cry - and the swell of support it gathered - forced Obama and Clinton leftwards on a slew of issues, changing their agenda for government for the better. So he had an affair. So what? That would rule out Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy too. Grow up. It’s the policies, not the penis, that counts. Most over-rated international event: The Beijing Olympics . Yes, it’s true: a ruthless Communist police-state can put on a show. They can arrest protestors, clear out dissidents, and demand the entire society stop and serve their prestige project. But should the world praise them for it? The 2012 London Olympics should be messy and frequently halted by protestors. It’s called democracy - and it’s worth a thousand slick, soulless acts of athleticism. The most under-rated international event: Chinese fiction. The best form of travel is always into a novel. Go to Beijing and you can stare at the shiny neon exterior; pick up one of the extraordinary new wave of Chinese novelists and you peer into the country’s minds. This year I have been travelling through the rising super-power by reading its fiction. Only there can you scent the shifting consciousness that the Communist Party is trying to suppress. In Jiang Rong’s ‘Wolf Totem’ you witness the dawn of Chinese environmentalism; in Ma Jian’s ‘Beijing Coma’ you hear democracy trying to wake. Most over-rated writer: James Wood . The New Yorker’s literary critic has been fawned over all year as the heir to Lionel Trilling, and the last of the great critics. But for me, his writing is weirdly anemic. He is an extraordinarily brilliant critic of style and form - but he simply doesn’t see the other components of great fiction. He seems to think novels exist in a hermetically sealed vacuum, insulated from politics and culture and the great tides of humanity (other than theology, the most sterile of all disciplines). Wood understands novels only in terms of how they relate to other novels. The genuinely great literary critics of the twentieth century - Lionel Trilling, Edmund Wilson, Alfred Kazin - were nothing like this. They saw the novel as a dialogue with the society: they knew no novel stands apart from the world. To them, this Wood would seem defenestrated and sparse indeed. Most under-rated group: Plane Stupid . The news story of this year - of this millennium - is the great global melting we are triggering. Yet as the ice vanishes, we are becoming more frozen. We change our light-bulbs and look away - except for a few. There were jeers and sneers when these smart young eco-activists blockaded a runway at Stanstead Airport in Britain, but if our destruction of our own habitat doesn’t warrant direct action, what does? If Plane Stupid doesn’t try to slap the sleep-walker awake, who will? Most over-rated phenomenon: The surge in Iraq . The outbreak of cholera in Zimbabwe was (rightly) seen as a symbol of that country’s collapse - but who noticed the outbreak of cholera across Iraq? The McCainiacs spent the year chorusing that The Surge Worked - but a study by the distinguished journal Environment and Planning found the truth. Between 2003 and 2007, Iraq was ripped by a massive programme of ethnic cleansing. The mixed Sunni-Shia areas were destroyed. By the time the surge started, there was nobody left to purge: the country was by then carved into ethnically homogenous neighbourhoods. All the surge did was build vast concrete walls between the collapsing hoods, cementing the cleansing. That’s success? Most under-rated phenomenon: Newspapers. Here’s a weird paradox. If you include the internet, more people are reading quality newspapers than ever before. Yet newspapers are - as the bankruptcy of the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune shows - dying. We don’t just want it all, we want it free. Does it matter? As good as some bloggers are, they don’t have the army of foreign correspondents or in-depth investigative teams that are necessary to make sense of the world. If print newspapers - for all their manifest flaws and corporate biases - die, there will be an aching hole where newsgathering used to be. Newspapers: buy them or lose them. And we can argue long into the New Year’s Eve fireworks about the borderline cases. (Nominate your own below). Did we under-estimate Gordon Brown, who seemed to find his feet by standing on Keynes’ shoulders? Did we over-estimate the eternal return of Peter Mandelson - a man fond of saying “I am seriously relaxed about people getting filthy rich”? Did we underestimate the American people, who rejected racism and Bushism so definitively? And can someone - anyone, please - tell me why I know so much about the divorce of Madonna and Guy Ritchie? Farewell, 2008. Go now, before all get hit by a plague of boils. Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent newspaper. To read more of his articles, click here or here .

Read the original: 
Johann Hari: Who are the most over-rated - and under-rated - people of 2008?

The old NY Times lede: In a carefully controlled strategy reminiscent of the vice-presidential hopeful Sarah Palin , aides to Caroline Kennedy interrupted her on Wednesday and whisked her away when she was asked what her qualifications are to be a United States senator. Here’s a screenshot of the Google News results: That screenshot is necessary because the lede now reads : She talked about her book, about the Bill of Rights. She talked about raising her family. And, echoing her friend President-elect Barack Obama, she said she could bring change to Washington. How sweet. She wants change! That sounds a heck of a lot better than being compared to Sarah Palin. What seems to have happened is that she blew off the press at an earlier event, her handlers got a gander at the NY Times reaction, and decided to make her available during a later appearance. So the NY Times rewrote the story based on subsequent events, given that the original premise (that she was dodging the press) was inoperative. So if nothing else, her handlers learned that they wouldn’t be able to get away with the Sarah Palin strategy, and that’s a relief. New York ain’t Alaska.

Here is the original:
From goat to hero, a tale of a lede rewrite at the NY Times

By Lindsay Beyerstein, TMC MediaWire blogger. A common thread is emerging in the right wing response to healthcare reform. Its opponents aren’t claiming that public healthcare will be bad. Rather, they are terrified that the new system will be so good that no citizen would buy expensive private insurance–or vote for politicians who wanted to take public insurance away. The Obama team is sending clear signals that healthcare reform is a core economic issue , and the health insurance industry is becoming increasingly anxious by the future administration’s determination to bring healthcare costs under control. Some Americans are seeing their healthcare premiums rising at four times the rate of inflation, if they have insurance at all. Healthcare reform is a pocketbook issue for all of us, according to the Obama team. In tough economic times it might be tempting to postpone healthcare reforms, but Obama is adamant that delay would be a false economy. In the American Prospect , Joanne Kenen and Sarah Axeen support claims about the high cost of doing nothing : A recent report by the New America Foundation’s health-policy program estimates that the cost of doing nothing about health care, including poor health and shorter lifespan of the uninsured, is well above $200 billion a year and rising. That’s enough to cover the uninsured and still have some left over for other public-health needs. If healthcare costs continue to rise at their current rates, it will cost $24,000/yr to insure a family of four by 2016, an 84% increase from today. At these rates, half of American households would have to spend at least 45% percent of their income to be insured. In the Nation, Willa Thompson describes how a bicycle crash made her appreciate the connection between healthcare and politics . Thompson was 21 years old when she suffered major injuries after a collision with a truck. Luckily, she was covered by her parents’ medical insurance until she turned 22. She later realized that if she had been just a few months older when the accident happened, she wouldn’t have been able to pay for her medical care. We all agree that something needs to be done. Let’s briefly review the options that have been proposed so far. Obama wants to provide healthcare for all by requiring private insurance companies to cover everyone and creating a public health insurance plan to compete with private insurers. The second part of his plan is the public option that Republican opponents are so scared of. Insurance companies love the idea that we’ll all be forced to buy their expensive product. They’re not so keen about competition from the public sector. Ezra Klein writes, “If you’re looking for the coming fault line on the left of health care politics, keep an eye on what happens to the public insurance option in the health reform bill.” Will the public plan survive? Not if the Republicans and the insurance lobby have anything to say about it. As evidence, Ezra cites this passage from a recent article in Congressional Quarterly : Mark Hayes, a Republican health policy adviser to the Senate Finance Committee, said Republicans have concerns because the government plan might have access to price controls and other tools not available to private insurers. This could lead to lower premiums in the government plan, which would cause most consumers to migrate out of the private market, he said. “Over time the effect the government option could have [is an] erosion in the private market, [making] other choices not available,” Hayes said. The consensus among progressives is clear, the public plan must prevail. In fact, many advocate going all the way to single-payer health insurance. Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee argues in the Progressive that Obama and Daschle should opt for single payer health insurance . Now is no time for piecemeal solutions: Such a path would perpetuate the crisis and deal a cruel blow to the hopes of Americans for real reform. Those in Congress and liberal policy organizations who are embracing caution or promoting more insurance, not more care, are playing a risky game. It could jeopardize the health security of tens of millions of Americans and, in the process, fatally erode public support for the Obama administration. Ezra links to a candid post from the blog of the right wing Cato Institute wherein Michael F. Cannon argues that blocking Obama’s health plan is the key to GOP survival . Why? Because, history shows that once people start getting good healthcare from the government at a price they can afford, they want to keep reelecting the politicians who make that possible. Cannon calls the phenomenon where people reelect governments that give them good healthcare “becoming dependent on the government,” we call it “voting our self-interest.” In other healthcare news, public health advocates are not pleased about rumors that Obama may ask Mark Dybul to stay on as US Global AIDS Coordinator for the first year of Obama’s term. Dybul is responsible for implementing the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which funds AIDS prevention and treatment in 15 poor countries. Advocates say that Dybul, a medical doctor, is too focused on medical interventions and behavioral changes for individuals, and not sufficiently concerned with broader public health initiatives. This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about healthcare. Visit Healthcare.NewsLadder.net for a complete list of articles on healthcare, or follow us on Twitter . And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy and immigration issues, check out Economy.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.NewsLadder.net . This is a project of The Media Consortium , a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder .

More here:
The Media Consortium: Weekly Pulse: Public Health Insurance Would Be Too Good and We’d Like It Too Much, Republicans Warn Healthcare NewsLadder

A new state commission says the Alaska governor ought to get a $25,000 a year raise. Asked to figure out how much Alaska should pay its top officials, the group recommends pay hikes for the lieutenant governor, department heads and legislators too. “We need the best people we can get to do some pretty tough jobs against some often incredibility well-financed, single-minded corporate and individual interests,” said Rick Halford, a former legislator and chairman of the new State Officers Compensation Commission.

Here is the original post: 
Panel: Palin Deserves A $25,000 Raise

orangeclouds115 has an important Diary making its way up the Daily Kos Recommended List. It details the kind of “bottom-up politics,” what we once called “participatory democracy,” that many of us eager for change have been heartened to see blossoming in 21st Century America. Not just we can believe in but change that we can count on. You can read the delicious details in the Diary, but the short version is that activist Dave Murphy has put together a petition regarding the next Secretary of Agriculture - which is as environmental a post as the chiefdoms of Energy, Transportation, and the EPA. His petition has not only collected all the big names in sustainable agriculture - as opposed to the version that plagues so much of our country now - but managed to get attention in traditional megamedia places like The New York Times . Here’s a comment from one of the best-known petition signers, Marion Nestle, author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health . I signed on because it’s time for a change at USDA, an agency that has long been linked all too strongly to industrial agriculture at the expense of more sustainable approaches.  The country badly needs more consumer-friendly approaches to areas under the purview of USDA: food assistance, food security, organic standards, meat and poultry safety, sustainable production.  Someone should be heading the agency who is interest[ed] in pursuing more just and sustainable goals. It’s also apparently caught the eye of Barack Obama’s transition team. How this grassroots/netroots effort will pan out is anybody’s guess. But another 50,000 names couldn’t hurt. I urge you to read and sign. Update [2008-12-16 22:25:53 by Meteor Blades]: : Caught the team’s eye but clearly only got a glance. All that can be hoped for now is that one or more of those six individuals whose bios appear below will be considered for undersecretaries. Here is Dave Murphy’s petition . And here are brief biographies of the six people he has suggested for Secretary of Agriculture. Gus Schumacher, Former Under Secretary of Agriculture for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Former Massachusetts Commissioner of Agriculture. Chuck Hassebrook, Executive Director, Center for Rural Affairs, Lyons, NE. Sarah Vogel, former two-term Commissioner of Agriculture for the State of North Dakota, attorney, Bismarck, ND.   Fred Kirschenmann, organic farmer, Distinguished Fellow, Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Ames, IA and President, Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture, Pocantico Hills, NY. Mark Ritchie, current Minnesota Secretary of State, former policy analyst in Minnesota’s Department of Agriculture under Governor Rudy Perpich, co-founder of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. Neil Hamilton, attorney, Dwight D. Opperman Chair of Law and Professor of Law and Director, Agricultural Law Center, Drake University, Des Moines, IA. Every one of them a competent, pragmatic, focused person who believes in the necessity of real change.

Excerpt from: 
Food Activists Take Bottom-Up Politics Seriously

The Secret Service has ruled that bloggers must go shoeless when attending political events. After the flack raised by Secret Service critics who questioned why President Bush found himself at the mercy of an Iraqi journalist’s size tens, the security org took a preemptive position, requiring that all bloggers, journalists and hosts from Air America, PBS, NPR and MSNBC would be required to remove their shoes before entering secure zones when the president, vice president James Dobson, and the CEOs of Blackwater and Haliburton are present “We have long had serious concerns over stiletto heels and steel tipped union work boots,” a spokesman for the secret service explained. “Now, we have an excuse… er, make that serious reason to secure the left’s footwear. The policy also requires that no stiletto heels be worn in any press briefings where any member of congress is present. “The godless, women on the left will have to hike their droopy butts without the help of high heels,” a press release from an un-named Secret service spokesman stated. Adidas spokesman did not comment, but a Birkenstock spokesman said the company was offering free “shoe security” bags, with a place for reporters and bloggers to put their name. And a Nike spokesman stated that their slogan, “Just do it,” does not necessarily apply to shoe throwing. Keith Olbermann is reported to have denied his past pursuit of shoe heaving leisure activities. “It was pigskin I was throwing with football buddies, not shoe leather,” he offered as a lame excuse. Josh Marshall of talkingpointsmemo, has already put in an FOI to determine whether Native American made moccasins will be included in the new rules. Joe Scarborough, of Morning Joe, was given an exclusion from the rules, but Mika Brezhinski was informed that she, along with her father, would be required to go barefoot. Thom Hartmann, of Air America Radio described how, when Thomas Jefferson first met with the Chinese, he also, voluntarily removed his shoes, so, Hartmann, would be honored, in the spirit of Jefferson, to do the same with the inscrutable Bush. Ed Schultz and Stefanie Miller of Jones Radio devoted an hour each to call-ins describing ways to throw shoes and fantasy shoe throw targets. Their seven second delay was invoked a8 times between the two of them. Producers explained most of them had to do with where callers wanted to plant the shoes. David Swanson, of afterdowningstreet, asked if a decree like this, coming under the authorization of Bush, would be an impeachable offense. Rachel Maddow, wearing five inch spike heels, behind her desk, and switching to Birkenstock flats, observed, “They’ve talked me down.” Phil Donahue explained that his shoes, as well as his show, were taken away from him in 2003, when his show, the highest rated on MSNBC, was shut down, because, MSNBC cited, of low viewership. An MSNBC memo later surfaced, stating that Donahue offered a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war……He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration’s motives.” Jay Leno, soon to be hosting a 10 PM show that will probably have more political content than his late night show, was left with just one shoe– the right foot– and given a warning. David Letterman had to hand over his shoes to John McCain, who sent Sarah Palin to pick them up. The RNC had to explain that they were not hers to keep. Chris Matthews was notified that the policy would apply to him. He’d have to keep his shoes off, except in Pennsylvania. Chris Bowers of Openleft analyzed five shoe polls and reported that blue state voters oppose the shoeless policy two to one and observed that Red state republican evangelical women didn’t seem to understand the problem. “Isn’t it God’s way to go barefoot and pregnant?” they asked. Treasury Secretary started to ask if there any financiers or bankers among those affected, then changed his mind. “Who needs shoes, anyway. We walk on the backs of the morons who bought the buyout,” he joked, when he was near a microphone he thought was turned off. Techpresident’s Micah Sifry, organizer of the new media conference Personal Democracy Forum, observed in about 140 characters, including using a tinyurl.com link, that shoes were so old-school analog, and that twitterers had been throwing digital shoes at Bush for what seemed like an eternity. Anna Marie Cox, Tim O’Reilly tweeted that they agreed, and Guy Kawasaki reported that alltop now has a shoe throwing page. Katrina Vanden Heuvel, of THE NATION, brought out an issue of the Nation from 1929 showing how a majority of Americans were shoeless back then and she this edict as a way for liberals to show solidarity with the victims of house foreclosures. Several liberal bloggers questioned why the shoe ruling would apply to Caroline Kennedy, who didn’t have enough experience to be considered for the no-shoes rule. Greg Palast, in a BBC special report, revealed that Ohio had required that inner city voters had been required to remove their shoes before voting in the 2004 election. And Robert Kennedy Jr. co-authored a cartoon with Palast, published in Rolling Stone, telling how voters with black or brown wing tipped shoes were exempted from the shoe-vote disenfranchisement. Michael Moore is reported to be writing a script for a new movie, a remake of Footloose, titled Sole-less in America. Code Pink called for people to send in their old shoes to be used in a demonstration at the gates of the White House. So far they have received 200 truckloads worth and they have asked people to stop sending shoes and to show up at the White House to help unload the trucks. Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin is now wearing Pink sneakers, but was told to remove them before entering a congressional hearing. Buzzflash’s Mark Karlin announced that the Buzzflash wings of justice award was being given to Muntadar al-Zaidi, the Iraqi journalist-shoe-thrower whose actions set off the new secret service policy. Alan Colmes, soon to be former co-host with Sean Hannity, denied that he had agreed to put his name on a shoe, which also included Hannity’s– on the bottom of the heel. But he commented, “The shoe does have a nice heft to it.” Politico, NY Times, Washington Post, CBS, ABC and Fox reporters complained, asking, “Why should we have to put up with the stinky liberal feet.” A source reported that Harry Reid had commiserated with the mainstream media celebrities. Dennis Kucinich issued a press release calling for a Department of Shoe Eloquence, and hailed Muntadar al-Zaidi as a hero of democracy. It is reported that a foundation headed by Imelda Marcos has contacted the homeland security department to explore becoming the recipient of lost and forgotten shoes. Her foundation already has such an arrangement with the TSA, for airport screening areas. Barack Obama’s spokesman said the President-elect would like to reverse the ruling against progressives, even before he took office, but his transition team legal advisers explained that the way Bush had instituted the rule, it could take up to two years to reverse it and progressives should just wait and be patient. crossposted from OpEdNews.com

Go here to read the rest:
Rob Kall: Secret Service Issues New Policy: Bloggers to Go Shoeless

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — An accelerant was poured around the exterior of Gov. Sarah Palin’s church before fire heavily damaged the building, federal investigators said Monday. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said the accelerant was poured at several locations around the church, including entrances. Lab tests will determine the type of substance involved. Possibilities include gasoline, kerosene, diesel fuel or even lamp oil, Agent Nick Starcevic said. The blaze was set Friday night at the main entrance of the Wasilla Bible Church while a small group, including two children, were inside. No one was injured. Fire authorities were called to the scene at 9:40 p.m., unusually early for many arson fires, Starcevic said. “It’s kind of odd to do in the evening hours,” he said. “I can tell you that most of the arson fires I’ve worked on are late nighttime, usually when no one is there.” Palin, the former Republican vice presidential candidate, was not at the church at the time of the fire but visited Saturday. Her spokesman, Bill McAllister, said Monday that Palin knew about the accelerants Saturday morning before a statement she authorized was released that day. During her visit at the church, Palin told an assistant pastor she was sorry if the fire was connected to the “undeserved negative attention” the church has received since she became the vice presidential candidate Aug. 29, McAllister said. Wasilla Deputy Police Chief Greg Wood said authorities had no immediate suspects or motive.

See the original post:
Palin Church Fire: Accelerant Poured Around Building

The 2008 presidential election may have been the beginning of a new era in presidential politics where assumptions and ground rules which we have known for decades will have to be revisited but, in at least some respects, the 2008 election looked quite similar to other recent elections. At least some of the things we knew about presidential election remain relevant even after this election that seemed to have changed everything. This election again confirmed the central import of fundraising in presidential campaigns. Barack Obama’s record shattering fundraising was a key piece of his election victory allowing him to not only dominate the airwaves and other paid media, but to implement his campaign’s brilliantly planned field campaign. Perhaps more importantly, Obama’s early fundraising success in 2007 allowed him to position himself as the only serious challenger to Hillary Clinton. As of the end of 2007, Obama had raised $101.4 million, while Clinton had raised $104.5 while all the other Democratic candidates combined had raised less than $75 million. In the Democratic nominating season of 2008, early fundraising clearly was still the first primary and helped narrow the field quickly to two candidates. By early 2008, Obama began to consistently raise more money than Clinton, making it possible for him to overcome the advantages that Clinton, as the early frontrunner, enjoyed. For the Republicans, fundraising was somewhat more complex. McCain was the early frontrunner, but stumbled badly in the first half of 2007. Clearly, early money was not as important for the Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani both had raised more money than McCain going into 2008. Although comeback from the brink of collapse in mid-2007 became a driving narrative for the McCain camp during the short-lived Republican primary season, it now seems relatively clear that the lack of discipline and focus which made it difficult for McCain to raise more than $37 million before 2008, also characterized a campaign that could neither stay on message or avoid making rash decisions. One of the reasons early fundraising remained important this year was that the primary schedule was changed again going into 2008, becoming more frontloaded than ever. Interestingly, even with the new schedule, Iowa and New Hampshire still mattered. For many people, Obama’s victory in Iowa is what made him seem like a plausible candidate for the first time, rather than just an interesting side story to the bigger story of Hillary Clinton’s nomination. Correspondingly, McCain’s victory in New Hampshire put him back in the Republican race again and on a swift route to his party’s nomination. Candidates who built strategies that did not include on winning one of these states, most notably Rudy Giuliani, or who were unable to win either of these states, such as John Edwards, saw their campaigns end quickly after the New Hampshire primary. The reasons for the persistent import of these Iowa and New Hampshire are not obvious.. The media and punditry all was aware of the front-loaded schedule and the relatively small size of these two states, but the narratives in 2008 with regard to Iowa and New Hampshire, with several candidates being in a do or die situation in one of these states, was similar to what we might have seen in 1976 or 1988. Thus, on the Republican side, for example, after Huckabee and McCain won Iowa and New Hampshire, with Romney coming in second in both, it was almost as if Rudy Giuliani, only a month removed from being the front-runner and still a popular figure nationally, no longer existed for many in the media, punditry and blogosphere. Although their was a sharp anti-intellectualism and contempt for book learnin’ from the McCain-Palin campaign, and even at times in the Democratic primary from the Clinton campaign, the 2008 election again saw the country elect a president who was educated at elite private universities. From 1948-1988, we only had one Ivy League educated president, John F. Kennedy, but since 1988 all of our presidents have had at least one Ivy League degree. Obama, oddly enough like President Bush, of course, has two, and has also taught law at a third leading university. So, in the year of Joe the Plumber, Americans again showed a preference for our most elite academic institutions. Lastly, the 2008 election also proved that one of the most fundamental rules of American politics-that if the economy is in bad shape and the country is stuck in an unpopular war, the incumbent party will not get reelected. It is not possible to isolate reason while Obama was able to win such an initially unlikely election, but it seems relatively certain that these factors were important. McCain’s ignorance of economic matters would not have been such a big problem for him had the country been in good shape economically. Similarly, McCain’s never-ending discussion of the success of the surge might not have fallen on deaf ears from most of the electorate if the war in Iraq was not already so wildly unpopular. These big picture events framed the 2008 election, and Obama’s victory like they frame every election. The 2008 election saw a well-financed Ivy League educated candidate win the Iowa caucus and go on to defeat the nominee from the incumbent party at a time when the country was mired in an unpopular war and an imploding economy. This may not be the dominant narrative, or the most exciting angle on the recent election, but it is still an important one, which may tell us more than we would expect about how much has or has not changed in our political system.

View post:
Lincoln Mitchell: We Still Know Some of the Things We Knew

Bristol Palin is expecting her first child, a son, on Dec. 20 — and her grandfather says their family has been receiving support and gifts from all over the world. “In Sarah’s mailroom, there’s 87 boxes — big boxes of mail that haven’t even been opened,” Sarah Palin’s father, Chuck Heath, 70, tells the Web site Grandparents.com. “I’ve been answering letters all day, all week. We figure there’s over a hundred thousand pieces here.”

See the original post here: 
Sarah Palin Will Be A Great Grandmother, Says Her Father Chuck Heath

CROWN POINT, Ind. — A Lake County jury has awarded $48 million in damages to a worker who has been a paraplegic since he was injured at a northwestern Indiana steel mill four years ago. Anthony Arciniega, 42, of Westville fell from a ladder at ISG Burns Harbor — now ArcelorMittal — in November 2004. Court documents said the ladder was covered with refractory concrete due to the negligence of subcontractor Minteq International. Through his attorney, Kenneth Allen, Arciniega issued a statement saying, “I’m thankful to the jury and for the hard work of my lawyer, but I’d give it back and then some if I could have my legs back.” Allen said he expects the case to be appealed. The Associated Press left a message on Monday with Gregory Bakota, the attorney for Minteq International, seeking comment. The jury reached its verdict on Thursday following a 10-day trial. Jurors determined half of the damages should be paid by Minteq and half by the steel mill, Allen said. While the $48 million verdict is a large sum, it is not the largest in Indiana history. According to Indiana Jury Verdict Reporter, there have been verdicts of $60 million and $56.5 million since 2000. Arciniega’s doctors and co-workers testified at the trial that he returned to work in a wheelchair within six months of the accident, even though he suffered through nerve pain. “I had to support my family,” Arciniega said during questioning by attorneys. “Part of my responsibility as a husband and father is to put food on the table.” His wife, Sarah, a nurse, worked at a nursing home to try and make up for the family’s lost income, as well as serving as Arciniega’s nurse and taking care of their three children. “Every day is a struggle for us but this verdict will make our lives much easier,” Sarah Arciniega said after the verdict.

View original post here:
Paralyzed Steelworker Wins $48 Million Verdict

Today the designated electors officially choose our next president. And today’s (12/15/08) New York Times features an op-ed titled, “A Ballot Buddy System.” (I copied the article below.) The concept in the piece is a creative idea which bypasses the need for an impossible-to-pass Constitutional amendment to change the unfair electoral vote to a popular vote. The creator of this new system, the op-ed writer, is my son. I’m not surprised he came up with this. I heard “That’s not fair!” countless times as we talked around the dining room table. As a single mom, raising teenage sons was pretty daunting, but we had spirited talks about politics and government. And Rand and his brother used the buddy system to override many of my decisions, such as how late to stay up or which movie to see. The two of them together were a powerful force. I guess he remembered that, when conceiving this: Here’s the Times op-ed, in full. I think it’s a truly creative concept, even if I weren’t his mom. A Ballot Buddy System By Randall Lane THE 2008 presidential election actually ends today, when the people whose votes truly count, the 538 electors chosen by voters to reflect their candidate preference, convene in each state to cast their ballots. The result might lack drama — 365 electoral votes for Barack Obama, 173 for John McCain — but when a high school biology teacher named William Forsee walks into Nebraska’s Capitol in Lincoln this afternoon, some history will be made. Nebraska went for John McCain by 15 percentage points. Yet Mr. Forsee, a resident of Bellevue, just outside Omaha, will cast his electoral vote for Mr. Obama — the first time since 1892 that any state has chosen to split its slate. Nebraska and Maine are the only two states that now apportion some of their electoral votes by Congressional district rather than give them all to the statewide winner. (Mr. Obama won all four of Maine’s electoral votes.) It explains why both Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton campaigned in Omaha during the closing weeks of this year’s campaign. Election theorists talk nobly of moving America’s presidential election to a popular vote, but that would require a Constitutional amendment. Swing states would never pass it, because it would mean giving up their influence. Neither would small states, which have a disproportionate influence in the Electoral College. But if every state apportioned its electoral votes as Maine and Nebraska do — one for each Congressional district, plus two for the overall state winner — millions more voters would suddenly become worthy of the candidates’ attention. What’s stopping the safe states from making themselves more politically relevant? The understandable reluctance of one party to unilaterally improve the presidential prospects of the other. A failed initiative in California earlier this year to move to district-based apportionment was denounced for what it was — an attempt by Republicans to siphon off sure Democratic electoral votes under the guise of election reform. But here’s a bipartisan solution: an electoral vote buddy system. Red and blue states of similar size should pair up and pass state laws to apportion their electoral votes by district. It would seem counterintuitive for a Democratic legislature in New York to cede a portion of its sure 31 Democratic electoral votes, but not if it opens up some of Texas’ 34 votes for the party. Washington State could make its 11 electoral votes relevant, in tandem with Tennessee, which also has 11. In this past election, voters in Louisiana (nine electoral votes) and Mississippi (six) could have focused the candidates’ views on Hurricane Katrina rebuilding had they buddied with New Jersey, which has 15 electoral votes. That might have also yielded more debate about urban transportation issues. Imagine how different the campaign would have looked if Mr. Obama, rather than making repeat visits to Denver and Dayton, Ohio, had stopped in San Antonio and Houston, while Mr. McCain held rallies in areas of relative Republican strength in New York like Dutchess County and Staten Island. As most of the electors now cast votes that were ceded by the other party well before the Iowa caucuses, perhaps their state legislatures will take notice of Nebraska’s William Forsee, whose ballot was never taken for granted, and start looking around for a buddy. Randall Lane, the former Washington bureau chief for Forbes, is the editor in chief of Doubledown Media .

The rest is here: 
Lea Lane: A Buddy System to Change the Electoral Vote

Apparently Chicago was getting a little too big for its britches about their favorite son and it got a big old biotch slap. First Oprah announced that she literally had gotten too big for her britches. She admitted - and what tacky person asked? - that she has hit the double centenary pound mark. I’m sorry you feel so bad about it, Oprah, and for health’s sake you probably should try to shed a few pounds, but heck you are one big beautiful black woman, so don’t get all shamey, do what you can and look gorgeous in the meantime. It might be karma for that wheel barrel of fat you had carted out on stage a while back. Then Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, with the very slim resume, got carted off for allegedly trying to sell Barrack Obama’s vacant Senate seat. It’s not like it’s never been done before, but you have to admire this guy’s level of transparency. Rod married Chicago alderman Dick Mell’s potty-mouthed daughter and rose to governor on a reform plank. Like the reform-minded guv from Alaska he got bored with the job and sought a national platform. There are no transcripts of Palin trying to sell Sen. Ted Steven’s old seat. Yet. Though we face huge state deficits, I hope my New York Governor Patterson doesn’t try to sell off Hillary Clinton’s senate seat. And who knew being governor was such a giant yawn? The “expletive laced” transcripts made young Rod sound like he was off his meds. The subpoenaed Team of Rovals linked the scandal to Barack Obama, Tony Rezko and maybe Boss Tweed. With audacity of hype FOX news denounced the pay-to-play demands of the governor and wanted off with his bleeping bushy head. Meantime the slobbying, mendacious GOP sees “ethics” as their mantra for the next election. Gag me with a forklift. It is sad that selling vacant senate seats is seen as a viable revenue stream in this economy. Desperate times. While America shopped, our unregulated capital markets turned into ponzi scum and high stakes poker parlors. Desperate measures. The damage continues to trickle down and very good, decent, hardworking people, who shower before and after work, are being hammered. Ironically gay and straight are equal in the great leveling juggernaut of this recession. The LGBT community is reeling. Individual memberships, donations and corporate funding have dried up and LGBT groups are cutting staff or going under. The Day Without Gay is real and it’s here and threatens to turn into weeks and months. Now more than ever it’s time for our own version of pay-to-play. In whatever year-end giving we can afford we need to support our LGBT centers and organizations, local, state, national and international. We also need to support straight organizations run by courageous out LGBT leaders. We need to lean on our straight allies to pay up with us. It’s time for some Pay-to-Gay.

See more here: 
Kate Clinton: It’s Pay-to-Gay Time

Britney Spears’ pop-tart image was created as a fantasy for the average man, but since her brush with the ugly side of fame, she’s been subjected to the average female nightmare. The public, and press, have leveled at Spears a litany of critiques that are familiar to everyday women: she’s lost her sex appeal, she’s a bad mother, she’s “crazy,” she’s fat, she’s over the hill before the age of 30, she’s angry and out of control. When Spears smashed her teen-queen facade by shaving her head, acting out, and being less than impeccably groomed, the public reacted with loathing and voyeurism; now, Spears’ “comeback” consists of losing her legal independence and at 27 (her birthday was just a few weeks ago), being micro-managed back into the same role she had as a comely teenager–the role that may have caused all the problems to begin with. On Sunday night two weeks ago, Mtv aired a Britney-approved documentary in which she opened up about her life for the first time in years. But the two hours of TV were more tragic than triumphant. In between moments of happy rehearsals and studio antics, the film focused in as Britney tearfully described her current life as “sad,” plagued by angsty boredom despite the rehearsals that are supposed to give her joy. The documentary included a moment in which Spears said that every day to her now feels like “Groundhog Day,” as well as some shocking footage of her car being mobbed by paparazzi and her handlers shielding her with a sheet as she shopped. Spears said she longed to take walks without being hounded, to “feel the crispy air… be a part of the people.” One of her entourage expounded: “The only time she’s free is when she’s in a closed four by four space.” In light of all that, it’s been disturbing this week to watch Spears go through the motions of performances meant to highlight her toned physique and ability to do some rudimentary dance moves. One wonder whether Spears is ready for this “comeback,” or whether the army of male managers, including her dad, have foisted it on her because they don’t know what else to do–and she’s their cash cow. A woman who has been in the public eye since before she could make decisions for herself can’t break away from her abusive lifelong relationship with her audience, as their sex-object, squeal inducer and punching bag. Writing about Britney in the midst of this blatantly-engineered publicity blitz is problematic: by paying attention to her, we are feeding the machine that keeps her in a cycle of public humiliation and redemption. We are reinforcing the presentation of a person–a woman–as merchandise. But Britney’s story is hard to ignore because it brings up so many disturbing reminders of society’s treatment of women, particularly our bodies. In the Spears explained that she shaved her head as “a form of rebellion” and a way of “feeling free… shedding stuff that had happened.” The reason that the world reacted so violently to the shaved scalp was she was rejecting her beauty and turning herself into something other than an object of desire. Similarly, her mid-routine kiss with Madonna remains a hot topic years later because Madonna, who presents herself as an empowered, highly sexualized, aggressive women, was symbolically seducing and converting Britney from virginal teen queen into something far more threatening. With all these classically sexist overtones to the Britney drama, it’s no wonder that women are reacting so personally. On Jezebel, several (excellent) threads about Britney have drawn out commenters’ own experience with eating disorders and mental illness. Britney is an object of fear, obsession, pity disgust and love for women because her journey–at least when it comes to scrutiny of her appearance and relationships–is ours writ large. She has suffered through breakups, family problems, pregnancies, body image issues, (rumored) postpartum depression and defiant self-destruction in front of millions. Many women suffer through at least some of these things. Sure, they do it with a smaller audience, but they often feel the same humiliation when they get caught in sweatpants or with unshaven legs, behave unthinkingly, make bad romantic choices, grow out of their adolescent bodies, get dismissed as crazy, are frowned upon as irresponsible parents or, after giving birth, are desexualized and resented. The obsession with her thinness is perhaps the most blatant of these problems. As Rebecca Traister wrote last year after Spears’ infamous VMA performance: Wonder why your daughters have eating disorders and hate their bodies? Maybe because they’re reading reports that label the thin young woman dancing around in a bra and panties physically unappealing and obese. Indeed, after that performance, the AP wrote , with its tongue not far enough in its cheek, that Britney’s physique was the “most unforgivable” aspect of her performance. And now that she can bare her midriff without shame, she is considered healed. Her father, cried during the documentary because his daughter was “beautiful” again. Talk about unhealthy messaging. During that flabby midriff era, Britney may have been controlling her life and image the only way she knew how: by flouting public requirements. The reality is we don’t know what Spears really thinks or feels beyond the clues she offered on TV. What we do know is that her handlers, parents, managers, paparazzi and the public may have irreparably damaged her life for profit and gratification, leaving her trapped between being a wind-up-toy and a train wreck. Perhaps that’s why so many are rooting for this woman’s comeback by buying her album , even as it feeds a vicious cycle for her and all of us. Originally posted at RH Reality Check

See the rest here: 
Sarah Seltzer: The Britney Show: A pop princess and American womanhood

WASHINGTON — At the gift shops in Union Station, shelves once stocked with ubiquitous FBI T-shirts and mugs now display all things Barack Obama _ apparel, action figures and a jack-in-the-box with the president-elect popping out with a big smile. Even a cigar shop at the busy train station has gotten into the high-demand business with an Obama stogie. “Everybody’s just Obama crazy. It’s madness right now,” said Johndell McLean, 30, who works at Life on Capitol Hill, a store now full of Obama products, including hot sauce, mints and an Obama bobble-head doll. One T-shirt features a U.S. map stamped with the words, “Under New Management.” Even more popular is anything with Obama’s face on it. “Whatever it is that has Obama on it, they like it,” McLean said. “Everything is selling.” Well, almost everything. A sign on one small shelf at the store reads, “All McCain/Palin tee-shirts now $3.75, while they last!” Mugs from the Republican campaign go for less than $2. Nearby, Obama mugs and T-shirts are selling for more than twice those amounts. Obama is clearly a big sales opportunity for the multitude of small vendors and gift-shop retailers in the nation’s capital and elsewhere. But it’s almost impossible to calculate the revenue being generated, partly because many trinkets are sold on the black market by street vendors in Washington, New York and other places. The fact that Obama will be the country’s first black president is driving sales to “a whole different tier than Clinton or Bush or anybody,” said Martin Brochstein, a senior vice president at the International Licensing Industry Merchandisers’ Association. And there is more money to be made in upcoming weeks. “It’s almost like the opening of a big movie in that everything builds toward that opening day,” Brochstein said. “Opening day here is called Inauguration Day” and that is Jan. 20. Barry Harris, 27, a business school student at Howard University, recently bought nearly $300 worth of Obama merchandise at Union Station for his family in California. He grabbed T-shirts, including one showing Obama and Martin Luther King Jr. with the message “A Dream Come True,” along with an Obama mug and candy bar. The items will be stocking stuffers and Christmas gifts. “It’s definitely a piece of history _ especially in the African-American community,” Harris said. “It’s definitely just representative of a lot of progress over many years.” Some Obama products can be personalized with your own name. The Web site DemocraticStuff.com, operated by Greenville, Ohio-based Tigereye Design, is selling personalized buttons, banners and rally signs. The Obama campaign is cashing in with sales of commemorative mugs and victory T-shirts; proceeds go to the Democratic National Committee. Ads for the 22-karat-gold-trimmed Obama “Victory Plate,” a “priceless work of art” that sells for $19.99 plus shipping and handling, have bombarded many cable TV viewers. “His confident smile and kind eyes are an inspiration to us all,” a narrator says on the commercial. Imprinted with the Election-Day electoral vote and the message “Change Has Come,” the plate also comes with a special certificate. The company behind the Obama plate, Fairfield, N.J.-based TeleBrands Corp., is the same group that sells “As Seen on TV” products such as the PedEgg pedicure device and the Stick Up Bulb. Newspapers also smelled an opportunity because so many papers sold out after the election, said Cathy Trost, the exhibits chief at the Newseum. The Washington Post is offering tote bags, clothing and a coffee mug with images of its day-after-election front page; prices range from $10 to $43. On Inauguration Day, the paper will print a special advertising section, “Welcome to the White House,” that lets people submit personal messages to the new president for $10. Not to be outdone, The New York Times has even more items for sale _ and at New York prices. Photographs of Obama go for $200 (just the basic) to as much as $1,129 for a framed print signed by the photographer. The Newseum also is selling Obama merchandise, including a poster with 25 front pages about Obama’s election from across the country. “It reminded people of how important newspapers really are,” Trost said. Capitalizing on the new president’s image is nothing new. “Historically, Americans have been making and selling commemorative inauguration material, souvenirs, since George Washington’s time,” said Larry Bird, who curates the campaign collections at the National Museum of American History. The museum has a button from Washington’s inauguration and a banner dating to Thomas Jefferson’s swearing-in in 1801 that says “John Adams is No More.” The museum, part of the Smithsonian Institution, already has acquired an Obama action figure from its creator (advertised as “An Action Figure We Can Believe In”) and campaign materials from the past year. Over the years, manufacturers have improved technology to the point that they can push out products faster than ever, which helps explain the crush of new Obama tchotchkes just after the election, Bird said. “If you think about it,” he said, “anybody can make a button. Anyone can make a poster. … And anybody can accept a credit card.”

Read more here: 
Obama Merchandise Selling Big In DC

The Blagojevich scandal has been fertile ground for late-night comedians this week. As we head into the weekend, here’s a roundup of some of Thursday’s night’s shots. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart: The Daily Show With Jon Stewart M - Th 11p / 10c Holiday Wrap-Up Barack Obama Interview John McCain Interview Sarah Palin Video Funny Election Video Two from Late Night with Conan O’Brien: The Late Show with David Letterman: object width=”425″ height=”344″>

Read the original here:
Blagojevich Jokes: The Daily Show, Conan And Letterman (VIDEO)

When I found out from Wonkette that the McCain-Palin campaign was holding a firesale of campaign sundries — including teevees and laptops — not far from my neighborhood, I briefly thought about driving over to see what deals there were to be had. My wife talked me out of it, telling me that what she wanted for Christmas was a gift “not drenched in the stink of terrible failure.” As it turns out, I should have gone, because the campaign was selling twenty-dollar Blackberries choked with campaign emails and addresses of GOP bigwigs! A Fox reporter documented the find : There were only 10 left. All of the batteries had died. There were no chargers for sale. But people were snatching them up. So, we bought a couple. And ended up with a lot more than we bargained for. When we charged them up in the newsroom, we found one of the $20 Blackberry phones contained more than 50 phone numbers for people connected with the McCain-Palin campaign, as well as hundreds of emails from early September until a few days after election night. We traced the Blackberry back to a staffer who worked for “Citizens for McCain,” a group of Democrats who threw their support behind the Republican nominee. The emails contain an insider’s look at how grassroots operations work, full of scheduling questions and rallying cries for support. But most of the numbers were private cell phones for campaign leaders, politicians, lobbyists and journalists. We called some of the numbers. “Somebody made a mistake,” one owner told us. “People’s numbers and addresses were supposed to be erased.” “They should have wiped that stuff out,” another said. But he added, “Given the way the campaign was run, this is not a surprise.” You would think the McCain campaign would have known better, seeing how McCain invented the Blackberry in the first place .

Read the original here: 
McCain Campaign Sells Blackberries Filled With Confidential Files

This morning, NPR’s Steve Inskeep interviewed the chairman of the Republican party, Mike Duncan, who is trying to hold on to his chairmanship despite the massive GOP loss in November. The most interesting part of the interview wasn’t anything Duncan said. Rather, it was Duncan’s long silence when asked about the perception of the GOP as the party of exclusion. His silence spoke louder than anything that he had said in terms of how incapable the Republican Party still is of recognizing what it did wrong and what it needs to do in order to gain Americans’ trust. Listen to the interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98116257 The comment that stumped Duncan came from Jerry of Sister, OR, toward the end of the 5-minute interview. Jerry’s comment was simply that “The Republican party needs to distance itself from the religious right.” Duncan had a quick, formulaic response: “We embrace lots of different people. . . We think that our values resonate better with the American people.” No explanation of how it can be that they were voted out of office when their values “resonate” better was given. Inskeep kept asking. He asked as anyone listening to Duncan would: “Is there then an assumption that this person has that is mistaken?” Silence. Inskeep was forced to pose the question again: “Is there an assumption that this person has that is wrong about the way the Republican party is set up?” Silence. Finally, Duncan responded, “The Republican party is a party of big tent. We welcome people of different ideas and different philosophies in the Republican party.” Now these statements run contrary to the strategy employed by McCain/Palin ticket during the general election. Presidential tickets typically are representatives of the party, so I am sure that I am not wrong in thinking the McCain/Palin ticket’s election strategy also reflected the Republican Party’s beliefs. Then how can we forget the infamous statement by Palin: “[Obama] is a man who sees America not like you and I see America.” She went even further. She was happy to be in the “pro-America” part of the country, well, as opposed to the not so pro-America parts of the country. The theme of “us” vs. “them” was used again and again at their campaign rallies. And who exactly was “us”? One obvious place to look for this “us” would be the Republican Party Convention. And who did we see there? Who was this “us”? I saw mostly old white folks in stiff suits swooning at every crack of the whip that Sarah Palin so skillfully employed. And how about the rabid crowd in a rabid frenzy at Palin rallies who shouted “kill him!” and “off with his head”? Now, it boggles my mind how the Republican Party can still be wondering how it lost the Hispanic vote. Isn’t that obvious? It is obvious to me, and I am sure it is obvious to many others, especially Hispanic voters. Most Hispanics count themselves as members of a minority group, so then is it any wonder that they voted for Barack Obama? Given the venom and frenzy, given the anti-immigrant, anti-”them” sentiments at the McCain/Palin rallies, is it a wonder that Hispanic voters simply could not see themselves voting for McCain/Palin? How would they in their self-interest vote for the ticket that tells them they are not “us”? Perhaps Duncan really is ignorant. He really does not know that the Republican Party has become a party of exclusion. However, why would he fall “silent” when asked if this particular perception was somehow a “mistaken” one? But it was also obvious, even on the radio waves, that he was searching for the right words because, as Duncan himself said during the interview, the Republicans just “need to articulate ideas better” and “to stimulate new ways of thinking, new words.” But this reveals only one thing: they are incapable of recognizing mistakes. It is not that they are ignorant, they are in total denial. That is why Bobby Jindal and Anh Cao are being heralded as the saviors of the Republicans. Because they see nothing fundamentally wrong with their party, only with its packaging. Hence the false belief: repackage the same old ideas with new, different faces, and the Party will be revived. It refuses to see their loss as a defeat of their ideas. Duncan’s silence was only an indication of this refusal to see, this deep-seeded denial. The November election made it clear. In the perception of many voters, the Republican Party is no longer a party that “embrace[s] lot of different people” or whose “values resonate better with the American people.” If it were, Republicans would have won easily. Their values didn’t resonate. And saying so does not make it true. So between the long, painful silence from Duncan today during the NPR interview and what he did actually say, I really don’t see how the Republican Party will re-establish itself any time soon. It may be a long, long time.

Originally posted here: 
Yuna Shin: Mike Duncan’s Silence and The Republican Party of Exclusion

Welcome to your daily alliteration. Colin Powell said on CNN that Sarah Palin was polarizing. Thank you, General Obvious. (I was going to say “Captain Obvious” but I don’t feel right demoting him before I’ve even had my coffee). I think she had something of a polarizing effect when she talked about small town values are good. Well, most of us don’t live in small towns. I was raised in the South Bronx and there’s nothing wrong with my value system from the South Bronx. And when they came to Virginia and said, you know, the southern part of Virginia is good but the northern part of Virginia is bad. The only problem with that is there are more votes in the northern part of Virginia than there are in the southern part of Virginia so that doesn’t work. But it was that attempt on the part of the party to use polarization for political advantage that I think backfired. And I think the party has to take a hard look at itself. There’s nothing wrong with being conservative, there’s nothing wrong with having socially conservative views, I don’t object to that. But if that party wants to have a future in this country, it has to face some realities. In another 20 years, the majority in this country will be the minority… Powell hit the nail on the head in one way, and totally missed it in the way that counts. Palin’s obliviousness to how her words are perceived by others didn’t make its first appearance in the divisive language of small town vs. big town, and “real Virginia” vs. the other Virginia. Remember when she mocked community organizers? Or when she accused Barack Obama of “palling around with terrorists”? Palin relies on division, and has much to learn about diplomacy. She may solidify a “base”, but that base shrinks every time she opens her mouth, and this is what Powell has recognized. And while Powell rightly tells his own party to take a hard look at itself, and while he rightly accuses Sarah Palin of engaging in a strategy of backfire, he’s missing the big picture. According to Powell, the reason that the divisive politics of “real Virginia” was in need of reexamination, was because there were more people in Northern Virginia. “The only problem with that, is there are more votes in northern Virginia” he concluded, and that problem, he argues, was a strategy mistake of alienating the majority. If there had only been more people in “real Virginia,” then using Powell’s reasoning, the strategy of division would have been perfectly fine. And according to Powell, there’s “nothing wrong with having socially conservative views.” While it sounds awfully nice and inclusive to say that, in many ways those views are part of the problem. There are some major land mines in social conservatism. Freedom to marry comes to mind. One could substitute the word “marriage” for the word “Virginia” and produce the same effect of alienating and demeaning an entire group of people. “Real marriage” is fine. “Other” marriage….well, that’s just plain wrong, even though it denies an entire group of people the freedoms, rights, benefits and privileges that the rest of us “real” married people enjoy. There are more straight people than gay people, so using Powell’s logic, that’s OK. It will “work” because it will win. There’s no problem. I can’t fault Powell for being a strategist. It’s who he is, and what he does. He’s paid to think about winning strategies. And he’s absolutely right that the politics of division is wearing thin on the American people, and certainly had a part in losing the election for the Republicans. But let’s acknowledge that it’s wrong on principle , and not just a strategic mistake that kept one party from winning. We need to “win” from the bottom up. And that’s not going to happen when we decide that the right strategy is to only employ the politics of division if you’re appealing to the majority group, whoever that may be. Powell tells his party to reexamine their strategy. Let’s hope they reexamine their principles.

Read the original post:
AKMuckraker: Palin, Powell and Polarizing Politics.

Philip Seymour Hoffman talked to Jon Stewart Thursday night to promote his movie “Doubt,” in which he plays a priest suspected of pedophilia. Earlier in the day Hoffman was nominated for a Golden Globe for the role. He and Stewart talked about their kids, Hoffman has three, and the controversial nature of the film. Hoffman also talked about how odd it was to play a priest. Stewart meanwhile, thought the movie was fantastic. “I think you might get two Academy Awards for this one.” WATCH: The Daily Show With Jon Stewart M - Th 11p / 10c Philip Seymour Hoffman Barack Obama Interview John McCain Interview Sarah Palin Video Funny Election Video

Original post: 
Philip Seymour Hoffman On "The Daily Show": His Kids, The Golden Globes And The Catholic Church

I cannot be bought. Not for less than 20 bucks. So there’s no need to worry that my judgment has been tainted by the fact that a publisher sent me a free review copy of a $16.95 book. Trust me when I say that you should consider giving What Do We Do Now? (A Workbook for the President-Elect) to anyone on your holiday shopping list who’s spent huge chunks of 2008 obsessed with politics. Or don’t trust me. Trust yourself. Read some excerpts . For me, What Do We Do Now? is about timing. As wise and accessible as the book is, it would have held no interest for me during the presidential transitions of 2000 or 1992 or 1988 or 1980. Nor would it have shaken me out of my despondency if we were living through a McCain/Palin transition right now. No, this book is all about this moment, this unprecedented time when I feel fiercely protective of the change so many millions of us voted for and acutely aware that the choices in this transition will help decide whether the Obama Administration dazzles of fizzles. So I was heartened this week when I interviewed the book’s author. Stephen Hess , whose experience with presidential transitions dates back to his time as an aide to President Eisenhower, was emphatic when I asked him what, if anything, he likes about Obama’s approach to the transition. “I like a lot ,” Hess said Monday. “It’s been a superb transition to date. … If (Obama) was reading my book, which I don’t have any reason to believe he was, he would be doing things exactly in the order he is doing them.” If Hess’s praise for the transition stemmed exclusively from some smug sense that Obama is marching in lockstep with his book’s advice, the author wouldn’t be nearly so fun to talk to and his book probably wouldn’t be worth a damn. Good things invariably grow out of curiosity and a love of surprise. On the day we spoke, Hess was reveling in a cabinet pick that took him completely by surprise: Obama’s choice of retired Gen. Eric K. Shinseki to be secretary of the Veterans Affairs Department. “I’m fascinated by that on a number of levels,” Hess told me. “First of all, because it surprised me. And I like that.” All in one, Shinseki gives Obama an Asian-American, a military man, the most prominent skeptic of Donald Rumsfeld’s disastrous plans to occupy Iraq with a relatively small force, and “somone who is totally qualified,” Hess said. It “showed how much shrewder (Obama) is as a political strategist than I am,” Hess said, chuckling. “We’re not even in the same league.” Different readers will get different insights from Hess’s work. For me, there was an especially valuable portion of the book that caused me to re-examine some of the assumptions I took away from reading Team of Rivals . I still love that book and the story it tells of President Lincoln’s extraordinary cabinet. Hess does, too: “I love that book. It’s a wonderful book. I don’t think it’s a terribly useful recommendation for this administration.” In the section Hess titled “Why Can’t We All Just Get Along?,” he provides some useful sketches of destructive cabinet rivalries: Shultz v. Weinberger under Reagan; Vance v. Brzezinski under Carter; Kissinger v. Rogers under Nixon. As Hess writes, “whatever irritants exist initially within the inner circle are sure to rub raw after staff and media get hold of them.” With this in mind, I’m still keeping my fingers tightly crossed about Obama’s pick of Senator Clinton for secretary of state. But Hess assured me that almost anything can be made to work. “It can work almost regardless if the president is not merely self-confident but knows exactly what he wants” and what he wants from his cabinet members, Hess said. A few sections of What Do We Do Now? didn’t do much for me. For my own eccentric reasons, I’m not especially fascinated by the various historic desks that a president has to choose from. To me, it’s trivia. But it’s trivia I’ve never heard of, at least. Some people might love this stuff. My anti-desk bigotry aside, copies of Hess’s book really do deserve to end up in wrapping paper this month. So if your plans to buy Barack’s old Senate seat for your kid have hit a snag, consider What Do We Do Now? as a thoughtful, cheaper, non-felonious Plan B. Huffington Post blogger David Quigg lives in Seattle. Click here to visit the blog where he’s gradually posting his entire first novel. Click here for an archive of his previous HuffPost work.

Here is the original: 
David Quigg: Trouble Buying That Illinois Senate Seat? (A Cheaper Alternative for Holiday Gift-Giving)

It was Chicago-native and future Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that once said: “Being a [Chicago] Cubs fan prepares you for life — and Washington.” What the events of this week have shown us is that while Chicago may prepare politicians for Washington, nothing can adequately prepare a politician for Chicago — except perhaps the ups and downs of being a Chicago sports fan. Only two months ago, Chicago was a city that ate, drank, breathed, and dreamt hope. There was the hope that one (our both!) of our city’s two baseball teams would see a World Series berth (both knocked out in the first round of playoffs). The disappointment and despair was relatively short-lived, however, as we soon-after elected a Chicagoan to the White House, our city bubbling over with promise and pride. Even our skyscrapers seemed to stand up a little straighter, the lights of our skyline seemed to dazzle a bit brighter. Then, just when it seemed that the Chicago Bears had found a quarterback it could bank on, Kyle Orton got hurt. Boo. Shortly after, Barack Obama selected Chicago congressman Rahm Emanuel as his chief-of-staff. Hooray! Now, a cloud hangs over us once more as our state’s governor, a Chicago guy through-and-through, was arrested on federal charges of fraud and soliciting bribes in connection with his duty of selecting President-elect Obama’s Senate replacement. Rod Blagojevich’s arrest Tuesday morning made headlines from coast to coast, but Chicago has already had the attention of the nation — and the world — since early November. In addition to the boost in tourism we’ve enjoyed from the crowds of people lined up to see where Mr. Obama got his hair cut or ate his Italian beef sandwiches, the International Olympic Committee has been evaluating us as a contender to host the 2016 Olympic Games. And of course, President-elect Obama’s regular press conferences, cabinet announcements, and transition government initiatives take place in Chicago. The political press corps is here. Homeland security is here. As President Bush has become the lame duck commander-in-chief, Washington D.C. has become the lame duck nation’s capital, forced to yield the spotlight to the City of the Big Shoulders, Hog Butcher for the World. It was not a Chicago politician but a German politician who once said, “Laws are like sausages. It’s better not to see them being made.” This is a phrase that a mentor and colleague of mine, whose knowledge of Chicago politics is limitless, repeats regularly. As names are named, and Rod Blagojevich becomes the fourth Illinois governor in less than a decade to be charged with white collar crime, you may find yourself asking, “What’s wrong with Chicago?” or “What’s going on in Illinois?” As a Chicagoan, I beg you not to judge us by the mistakes some of our lawmakers have made. During the campaign, Senator John McCain said rather spitefully with regards to Barack Obama: “I don’t need lessons about telling the truth to the American people… and were I ever to need any improvement in that regard I probably would not seek advise from a Chicago politician.” But for all of the faults of some Chicago politicians, Illinois has certainly given this nation its share of great leaders. President-elect Obama and his team of experts promise to steer this ship out of the rocky economic waters in which we now find ourselves. Our late congressman Paul Simon was a fierce and outspoken champion for gender and racial equality. Illinois conservatives will be quick to inform you that Ronald Reagan was born here. And of course, we gave you the president who presided over the greatest internal conflict in our nation’s history, Abraham Lincoln. We’ve given you decades of laughter, thanks to comedians like Bill Murray, Chris Farley, Tina Fey, Steve Carrell, and even Steven Colbert. We’ve given you timeless literature, for people of all ages, from Ernest Hemingway, Shel Silverstein, Michael Crichton, and Carl Sandburg. Studs Terkel. Harrison Ford. Oprah Winfrey. Harry Caray. Even Kanye West. I call myself a Chicagoan now, but I’m a new Chicagoan. I am the daughter and granddaughter of native Chicagoans, but I was born and raised in New Jersey, and then went to the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). I only ended up here because my parents relocated from the east coast while I was in college, and after working the Kerry campaign in 2004, I was broke and needed somewhere to live. But I love this city more than any place I’ve ever lived. I met the man I’m going to marry here and bought my first home here. I will never leave, if I can help it. We are more than Governor Blagojevich. We are more than our cold winters, Al Capone, our hot dogs (always without ketchup), deep-dish pizza, and 100-year curses. I’ll leave you with the words of the divine Sarah Bernhardt: “I adore Chicago. It is the pulse of America.”

Original post:
Brett Ashley McKenzie: America’s New Political Capital: Don’t Judge Chicago by Its Crooks

“I don’t tend to watch television news…I have three grown sons who kind of filter those things and they sent it to me.” That’s Bill Ayers, making an appearance this evening on Hardball, with Chris Matthews. Once of the Weather Underground, Ayers was more recently a central figure in the vast booga-foo nightmare that the GOP tried to paralyze the nation with to prevent the election of Barack Obama, because they didn’t have any ideas or policies they wanted to talk about instead. I guess. I mean, such things could have been useful to a presidential campaign or something! Anyway, instead, we had loud braying about how Obama and Ayers might have met at some point, and Obama’s failure to strike Ayers down in cold blood for his crimes was proof that they were in cahoots with one another. Or, in the parlance of Alaska Secessionists, “pallin’ around.” Asked about his reaction to Palin’s “palling around with terrorists remark, Ayers said: “I thought it was outrageous and profoundly dishonest, and I chose not to react to it at the time.” Ayers added, “I was on a board with President-Elect Obama, we did live in the same neighborhood, but the dishonesty of the narrative is that if you can place two people in the same room or prove that they took a bus downtown together, that they’re somehow responsible for one anothers politics, policies, outlook, and behavior, and that seems to me to be patently absurd.” Matthews, along the way, talks about supposed Weather Underground targets like the Pentagon and the Capitol building having special “resonance” because they were hit on 9/11. I know, I know…unlike the Weather Underground, al Qaeda did not furnish evacuation warnings in advance of their attacks. Also, despite what Chris Matthews thinks, the Capitol Building was actually NOT ATTACKED ON 9/11. Of those bombings, Ayers says, “I don’t defend those actions…what I try to do in Fugitive Days is try to understand how this young man…in that context could find himself in these extreme positions.” Lots of passive voice in the description, huh? “I think we made enormous mistakes,” Ayers says, adding, “I think there were terrible things done.” Ayers goes on to say he favors a sort of “truth and reconciliation” moment where everyone comes clean about what they did during the Vietnam War. Somehow I think Robert McNamara isn’t going to see eye to eye with this concept. “I don’t want to defend what we did, nor do I think it was completely insane,” Ayers says. Matthews remembers some demonstrations and some activism from the period, that he felt was more effective than bombing. What is it that distinguishes a protesting assemblage from a cabal of bombers? Desperation borne of solitude, perhaps. I’m tempted to say: the sort of narcissism that inspires a man to make sure the first thing he says to a TV newsman is that he doesn’t watch television news. For what it’s worth, Chris Matthews’ judgment was that Bill Ayers was a changed man. Make of that what you will. [WATCH.]

View original post here:
Bill Ayers On Hardball: Calls Accusations "Profoundly Dishonest" (VIDEO)

This past Friday, Governor Sarah Palin made her way to Fairbanks, in the subartic interior of Alaska, where she participated in a glorified photo-op at which the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) license was signed by Alaska state officials. “This is a significant step as we march forward toward Alaska’s next economic lifeline,” Palin declared, stringing together as many political catch phrases as she could. “It’s our next economic engine.” That license allows the gas line builder, TransCanada Corp, and its subsidiary, Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd., to “move forward” on the controversial 1,715-mile pipeline linking Alaska’s resource rich North Slope with energy distribution hubs in Alberta, Canada. That’s right– move forward . In her debate with Joe Biden during the 2008 presidential campaign, Palin boldly claimed, “We’re building a nearly $40-billion natural gas pipeline –which is North America’s largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever.” And in her address before the Republican National Convention, Palin also claimed “we began ” to build that very same pipeline “to help lead America to energy independence.” Note the use of both the present and past tense with the verb “to build.” One would have assumed from Palin’s declarations that construction of the pipeline was already well underway. Not even close. Palin has always been fast and loose with the truth (and her capacity for self-promotion would seem to know no bounds), but her duplicity about the pipeline extends far beyond whether it is currently being built or not –it is not –but whether or not it ever will be built. “That pipeline,” she declared at the GOP convention, “when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.” Well the first section is at least six years away, and many contend that it will never be built at all. As one Alaskan state legislator grumbled at the license signing, “This AGIA license is not a commitment to do anything other than process a whole lot of paper.” Palin has repeatedly trumpeted the pipeline as an example of her energy know-how and pragmatic politics. She also has claimed, as she did at the convention, that she has single-handedly imposed “competition and basic fairness” to oil and gas production in the Last Frontier. In fact, as is often the case with Palin, it’s all hat and no saddle. Zane Henning, a longtime critic of Palin and an oilfield worker on the North Slope, says “I can guarantee that the AGIA pipeline will not be built unless the State of Alaska passes a long-term tax policy that the oil companies agree with.” Still others have argued that without the gas-rich Point Thomson region included in the pipeline agreement, there won’t be enough economic inducement to generate production of the gas line. In an interview with the Fairbanks News Miner , Palin acknowledged as much. “That is what it will take,” Palin declared in her peculiar syntax, “of course, to get the project actually built, is for all parties to be in this as one.” But Alaska’s so-called Big Three–ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and British Petroleum–are not in; far from it. Palin says she is developing incentives to bring the Big Three into the pipeline equation, but there’s certainly no evidence of that on the table. So far, Palin has put the cart before the horse every step of the way. In fact, Palin rigged the bidding process for the pipeline so that it favored TransCanada and so that the Big Three were effectively shut out of the bidding process. In the end, of the five bids that were submitted, four were disqualified, leaving only one bidder in line to get the contract, you guessed it, TransCanada. Moreover, TransCanada has strong political and economic links to Palin’s administration. Palin’s AGIA negotiation team was headed up by Marty Rutherford, an oil industry lobbyist who had previously done lobbying work for TransCanada, through its subsidiary Foothills Pipe Line. Rutherford was paid $40,200 as recently as 2003 for legislative work in Juneau on behalf of TransCanada. Palin’s own phone logs indicate that she had direct contact with TransCanada during the bidding process, contrary to the guidelines established by her own administration. To make the whole arrangement even slimier, Palin offered TransCanada a $500 million subsidy. So much for Palin’s assertion of promoting economic “competition and basic fairness.” Palin was able to get away with many of her claims during the campaign because of the isolation of Alaska from the Lower 48. It took almost a month for her Bridge-to-Nowhere lie to catch up with her, and the pipeline fabrications got lost amidst the daily grind of 24-hour news cycles and following less substantive tales about her clothes and makeovers. But for most Alaskans, the gasline has been a huge issue for more than a decade and just about everyone in the Last Frontier knows that it will never be built unless the Big Three has a strong economic incentive to develop their gas leases and that there must be a negotiated tax-structure in effect before they make any agreement with TransCanada. And therein lies the rub. Palin has said that TransCanada has made “commitments to build this pipeline”–but in fact, TransCanada has made no formal commitment to build anything. They have simply moved the process along to the next photo-op. Palin can take her bows for the pipeline, as she did throughout the campaign and among the suits up in Fairbanks last week, but Alaskans across the political spectrum are growing tied of her dog and pony shows when it comes to resource management and energy production. One of Palin’s most vocal critics, Tony Hopfinger of The Alaska Dispatch , argued that the license signing this past week in Fairbanks raises more questions than it answers. “Why didn’t the administration sit down with the oil companies and try to negotiate tax terms for the pipeline before embarking on the AGIA?” Hopfinger wondered. “And tell us again why we’re giving a half-billion dollars to TransCanada–especially now that oil prices have crashed?” Palin and her minions have consistently skirted the tough questions on AGIA. Right now, the Alaska Gasline project is yet another one of Sarah Palin’s political pipe dreams to nowhere.

Go here to read the rest: 
Geoffrey Dunn: Pipe Dreams to Nowhere: Another Palin Lie

Run, don’t walk, to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign headquarters in Arlington, Va., for an amazing Blowout Sale! Computers, blackberries, televisions, desks, you name it - everything must go. Hurry while the offer lasts! That’s right, the failed McCain-Palin campaign is having a fire sale this week on leftover equipment. Everything is on sale at reduced prices. An email sent over the weekend to all campaign staff, which was subsequently forwarded to the Sleuth, reads: “Starting Monday December 8, 2008 the prices will be slashed to 36% of the original price for furniture, office supplies, blackberries, and many campaign computers. This is a great opportunity to own a piece of history, finish your Christmas shopping, or simply replace your old laptop.”

View original here:
McCain-Palin Campaign Holding Fire Sale On Equipment

JUNEAU, Alaska — An eighth letter containing suspicious powder and addressed to a governor’s office was intercepted in Alaska on Tuesday, and it bore a Texas postmark like suspicious mailings to other governors this week, officials said. A spokeswoman for Gov. Sarah Palin said the letter was received Tuesday in Juneau at a mailroom about a block from the Capitol, and it was addressed to Palin’s predecessor Gov. Frank Murkowski, who left office two years ago. Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said the letter came from Texas, but she didn’t know which city. Seven suspicious letters to governors’ offices received this week bore Dallas postmarks, the FBI said Tuesday. And while those seven letters were determined to contain harmless powder, results of tests on the Alaska letter were pending Tuesday night, the FBI office in Anchorage said. Government operations were disrupted Monday when workers in Alabama, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana and Rhode Island opened the letters and discovered white powder. In Alabama, the Department of Public Safety said Tuesday the letter received at its state Capitol contained a harmless food substance. In Missouri, a chemical analysis by the state health lab found the powder appeared to be bleached flour, spokeswoman Nanci Gonder said Tuesday. FBI spokesman Rich Kolko in Washington, D.C., said the Dallas FBI office is investigating and warned other states to be on the lookout for similar letters. In Juneau, many workers left the building housing the mailroom, and a hazardous materials team later locked the structure down. The worker who opened the letter showed no signs of exposure to a hazardous material and was released, said Richard Ethridge, a Juneau fire department division chief. Palin, the former Republican vice presidential candidate who splits time between Anchorage and Juneau, was in the capital on Tuesday to host the annual holiday party at the governor’s mansion. The event went on as planned. The FBI declined to say if the letters intercepted Monday were specifically addressed to each governor or written to a generic “governor’s office” address. Alabama’s public safety director, Christopher Murphy, said the letter received in Montgomery did not specifically target Gov. Bob Riley but declined to elaborate on what it said. The letters forced the evacuation of the Capitol in Helena, Mont., and the closing of a major street in downtown Montgomery for several hours. Kolko said even hoax letters could be considered a crime. ___ Associated Press writers Chris Blank and David A. Lieb in Jefferson City, Mo., Phillip Rawls in Montgomery, Ala., and Anabelle Garay in Dallas contributed to this report.

Read the rest here: 
Sarah Palin Sent Suspicious Powder

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, the greatest political criminal of our time, was considering giving President-elect Obama’s senate seat to himself. According to the charges, Rod wanted to “remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016.” We here at 23/6 promise the Governor that we will do everything in our power to make this happen, and we will do this in addition to our ongoing commitment to Governor Palin. Could it be… Blago vs Palin in 2016? Oh dear Lord, we are on our knees. (And not because we think it will get us the Illinois senate seat.) Governor, please accept our help in the form of campaign posters:

Originally posted here: 
23/6 Proudly Endorses Rod Blagojevich For President In 2016

“Banks no longer trust each other because of bad debts.” So say BBC financial experts . Which raises the obvious question. They don’t trust each other, and in spite of the $150 billion-plus of U.S. taxpayers money, they are still not lending money to one another and credit markets are still stalled. Maybe they understand better than anyone just how untrustworthy they are. So why would we want to pour yet more hundreds of billions of dollars into their coffers? Just last week the Government Accountability Office reported : “Treasury has yet to address a number of critical issues, including determining how it will ensure that CPP [the Capital Purchase Program] is achieving its intended goals and monitoring compliance with limitations on executive compensation and dividend payments.” So, for all we know, we taxpayers may be taking thousands of dollars out of our wallets (and our kids’ and grandkids’ wallets) to pay for gold-plated executive bonuses and big shareholder pay-offs. There are likely more credit crises coming down the pike, and we’ll probably see a steady stream of credit card companies, car loan executives, and others coming to Congress for bailouts. But wait, we still need some money to pay for Obama’s promising economic recovery program , which has the big advantage of funding needed infrastructure and school repair, and energy efficiency upgrades, instead of the global casino economy. That’s all good, but if the Obama administration follows usual practice, the U.S. government will borrow money at interest from those self-same banks we are bailing out, plus a bunch of foreign governments and sovereign wealth funds. Is it just me, or does this not make sense? It turns out there is another option. The U.S. government does not need to borrow money from private banks — it can own the banks and thus create the money itself. Or it can just print the money. The right to issue money is in the Constitution, and no, it doesn’t have to be inflationary. Attorney and author Ellen Brown explains how it can be done in a remarkable article featured on the YES! magazine website. And before you dismiss it as too good to be true, imagine what it would mean to our taxes and the debt of future generations if we could stop borrowing money, at interest, from the banks, and instead issue money ourselves. Check it out .

Here is the original post:
Sarah van Gelder: The Banks Don’t Trust Each Other, So Why Should We?

The following are excerpts from Sarah Palin’s upcoming book — edited by me: FIRST MEETING WITH SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN I met Senator John McCain (who on first site I deeply loved) today. For an old man he’s got wandering hands, let me tell ya. He sure liked my butt. He says because of being tortured he can’t raise his hands high enough to pat me on the back. He called me a fellow maverick and I didn’t have the heart to tell the old guy that I’m a Christian. He asked me if he can see me again. I said, you betcha your arthritic bones you can old feller. PHONE CALL FROM JOHN MCCAIN I was cutting out the intestines on a dead moose I shot before parachuting out of my airplane when my darn cell phone rang, I wiped the blood off my hands and lips (on the coat I bought at my favorite consignment store “Out of the Closet”) and answered it. It was Senator John McCain (the man I love more that this dead moose, even when it was alive, before I put two bullets between its sweet eyes). Senator McCain wanted me to fly to Arizona to talk about being his running mate. I told Todd and he didn’t like the way that mate thing sounded. I explained to him that the Vice President is a platonic relationship. Todd nodded his head, then went out and walked the dogs for a hundred miles. SECOND MEETING WITH JOHN MCCAIN (ARIZONA) Senator John McCain (who I love far more than any torture victim I’ll ever meet or would have tortured) flew me to his ranch today. We sat under a sycamore tree and he asked me if I’d be his Vice President. I told him to get down on one knee and ask me properly. He did and wouldn’t get up until I answered him. So I felt sorry for the old guy (who I truly love more than hunting moose with automatic weapons) and said yes. I found out later he wasn’t waiting for my answer he just couldn’t get up by himself. INTENSE VETTING I started the vetting process today. I must have done a good job explaining the process to Todd because he stopped midway through telling me which dogs had their shots. Those vetters were darn thorough, faster than you can melt snow with a hundred gallons of oil, a blow torch and fifty greasy seals, they asked me what my favorite Bee Gee song was. I didn’t hesitate for an Eskimo second and told them it was “Satisfaction” by Aretha Franklin. Before I leave for the convention I have to remember to go through our stuff to look for suitcase bombs. Those Russians and Mr. Putin, when he rears his head and flies over our air space, could have lost their luggage right in my back yard. You betcha! MY DAUGHTER’S PREGNANCY REVEALED A few days later, when my seventeen-year-old daughter asked me to hold my son, Trig, Senator McCain (who I love more than drilling for oil on protected lands) noticed that she had quite a belly on her there. Before he could do any fat, or rape jokes (he’s good at them), I fessed up, and told Senator McCain that she was pregnant. Senator McCain jokingly offered to divorce his wife and marry her or me or both. What a kidder that darn Senator McCain (who I love more then embryonic stem cells) is! I told him that we decided that it’s better that my daughter have the baby and marry the father. I believe that life begins at conception and conception starts with the first drink. SPEECH FOR CONVENTION I started working on my speech for the Republican convention today with Senator McCain’s writers. The speech was a doozy, let me tell ya, even though they wouldn’t let me call Brat Obama a darn socialist. They wouldn’t even let me accuse him of getting my daughter pregnant. Supposedly they can tell who the real father is by doing some kind of T and A test. RIGHT BEFORE CONVENTION In a few hours I deliver a speech to the Republican convention on national TV and will be nominated for the Vice President of the United States. I’ll look beautiful and sexy wearing specially tailored very expensive clothes. Let them try and call me a hockey mom now! Oh, I just had Botox treatments so I must remember to order more lipstick. AFTER CONVENTION The speech went great but it could have been better if they had let me call Saddam Hussein Obama a skinny commie community organizer who goes to gay bars with terrorist abortion doctors. I made up for it, by adding a few extra winks. They seemed to eat it up and I got to spend quality time with my family when I brought them up on stage (at midnight almost fully awake). ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL WITH MCCAIN Senator McCain (who I love more than a melting glacier falling on a polar bear) likes campaigning with me. The fat women in their jogging pants seem to think I’m a hockey mom. Some of them look like they swallowed the whole darn skating ring. LIPSTICK ON A PIG Barak He’s Insane Obamba used a lipstick on a pig reference. Senator McCain (who I love more than a starving sea lion sunbathing on an oil slick) said that the big city commie was saying that about me. Senator McCain said they can use those remarks to keep the media from talking about the dumb economy, whatever that is. Long as we keep giving me these clothes Obambi can call me any name he wants (except my little Wasilla honey bunny slut, which Todd likes me to call him). STUMP SPEECHES They want me to keep saying that darn Hockey Mom stuff over and over again. They won’t even let me make fun of Obama’s ears! They never let me speak my mind. This here is America where we’re all hated equally, at least that’s what it says in the Constitution, or maybe I saw it in a recipe. It’s time the American people know that pinko atheist Muslim Obammie wants them to change the book the Statue of Liberty is holding to The New York Times . Someone from the crowd yelled out “Kill him.” I ignored it. I really wanted to do the Christian thing and tell the guy that God helps those who help themselves. CHARLES GIBSON Charlie asked me hard questions. It was unfair, they didn’t let me ask Charlie any. What kind of debate was that? So I didn’t know who the Bush doctor was. Who cares, like I need one. My water broke, I flew eleven hundred miles in coach, drove forty more with a stick shift, changed a flat, ran out of gas and walked six miles up hill through a foot of snow in high heels, got hungry so I strangled a deer, and field dressed the buck with my nail file, ate a raw thigh, and then had my baby while I was negotiating an oil deal. Oh, and I cut the umbilical chord with my teeth. And then Charlie had the nerve to make a big deal out of me not meeting with any foreign heads of state. I’ve had to deal personally when some very powerful people. Before Todd, I dated two Eskimo chiefs one of them a former witch doctor who fertilized barren female salmon. I’ve also done my share of traveling. I’ve been to six different colleges! KATIE K INTERVIEW What’s with these interviews, all they want to talk about is politics? Katie Crocket even had the nerve to ask me what newspapers I read. Let her find her own garage sales! I’m Alaska’s most popular Governor. What other Alaska official gets two hundred emails everyday from Match.com. Good thing Todd doesn’t know my Match.com name “Ambitious Petroleum Nympho Bitch.” DEBATE PREPARATION They started preparing me for my big debate with Senator Joe Biden. Boring! How do they expect me to get my waves, winks, and dawg-gone-its down if they keep throwing all these names and facts at me. Senator Biden can have his darn facts. When Joe says something that sounds smart, I’ll do what they first told me and look at camera, wink and respond with “Just say it ain’t so, Biden.” POST DEBATE I thought I clearly won the debate. I’m much more photogenic than my sixty-something smart ass comb-over opponent. All Senator Biden did the whole time was answer the questions they gave with dumb snooze a minute facts. His answers didn’t take any imagination, not like me who just made up stuff on the spot. Stuff you had to try really hard to figure out. JOE THE PLUMBER AND AMERICAN WORKERS We’re not doing too good in the polls, but today I met with Joe the Plumber, Ken the cabinet maker, Frank the carpenter, Jane the decorator, Sam the contractor, and Carol the nurse. I’m not going to look at this as losing an election, I’m gonna look at it as finding people who’ll give me a deal to renovate my house. CONCESSION SPEECH Senator McCain (who I love more than selling natural gas to America for twice the price) gave a concession speech all by himself. I cried, I spent my whole day working on my own and all. My speech wouldn’t have taken away anything from Senator McCain, in fact I wouldn’t even have mentioned him once (by name). I would have just referred to him as that lovable old loser who walks like Frankenstein. PROPOSITION 8 Well one good thing happened during the election. The people of California passed proposition 8 that prohibits gay people from getting married. Maybe I’ll propose one that wouldn’t allow them in Alaska then we wouldn’t have to worry about them getting married. BACK IN ALASKA My first day back in Alaska has been very busy. I’ve had my whole family going through their clothes and tearing off the Neiman Marcus and Sax Fifth Avenue labels and switching them with Sears, Wal-Mart and Target. I told them to put on all the silk underwear they can. My pregnant daughter stuffed enough for a whole hockey team under her shirt (familiar territory for hockey players I’m afraid).

See the original post: 
John DeBellis: I Can See Alaska from Me

I’ve been sadly amused today watching the cable news bloviators discuss whether Caroline Kennedy is "qualified" to replace Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in the U.S. Senate and, frankly, the whole debate shows how disconnected and self-absorbed the pretentious inside-the-Beltway crowd is about who they wish to admit into their society. So, allow me to be brutally honest about this Congressional qualifications stuff, for whatever my opinion is worth. Without a doubt, we would all be much better served if all 535 Senators and Representatives were the smartest, most insightful, courageous, selfless people we could find. That would be ideal. But the truth is they aren’t. Not even close. And having spent more than a decade around these people — there’s nothing so difficult about the job Representative or Senator that someone as impressive as Caroline Kennedy couldn’t master in short order, if not on Day 1. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying anyone is suited to serve in Congress. The job is demanding, it takes a particular skill set to master things like debate, public speaking, digesting information and analyses, campaigning, and asking strangers for money. And the work they do is of critical importance.  But I find it insulting and annoying that these political and media blowhards even think for a moment that the job is so complicated and technically difficult that a Caroline Kennedy might be out-of-her league if appointed. It’s such utter nonsense that I find myself annoyed by it all. The truth is, the real hard part of Congress is done by the staffers and career people. They do the tough work. They do the numbers crunching, the public policy analysis, the writing of crucial and complicated legislation, the constituent outreach and case work. That’s the hard part. Serving as a member of Congress is not like being a governor of a state or, obviously, President of the United States. Those are hard jobs where the elected official is largely responsible for running an actual government on his/her own. (Side note: the effort by some to compare her to Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) is equally misplaced. Palin was running to be the possible next president [i.e., the hardest job of all], not one of 100 senators.). I have had the honor of working with and getting to know some incredibly talented and brilliant people who serve in the House or Senate. My political career was built on the lessons learned from spending years with people like Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) and Rep. Ben Chandler (D-KY) . But we should not confuse the fact that while there are many brilliant people in Congress, who bring a distinct skill set, the job itself doesn’t require a Ph.D. to master. There are, unfortunately, more than a handful of especially unimpressive members of Congress who demonstrate daily that you can get by with limited skills, if not thrive. After all, we are talking about a Congress that sent us into a war that cost us more than 4,000 American military lives and about a trillion dollars, even though no weapons of mass destruction existed. That same Congress can’t balance a budget, stand-up to an abysmally unpopular president who happily skirted the boundaries of lawfulness for many years, and who seem wholly incapable of making tough and courageous decisions that the American public expects of them. Nevertheless, despite the remarkable life that Caroline Kennedy has lived…despite her Harvard undergraduate degree and Columbia Law School degree…despite her being an attorney, an editor, and a published author…despite that our next president trusted her to co-lead his search for a vice president…despite coming from one of the greatest families ever to serve in the United States Congress… we have to sit and listen to members of this Beltway fraternity (and sorority) bluster that she might not be qualified to become 1 of 100 in the Senate. Seriously? The pundits spew a great deal of nonsense on any given day. But this one might actually take the cake. And if I didn’t know better, I might think there was a bit of misogyny wrapped-up in the analysis. Not only do I not recall the same criticism being leveled at the idea that her cousin — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. — might seek the appointment, or someday run for the job — but I sort of recall some of the same arguments made about Hillary Clinton’s own run for this seat eight years ago. Finally, I’m not saying that experience doesn’t matter. Clearly, it does. We want the best experience we can get in a candidate for any public office, and Kennedy would have to defend hers in a 2010 special election. That is a legitimate question for her opponent to raise. But when it comes to filling a Senate vacancy in New York, I find this whole discussion more than nauseating, especially considering the sources. Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base , and this story was from his original post, " Honestly, It’s Not Rocket Science "

See original here: 
Mark Nickolas: The Shameful Bloviation About Whether Caroline Kennedy Is "Qualified" To Be A Senator

In a fit of pathos and nauseating self-pity, Karl Rove had the temerity to claim that Washington partisanship is to blame for the failures of the Bush Administration. That pushes the extreme outer limits of hubris and intellectual dishonesty. Rove whining about partisan politics is like a child who murders both parents, then pleads for leniency before the judge because he is an orphan. We can only stutter in astonishment at the sheer audacity of the claim. Apparently King Karl has never encountered the biblical concept that “you reap what you sow” or “as you made your bed, so you must lie upon it.” Rove is the Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods of partisan politics all rolled into one, so any complaint about partisanship is beyond outrageous. Rove’s bizarre complaint is as absurd as if the Pope was lamenting that religion made ruling the Vatican so much more difficult. We just have to shake our head, and say, “What?” Bush occupies the White House only because Rove mastered the divisive politics of hot button social issues so dear to right-wing evangelical Christians. He energized his base by demonizing the left. He took partisan politics to a new hateful extreme as a deliberate policy. He divided the nation into god-fearing, anti-abortion, anti-gay, church-going conservatives and latte-drinking, BMW-driving, French-speaking liberals who despised America. Never mind that his characterization of the left is absurd, or that Bush had a Republican majority on the Hill for six of his eight years. By obscuring reality, he convinced the religious right that the world would end if liberals won the election. It was “us against them” taken to an all new level of vitriol and rage in 2000 and 2004. And now he wonders why Bush encountered partisanship in Washington. I’m breathless. Rove’s plea would be easy to ignore, but dangerous to do so. This is the opening salvo in the Republican effort to rewrite history and sanitize the Bush Legacy. Rove and his colleagues will try to use sleight of hand, smoke and mirrors and outright lies to get us to forget the horrors of the past eight years. We can easily see the path they will take. We must block their advance. Rove said the following: “nobody will say that taking out the Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was a mistake or that the broader war on terrorism was a miscalculation.” Really? Nobody? Are you sure, Karl? How about 63 million Americans who voted for Barack Obama? Here Rove is intentionally confounding his ill-fated war in Iraq with terrorism, again confusing Saddam with 9/11 even though we know conclusively that Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center. The CIA has concluded unambiguously that al Qaeda was not in Iraq before we invaded. At the same time, Rove is deflecting attention away from Bush’s failure to finish the fight in the real war on terror in Afghanistan. Rove is trying to obfuscate, deflect, misdirect, but we will not let him. Bush took his eye off the ball, diverted resources to Iraq, and let the Taliban, who really are responsible for 9/11, regroup and rebuild. He also let bin Laden escape. If a Democrat was president, and bin Laden was still roaming free, we would hear of nothing else, every day. Rove goes on to say that, “no president in the foreseeable future is going to step back from the tenets of the Bush philosophy, which are: better to fight them over there than to fight them here…” We should probably ask Sarah Palin for an explanation, because what Rove said makes no sense. That is only one tenet, too, by the way. By invading Iraq we created a new breeding ground for terrorists, an entire new generation of radical Muslims who hate us, and who cannot wait to get here to kill us. And al Qaeda can multi-task: just because we are now fighting them in Iraq does not mean they will not come here as well. Have Bush and Rove never heard of a multi-front war? (Hmmm, perhaps that is why Afghanistan is going so poorly…). If Bush and his brain understand that a war can be fought in more than one place, do they believe only we are capable of doing so? The views espoused by Rove are ridiculous, constituting a naïve pipe dream, not a philosophy. If a Democrat said something as idiotic as we are fighting them there so we won’t fight them here, he would be drawn and quartered. Israel Hernandez, a longtime Bush supporter who entered politics as a Bush aide in Texas, said of Bush: “What you see is what you get…and what you get is a man who loves his country dearly and will do anything to protect it.” Yes, that is the problem, he will do anything, including break the law, trample our civil rights, condone torture and initiate an illegal war. Explaining that Bush loves America is like a wife-beater who explains his actions by pleading that he loves his wife. Yeah, maybe, but we would all be better off if he loved a little less, or with a bit more wisdom and restraint. The Big Lie has begun. Republicans are desperate to whitewash the intense red stain of Bush and his hideous legacy. Like the Shadow, they will try to cloud our minds. Much is at stake, because Bush’s failures are the failures of his party, and of conservative ideology. We must resist every effort to cleanse the record so that the world never forgets the tragic consequences of faith-based conservative rule executed in the name of a stubborn conviction immune to reason and immutable in the face of a changing world. Bush nearly drove this country to its knees, and Karl Rove must never be allowed to twist that basic truth.

Read more here: 
Jeff Schweitzer: Bush’s Brain: Karl Rove Goes Mental

Last week, the Anchorage Daily News reported that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would not release her testimony from the Troopergate investigation. Now, in an editorial, the paper wonders why : Much as Gov. Sarah Palin might wish otherwise, she has not given Alaskans a complete, transparent accounting of her actions in Troopergate. … To put it bluntly, either Gov. Palin or fired public safety commissioner Walt Monegan is lying about key facts. Investigator Tim Petumenos shrugged off the contradictory accounts. Then, to dismiss altogether the question of who was telling the truth, he invoked a creatively contorted interpretation of the state ethics law. … Gov. Palin is still highly popular among Alaskans. The Legislature may not have the stomach for trying to resolve the contradictory accounts, even though she told Alaskans from the start that she was prepared for them to hold her accountable. One way she can make good on that offer is to release the deposition she gave investigator Petumenos. During the vice-presidential campaign, her attorney said she wanted to release it — but now that the race is over, she doesn’t plan to do so. … That is not the “open and transparent” conduct Gov. Palin promised Alaska voters. If she stands by her conduct in the Troopergate matter, she should have no problem letting Alaskans see exactly what she told the investigator who “exonerated” her. Read the whole thing .

Read more from the original source: 
Palin Troopergate Testimony: Hometown Paper Questions Secrecy

This may seem a strange time to discuss the future of secularism, since we have just concluded a faith-saturated presidential election campaign. From the start, from Barack Obama’s 2006 Keynote Address to the Sojourners Call to Renewal Conference to the over-the-top faith confessions by Obama, Clinton, and Edwards, the Democrats were determined to run as a faith-friendly Party. On the Republican side, though John McCain was pretty easy-going about religion, the religious right finally got to celebrate with the vice-presidential nomination of the ostentatiously religious Sarah Palin. You would not have known there was a secularist in America. At the same time, however, recent polls have been showing an enormous and rapid growth in various forms of the unchurched. Perhaps the most startling statistic for such a famously religious country as America was a February 2008 PEW Forum finding that 25% of Americans 18-29 are unaffiliated with organized religion. Similar trends have been noted in other groups as well. The growing power of the nonreligious can be seen in the publishing success of the group often referred to as the New Atheists. Christopher Hitchens’ runaway best-seller, God is Not Great , joined Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion , and many similar books as a militant secularism found its voice. You might predict that these two opposing trends — a more religious politics and a more secular society — would eventually clash, particularly in the Democratic Party, where most secularists reside. The Democrats wore their new-found religiosity a little awkwardly, as Obama’s uncharacteristically oafish comment about small-town America clinging to religion and guns demonstrated. (The Democrats also got religion about guns this year). At some point, secularists may chafe under all the religious pandering. But that may not happen. Along with its overall growth, new forms of secularism are emerging that are more religion friendly than the New Atheists would have you believe. This has been particularly true in science, where the idea of God has begun to be reinterpreted. In his recent book, Reinventing the Sacred , the theoretical biologist Stuart Kauffman writes that God “is our chosen name for the ceaseless creativity in the natural universe, biosphere and human cultures.” And the British paleontologist Simon Conway Morris in Life’s Solution is even willing to look at the religious tradition directly: “[G]iven that evolution has produced sentient species with a sense of purpose, it is reasonable to take the claims of theology seriously.” As far as I know, these thinkers are not religious believers. They are secular scientists who are sensitive to mystery and meaning. They would not accept a personal God who could set aside the laws of nature. But they are not mere materialists either. There are various other indicators of a new permeability between religion and secularism. In philosophy, Jurgen Habermas ( Between Naturalism and Religion ), Susan Neiman ( Moral Clarity ) and James C. Edwards ( The Plain Sense of Things ) are describing a secularism open to religious insights. In theology, a kind of secularist religion is emerging in the work of Michael Hampson ( God Without God ) and John Shelby Spong ( Jesus for the Non-Religious ). Even Austin Dacey, passionately opposed to organized religion, calls on his fellow secularists to reject relativism and accept belief in public debate in The Secular Conscience . I myself try to describe a religiously oriented secularism in the book Hallowed Secularism , which will be published in March. The political implications of any movement away from the us-them divide between religion and secularism would be profound. The success of the Republican Party in winning large numbers of religiously oriented voters is based on two quite different foundations. One is policy. Religiously oriented voters oppose abortion and gay rights to a greater extent than the public at large. Secularists tend to support both. That is not going to change. The Democrats this year wooed religious voters, but not by offering much compromise on those fronts. But there is another foundation for this Republican Party electoral success, one that is cultural rather than policy-oriented. The Democratic Party has just not seemed at home with religion. That suspicion was inflamed by the Obama comment about religion. If secularism were to rediscover the language, symbols and images of traditional religion, now reinterpreted along naturalistic lines, this cultural divide could be bridged. Women and men of good faith could think once again of a broad progressive coalition among religious believers and nonbelievers, which, though it could not agree on all issues, would undoubtedly find a lot of political common ground. Indeed, such a coalition might renew the American radical tradition that has languished since Marxism was discredited. All that is needed is an appreciation by secularists that religious concerns are the concerns of all human beings with perennial questions that can never go away: who are we, why are we here and what can we hope for? We who do not believe in God have a great deal to learn from traditional religion about how to approach those questions. We can become sufficiently self-confident that we no longer fear words like God and faith, but can look to shared realities behind them.

Here is the original:
Bruce Ledewitz: The Future of Secularism in American Politics

At his Sunday news conference –the President-Elect will have had more of these get-togethers with the media before he’s sworn in than the President-Reject has had in eight years–Barack Obama gave a few more details about his new New Deal program for massive federal spending for infrastructure. What caught my ear: his pledge that the program would go beyond “roads and bridges” to other programs with “long-term payoffs for taxpayers”. That list included the now-familiar broadband Internet buildout, getting medical records into electronic form, school construction, and “making our economy more energy efficient.” Gee, that’s the whole “progressive” shopping list for federal infrastructure–except for one nagging little thing. For those whose memories are short, here’s a clue, from Saturday’s Times-Picayune : A long-delayed Army Corps of Engineers plan for protection against a Category 5 hurricane — a storm as large as or larger than Hurricane Katrina — will be delayed until at least June, and maybe longer, the project’s manager says. Further, the final document won’t be a plan at all, but rather a menu of about two dozen alternatives for Congress to further study and debate, a recipe for additional delay. Yes, the same Corps of Engineers that made (and ultimately took long-delayed responsibility for) crucial engineering and design mistakes that led to the 2005 flooding of New Orleans is now slow-walking plans to rectify its handiwork. And nowhere in President-Elect Obama’s laundry list of infrastructure expenditures is a commitment to ramp up work on flood protection and coastal wetlands restoration for the area that supplies–sorry, Governor Palin–as much as 40% of this country’s domestic oil production. Friends of mine assure me that that little item is a stealth priority–”he doesn’t want to rile up all the anti-New Orleans sentiment before he takes office”–that, like John Kerry, who never mentioned the Supreme Court during his campaign, New Orleans is an issue that this guy cares so deeply about he dare not mention it yet. New Orleanians, always met with “why should we give you money so your corrupt politicians can hijack it?”, have done their share, throwing Dollar Bill Jefferson out of office in a stunning election upset. Now what’s Washington’s excuse?

Read more here:
Harry Shearer: What’s Missing From Obama’s Infrastructure Plan

It’s hard to have yet another Sarah Palin epiphany, but that’s what happened as I was drifting happily through a conference called “Reality Worlds,” organized at the Annenberg School for Communication by Marwan Kraidy and Katherine Sender. Scholars devoted to the genre were generating all sorts of theories about these relatively inexpensive and ubiquitous program efforts. But what occurred to me (and undoubtedly has occurred to others) is how Palin’s trajectory through the political campaign approximates the rhythm of makeover and other reality TV shows. Palin is one-person reiteration of everything from “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” (early round dismissal?) up through and including “Survivor.” And then now, there’s the story of Palin and her hair stylists, including Amy Strozzi, who received over $40,000 and was awarded an Emmy for her work on the show “So You Think You Can Dance.” Shades of “Making the Cut,” “Million Dollar $alon,”and “Top Hair.” Palin wasn’t even mentioned in the Annenberg talks, but her arc during the campaign could have been a subtext for all the scholarly presentations. Laura Grindstaff, for example, a professor at the University of California, hit a kind of proverbial Palin nail on the head when she spoke about how these shows seek out a center of American life, and engage in what she called the “production of ordinariness” through reality television. Grindstaff was talking particularly about an MTV series called “Sorority Life” which chronicles the life of pledges as they move towards acceptance and initiation. I didn’t ask, but it seemed to me that one could call Palin, whatever else she was, a kind of initiate, a rushee who among other things had to go through a process of hazing (did she make it? You be the judge.). At the Philadelphia event, I talked with a very helpful Penn graduate student, Rebecca Pardo, who, like a lot of modern young scholars, has a slight and admirable obsession with “reality” filtered through this art form. She loves the work of Nicholas Couldry (a professor at Goldsmiths in London) and sees Palin as the embodiment of what Couldry has called the Myth of the Mediated Center. Pardo also put me on to Justin Wolfe, who blogs about “The Hills,” a reality show about life in 90210, hedonistic and pragmatic California. Wolfe has written , without, blogwise, using capital letters, about Palin and the process of candidate selection in reality shows: “it’s funny because the way sarah palin was chosen is, in many ways, just like the way heidi montag was chosen for the hills. if you strip all the fame away from heidi montag, if we pretend that she’s just a normal girl what’s special about her, what sets her apart? nothing, really, she’s just normal. kind of pretty, sort of ambitious, but mostly normal. and, without the magic ticket she was given into the world of celebrity, into the show, that’s how she would’ve probably stayed, a normal girl from a small town in colorado. If course, that’s the Sarah Palin narrative, too: plucked from the relative obscurity of the alaskan wilderness into the national spotlight, with the barest of real experience or qualifications but with scads of those particular qualities that resonate with the american public: personality, relatability, normality. ” As on some reality shows (take “Project Runway” for example), Palin was subjected to ingenious and daunting tests that would raise public anticipation about the outcome–triumph or failure. Would she make it to the next round? When Sarah met Katie Couric, it could have been one of these “tests” revealed to the contestant (”for your next challenge, you must go one on one with a noted anchor-person who will ask you questions you may have no way of answering”). Palin’s life was a series of created melodramas with accompanying anxieties and the imminent apprehension of failure. No reality show is complete without the backroom drama, as “Dancing With the Stars,” illustrates through the elaborate process of trying to turn someone quite ordinary (in some respects) into the surprisingly gifted (the Pygmalion moment, the alchemy of transformation). Can you really make this person rhumba? Can he or she be trained to be a cook or a business executive (or an expert on foreign affairs)? We were all on pins and needles to see if this process would work with Sarah. My mind drifted to one of my favorite shows I never watched in entirety: “Ladette to Lady,” the story of a group of relatively inexperienced young women,who are given an old-fashioned five-week course in learning how to behave like a real lady. They are sent to Eggleston Hall, an English finishing school. There was a lot of Ladette to Lady in the Palin tale, though Palin was not a Ladette, by any stretch. And the Republican National Committee wasn’t Eggleston. You could say that this wasn’t a real reality show because it didn’t have the panel of judges requisite in some versions. But I think of that curious crew of indifferent panelists Wolf Blitzer oddly and unrealistically named “the best political team on television.” They could just as well have had cards and numbers; and Sarah (holding Todd’s hand tightly) might have been seen on camera — like frightened ice-skaters — waiting for the results in an isolated room. Zala Volcic, a Slovenian now living in Brisbane spoke, at the Annenberg conference (part of Professor Barbie Zelizer’s Annenberg Scholars Program in Culture and Communications Program) about That’s Me, a Big Brother style Balkan reality TV show which mixed roommates from all over the former Yugoslavia. The show was designed to “negotiate the struggles among religious, ethnic and national groups that still plague the region.” That’s Me was supposed to smooth conflict, and did not necessarily succeed. This was reality show as social engineering. Think Palin: The Message, energizing the base. There was much talk at the Annenberg workshop about “parenting” as a persistent theme in reality shows. Mark Anthony Neal, the Duke scholar of hip-hop, gave an exuberant talk on Snoop Dog and his program called “Fatherhood.” There and on so many other shows, the fragile nature of parenting–and the possibility of failing and the complexities of succeeding–were tracked. Of course, the Sarah candidacy–right out of the box–was about mothering in American society–mothering and having a career, mothering and the extraordinary decisions about a child with Downs Syndrome, parenting and an unmarried daughter who discovers pregnancy–it goes on and on. Much of reality television scholarship is about voting habits of the committed viewers. Stephen Coleman (Leeds), the guru of Big Brother voting, has concluded that there’s not a gulf between those who vote in “real” elections and those who vote in “reality” elections. Aswin Punathambekar of the University of Michigan probably had a slightly different view. He spoke, movingly, about the temporarily intense political activity and rampant mobile phone voting in North-East India for the Indian Idol candidacy of Amit Paul. And then, of course, there were the clothes. Palin and her relationship to clothing is Reality TV writ large. It’s the epitome of the “makeover” story. One can think of the RNC operatives as channeling “What Not to Wear”, the British show with Trinny Woodall and Susannah Constantine, even including those choice bits of surveillance where Trinny and Susannah view videos of the poor subject. It’s a small and maybe obvious epiphany–The Palin campaign as all reality shows rolled into one. The Annenberg conference luxuriated in phrases that resonated with the campaign like “cult of the commonplace.” But mostly, it was interesting to see, through the Reality TV Show lens, what the Republicans — McCain and Palin’s handlers or the audiences reacting to her so enthusiastically — were actually doing, thinking and reflecting this summer and fall.

Read more: 
Monroe Price: Sarah Palin: the All-in-One Reality TV Show

Calvin Trillin, responding to Daily Show host John Stewart’s impish description of his new book in verse on the 2008 election Deciding the Next Decider , joked, “You made me feel like one of those guys who’s done the Palace of Versaille in beer cans.” No, John Milton he isn’t. Trillin is a comedic writer with a gift for light verse. And it was clear from last week’s Daily Show interview that he understands that his latest project–chronicling politics in rhyming couplets–is a little goofy. He refers to his book in a tongue-in-cheek fashion as “epic” (it is, in fact, written in heroic verse). But while the author himself calls it doggerel, as you’ll see from these excerpts on John McCain, his verse can be very biting: No longer did he seem the same man who Had charmed the voters (and reporters, too) With candor as he’d cheerfully express His willingness to call BS BS. McCain of old would not allow such scat. His honor meant much more to him than that. But into Bush’s role with Rove he’d slid. What torture couldn’t do, ambition did. Trillin overcomes one of the biggest hurdles to writing a book-length poem–managing to hold a reader’s attention–by breaking up the work (and its relentless rhyming couplets) with short, “embedded” poems, many of which appeared previously in The Nation . Some of the embedded poems play off of well-known songs, and others, including “The Rhyme of the Ancient Candidate,” take their cue from literary classics. All in all, the book spans events from the 2006 midterm elections through the 2008 decision, and few of the major players escape his wit. Here are some good ones: Virginia Senate candidate George Allen: He fit what’s often valued by the right, Quite cheerful, Reaganesque, and not too bright. Sarah Palin: She’d say it yet again, with no contrition, As if she’d make it true by repetition. Rudy Giuliani: The stories of his married life confirm That, if we can be frank, the man’s a worm. Fred Thompson: The pros said, “That’s a state (SC) he has to take,” And he just might, if he can stay awake. Al Gore: Some said that if the presidential glimmer Was in Gore’s eyes, he’d try to get much slimmer And, of course, Barack Obama: Experience was what he seemed to lack. And to be frank, they pointed out, he’s black. You wouldn’t expect it, but Trillin’s sort of light verse has an impressive lineage. Take a look at the similarities to this barb from Byron’s famous poem “Don Juan” wherein he rips fellow poet Robert Southey (whose name he rhymes with “mouthy”) by following up a Southey quote with: The four first rhymes are Southey’s every line: For God’s sake, reader! take them not for mine. His work has another predecessor in the witty, light verse of Alexander Pope. Here’s an excerpt from “Rape of the Lock,” which details the horrifying(!) theft of a lock of a woman’s hair: The meeting Points the sacred Hair dissever From the fair Head, for ever and for ever! Then flash’d the living Lightnings from her Eyes, And Screams of Horror rend th’ affrighted Skies. Not louder Shrieks to pitying Heav’n are cast, When Husbands, or when Lapdogs breath their last So how does Trillin end a poem of such size and scope? With a victory speech, of course. And foreigners, from Rome to Yokohama, Were cheering an American: Obama From this vote they were willing to infer We aren’t the people they had thought we were. And Lady Liberty, as people call her, Was standing in the harbor somewhat taller. I have to admit, the ending is kind of “epic.”

Go here to see the original:
John Lundberg: The 2008 Election in Verse

Let’s try for a minute to take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does. Shall we look to Abraham, the great patriarch, who slept with his servant when he discovered his beloved wife Sarah was infertile? Or to Jacob, who fathered children with four different women (two sisters and their servants)? Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel–all these fathers and heroes were polygamists. The New Testament model of marriage is hardly better. Jesus himself was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments–especially family. The apostle Paul (also single) regarded marriage as an act of last resort for those unable to contain their animal lust. “It is better to marry than to burn with passion,” says the apostle, in one of the most lukewarm endorsements of a treasured institution ever uttered. Would any contemporary heterosexual married couple–who likely woke up on their wedding day harboring some optimistic and newfangled ideas about gender equality and romantic love–turn to the Bible as a how-to script? Of course not, yet the religious opponents of gay marriage would have it be so.

Excerpt from:
NEWSWEEK: The Religious Case For Gay Marriage

The RNC is continuing its herculean effort to calculate the total dollar amount spent on Sarah Palin’s campaign wardrobe, accessories, and spa treatments. The receipts are still pouring in from retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Toys R Us and Victoria’s Secret, and the running tally has already been bumped up to $180,000 from the original $150,000 estimate. No one knows how long it will take to retrace the steps through Sarah’s all-American shopping spree, but we’re keeping track of the running total with every click of the adding machine. You can too with the RNC’s new, handy Sarah Palin Shopping Spree Cost Calculator, an up-to-the-minute accounting of every blouse and anklet Sarah purchased since she first hit the malls last September.

Continued here: 
236.com: Sarah Palin Has Cost The RNC $180K And Counting….

The RNC is continuing its herculean effort to calculate the total dollar amount spent on Sarah Palin’s campaign wardrobe, accessories, and spa treatments. The receipts are still pouring in from retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Toys R Us and Victoria’s Secret, and the running tally has already been bumped up to $180,000 from the original $150,000 estimate. No one knows how long it will take to retrace the steps through Sarah’s all-American shopping spree, but we’re keeping track of the running total with every click of the adding machine. You can too with the RNC’s new, handy Sarah Palin Shopping Spree Cost Calculator, an up-to-the-minute accounting of every blouse and anklet Sarah purchased since she first hit the malls last September.

Read the original here:
236.com: Sarah Palin Has Cost The RNC $180K And Counting….

That’s some expensive lipstick . Oh, and unlike the $180K the RNC spent on clothes, the Palin lipstick budget was entirely paid for by taxpayers. ( Update, 10:31AM: To be clear, it was paid for by the McCain campaign, which was funded publicly.)

More here:
McCain Spent $110K On Palin Makeup

When she ran for Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin campaigned on a promise of “open and transparent government.” What she didn’t say was that such political transparency came with a hefty price tag–in some cases, more than $15 million. That’s more than twice what a book by Palin would reputedly fetch on the international literary market and considerably more than the GOP spent on her controversial wardrobe during her two-month stint as John McCain’s roving pit bull on the campaign trail. It even makes the $68,400 for her traveling makeup artist and $42,225 paid to her hairstylist for two months of work pale by comparison. Ever since she became governor two years ago, Palin’s activities have generated concern and suspicion among longtime political watchdogs in Alaska, from all ends of the political spectrum. Zane Henning, a self-defined “fiscal conservative and social moderate” who has kept an eye on Palin since her early days on the Wasilla City Council, suspected foul play in Palin’s efforts to oust Randy Ruedrich as chairman of the state Republican Party. Henning requested email records for Palin aides Ivy Frye and Frank Bailey to see if they were conducting partisan politics on state time. Much to his surprise, Henning discovered that a good deal of Palin’s state business was being conducted on private email accounts, and than Palin’s husband, Todd, had been copied on much of her state business. Henning doled out a hefty $1,091 for his discovery. Once Palin was named John McCain’s running mate on the Republican ticket in late August, the number of requests for Palin’s email records skyrocketed and, so too, did the price tag. One request by the Associated Press–for “copies of all e-mails and attachments” from the “mccain08hq.com domain since Aug. 1, 2008″–was met with a prospective state fee totaling $15.4 million. Alaska administrative director, Linda Perez, applied a flat rate of $960.31 per email account searched; given that there are approximately 16,000 full time employees in Alaska, the fee would have topped $15 million. Had Alaska’s part-time employees been included in the search, the fee assessed would have been $27.8 million. Several other requests by NBC and the AP–most notably NBC’s request for all records of Todd Palin’s email activities on his government issued BlackBerry–also soared above the $15 million mark. Had news agencies agreed to these exorbitant fees, Palin’s emails would have topped Alaskan crude oil as the state’s No. 1 export. In fact, most news agencies refined or rescinded their requests in response to the projected fees. At the same time, the speed at which the requests were accommodated slowed down considerably. The Alaska Public Records Statute requires that the state make records available “as soon as practicable,” but no longer than the “10th working day” after an agency receives such a query. But by early October, MSNBC investigative journalist Bill Dedman had been informed by Perez that the information he was requesting would not be available until after the November 4 election. She cited excessive workload and the necessity of legal review for the delays. Some of the requests went nowhere; still others led to significant revelations. For instance, the recent news item that Palin failed to file proper financial disclosure forms for two free trips that she took nearly two years ago was discovered by the AP following a records request in October. (Palin has since amended her disclosure form.) The one request that seemingly got lost in all the shuffle was made in June of 2008–more than two months prior to Palin being named to the national ticket–by Andree McLeod, a registered Republican, who, like Henning, suspected Palin and her staff of playing party politics on the state’s nickel. In response to McLeod’s request, Palin’s office withheld more than 1,000 emails on the grounds that they were confidential and contained “official policy deliberations” between Palin and her staff. Many of those emails, it turned out, had subject lines indicating they were not about policy matters (one from Frye was entitled “I may be in trouble here guys,” while another was headed “from Sheila Toomey,” in reference to an Alaska gossip columnist) and several were copied to Palin’s husband, Todd, who holds no official position in his wife’s administration. “The people of Alaska have a right to know the inner workings of their government. They have a right to know how the individuals they elect to public office are discharging the public trust,” McLeod said in a public statement at the time. She called Palin’s position “bogus.” More importantly, McLeod’s request, like Henning’s earlier, revealed that Palin conducted even more state business on private email accounts, which meant that they could not be retrieved from the state’s server. That created a classic Catch-22 in the Alaska bureaucracy: The only way they could track down Palin’s emails sent on her private accounts was to do a search of all of Alaska’s employees to see if they had been the recipient of such communications, resulting in a price tag (you guessed it) of $15-plus million. Last month, a state judge in Anchorage “ordered” Palin “to preserve all emails” she has sent from or received at her private accounts, until McLeod’s lawsuit demanding that the emails be made public is resolved. That legal challenge still awaits Palin in the governor’s office. Meanwhile, MSNBC is still waiting for a response to its September request seeking email correspondence between a group of 13 state employees and 11 potential recipients. The state is still citing workload and legal review as cause for the delays. Watchdog Henning, who’s currently working on the cold North Slope of Alaska’s oil fields, is having none of the state’s explanations. He’s issued a letter to Alaska Attorney General Talis J. Colberg demanding that the state expedite the records request process. “With the technological knowledge of the computer age, I’m extremely disappointed in the length of time it has taken to receive records from the State of Alaska,” he wrote. “Frankly it is unacceptable in my opinion. I would hope that the commitment of the Palin Administration to maintain ‘clear and transparent government’ would include providing requested information in a timely manner.” And, one would hope, without rock star price tags. Not even Palin herself can afford those.

More here:
Geoffrey Dunn: $15 Million Price Tag Placed on Palin’s Emails

Following yesterday’s report on an additional $30,000 in “accessories” spending by Governor Sarah Palin during the Presidential campaign, the New York Times has information on the money made by her makeup artist and hair stylist: Gov. Sarah Palin’s traveling makeup artist was paid $68,400 for roughly two months of work, according to a new campaign finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission. Ms. Palin’s makeup artist, Amy Strozzi — who was nominated for an Emmy award for her cosmetics work on the television show “So You Think You Can Dance?” — was paid $32,400 by Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign between Oct. 16 and Nov. 24, the period covered by the most recent reports filed with the commission. This amount came on top of the $36,000 she had already been paid in previous reports, dating back to September. In addition, Ms. Palin’s traveling hair stylist, Angela Lew, was paid a total of $42,225, with $23,400 coming during the period covered by the latest reports to the commission, which were due at midnight on Thursday. Read more on Palin’s makeup artist Amy Strozzi .

Read the original:
Palin’s Stylists Were Paid $55,000 In Final Weeks

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama’s presidential campaign raised $104 million in the weeks around Election Day, a grand finale to a successful bid that shattered fundraising records. Overall, Obama raised nearly $750 million during his odyssey to the presidency, and his spending in the eight weeks before the election vastly outpaced that of his Republican rival John McCain, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. The reporting period covered Oct. 15-Nov. 24. The campaign said more than 1 million contributors donated during the period, more than half for the first time. Throughout the campaign, more than 3.95 million contributors gave to the eventual president-elect, his campaign said. Obama’s fundraising sum was more than the combined total of the two major parties’ nominees four years ago. George W. Bush and John Kerry pulled in a total of $653 million in the 2004 primary and general election campaigns, including federal public financing money. The final numbers underscore how pivotal the two candidates’ strategies were for funding their general election campaigns: McCain accepted $84 million in taxpayer money through the public financing system; Obama gambled that he could raise far more from private money. The two campaigns spent identical amounts in June, $25.6 million each. But from there the numbers diverged widely, September and October when the Obama financial juggernaut swamped McCain. By the end, the Democrat was outspending his rival four to one. Also on Thursday, the Republican National Committee was expected to report spending $30,000 on accessories for McCain running mate Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska. The RNC reported in October that it had spent nearly $150,000 on Palin for clothes and accessories. A party spokesman said Thursday that the expenditures were directed by the McCain campaign and that the garments have been returned to the party. “The accessories used by Governor Palin and represented in the Republican National Committee’s filings both in October and December with the Federal Election Commission were the result of coordinated expenditures at the campaign’s direction,” the spokesman, Alex Conant, said. “Accessories have been returned, inventoried, and will be appropriately dispersed to various charities.” In his Oct. 15-Nov. 24 report, McCain spent a mere $26 million to Obama’s $136 million. While McCain was limited to spending $84 million from September on, Obama spent $315 million during the same period. McCain tried to narrow that yawning gap with help from the Republican Party, which pumped in millions to promote his candidacy. The party spent $53 million alone on independent ads targeting Obama. Obama ended with a cash balance of nearly $30 million. He still owed vendors nearly $600,000. Obama’s prowess at attracting money was one of his campaign’s defining characteristics. After initially vowing to take public funds if McCain did, Obama became the first presidential candidate since the campaign finance reforms of the 1970s to raise private donations during the general election. What distinguished him from his successful predecessors was his ability to motivate donors to give repeatedly, said Michael Malbin, director of the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute, which studies money in politics. “Obama persuaded an unusually large number of people to give more than once,” Malbin said Thursday at an election law conference. The institute’s research showed that 212,000 people were repeat givers who donated a total of $200 or more, averaging $490 each. Obama had a total of 580,000 individual donors as of mid-October, the most recent data included in the study. Overall, the institute found that Obama collected about 26 percent of his total haul from people who gave less than $200 _ about the same as President George W. Bush did in his 2004 campaign, but less than Democrat Howard Dean’s small-donor take of 38 percent in his unsuccessful primary bid that year. And like other campaigns, Obama’s relied for nearly half of its fundraising on big donors, those who gave $1,000 or more, a finding that “should make one think twice before describing small donors as the financial engine of the Obama campaign,” the institute reported. McCain’s biggest expense in the final stretch was for television. But he only spent $9.5 million during the period, compared with $19 million during the first two weeks of October. In a tactical shift, McCain devoted nearly $4.5 million to phone messages as Election Day approached. He reported nearly $5 million in debts and nearly $1.5 million in money owed to his campaign committee.

Excerpt from: 
Obama’s Final Fundraising Number: Nearly $750 Million

Here’s a potentially bloody primary fight that I’d like to see: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has some Republican-to-Republican advice for Gov. Sarah Palin: If you want to make a run at the White House, keep your hands off my Senate seat. Murkowski, up for reelection in 2010, is nervously awaiting word on whether John McCain’s former running mate will run against her in the GOP primary. But she says Palin is the one who should be nervous. “I can guarantee it would be a very tough election,” Murkowski said in an interview.   Asked Monday to respond to Murkowski’s comments, Palin’s communications coordinator, Kate Morgan, said only, “The governor has never stated her intention or desire to run for that office.” Nice non-denial there, eh? And while some, including Murkowski, say that a Senator Palin would cost Alaska senate seniority, a Democratic pollster says that: Sarah is interested in what is best for Sarah, and she is not necessarily going to get sidetracked by party loyalties. Darn right!

View post: 
This Would Be Fun To Watch

Look for more “campaign accessories” bought on behalf of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in tomorrow’s end-of-cycle financial report filed by the Republican National Committee. Revelations that the R.N.C. had purchased about $150,000 in clothing and other items, labeled as “campaign accessories,” from luxury stores like Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus in September for Ms. Palin and her family caused a stir in the weeks ahead of the election.

Go here to see the original:
More Palin "Accessories" Spending Revealed

Try to decode this logic from The Weekly Standard writer Stephen Hayes: BORGER: You just can’t say no, because that won’t go over with the American people. HAYES: I’m not sure, I think there’s a strong part of the country — more than 50% in a lot of polls — that are just opposing right now, that are very skeptical of these bailouts, and I think that if you have somebody like a Sarah Palin or another Republican who can articulate that opposition by presenting alternatives… BORGER: But what are the alternatives? That’s the point. You have to have ‘em. HAYES: Well, one would be not, y’know, $7.4 trillion giveaways. Unless I’m missing something, Hayes is saying: Actually, you can just say no. You should say no by “presenting alternatives.” The alternative is to just say no. When they talk about the intellectual deficit on the right, this is the kind of thing they are taking about. (By the way, Hayes seemed to think passing the bailout was a political plus for McCain during the campaign.)

Continued here: 
Stephen Hayes Offers Confusing Advice For Sarah Palin

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin has added to her financial disclosure forms two free trips that she took nearly two years ago but failed to report. Palin, who was Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s running mate, made the disclosures last month, but after Election Day when she and McCain lost to Barack Obama and Joe Biden. The trips were first revealed in a story by The Associated Press in October. The free trips were taken in April and May of 2007 and should have been reported within 30 days under state ethics law. The Nov. 17 disclosure forms note that the reports were “not filed timely due to administrative error.” Bill McAllister, the governor’s spokesman, said this week that the mistakes were made by travel support staff. He said he could not explain the timing of when and how they were caught, but that it was irrelevant because the error was corrected. Palin, who has criticized state lawmakers for gifts they take, is not facing any sanctions for the late filings, according to Linda Perez, state administrative director. Perez said she was alerted to the matter by McCain’s presidential campaign before the Oct. 14 AP story. “It wasn’t necessarily the governor’s oversight, nor was she trying to hide anything,” Perez said. “It was a staff oversight.” In one of the trips, the James B. Hunt Jr. Institute of North Carolina _ a nonprofit education policy group _ paid the $2,827 cost of Palin’s April 2007 flight and hotel in Scottsdale, Ariz., to attend a four-day conference, according to her report. The group has said it also paid for other governors attending the annual event in recent years. In May 2007, Palin accepted lodging for herself and her three daughters at Mt. Chilkoot Lodge in the Southeast Alaska town of Skagway. The lodging, valued at $300, was paid for by the owners, including Palin friend and former deputy campaign treasurer Kathy Hosford. The reports were among recent disclosures released to the AP after a public records request. Among other gifts Palin reported last month is a June 30 flight valued at $1,187.50 that was paid by the North Slope Borough for Palin and her 7-year-old daughter, Piper, to attend various functions, including a whaling festival in the town of Barrow. Palin and husband Todd also received travel, food and lodging valued at $4,620.12 to attend a Republican Governors Association event in Texas, in April _ gifts that were not reported until August, according to disclosure forms. Palin and the other governors attending the event also received $1,000 Rocky Carroll cowboy boots. ___ On the Net: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin: http://gov.state.ak.us/

Go here to read the rest: 
Palin Files Late Disclosure For Free 2007 Trips

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin has added to her financial disclosure forms two free trips that she took nearly two years ago but failed to report. Palin, who was Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s running mate, made the disclosures last month, but after Election Day when she and McCain lost to Barack Obama and Joe Biden. The trips were first revealed in a story by The Associated Press in October. The free trips were taken in April and May of 2007 and should have been reported within 30 days under state ethics law. The Nov. 17 disclosure forms note that the reports were “not filed timely due to administrative error.” Bill McAllister, the governor’s spokesman, said this week that the mistakes were made by travel support staff. He said he could not explain the timing of when and how they were caught, but that it was irrelevant because the error was corrected. Palin, who has criticized state lawmakers for gifts they take, is not facing any sanctions for the late filings, according to Linda Perez, state administrative director. Perez said she was alerted to the matter by McCain’s presidential campaign before the Oct. 14 AP story. “It wasn’t necessarily the governor’s oversight, nor was she trying to hide anything,” Perez said. “It was a staff oversight.” In one of the trips, the James B. Hunt Jr. Institute of North Carolina _ a nonprofit education policy group _ paid the $2,827 cost of Palin’s April 2007 flight and hotel in Scottsdale, Ariz., to attend a four-day conference, according to her report. The group has said it also paid for other governors attending the annual event in recent years. In May 2007, Palin accepted lodging for herself and her three daughters at Mt. Chilkoot Lodge in the Southeast Alaska town of Skagway. The lodging, valued at $300, was paid for by the owners, including Palin friend and former deputy campaign treasurer Kathy Hosford. The reports were among recent disclosures released to the AP after a public records request. Among other gifts Palin reported last month is a June 30 flight valued at $1,187.50 that was paid by the North Slope Borough for Palin and her 7-year-old daughter, Piper, to attend various functions, including a whaling festival in the town of Barrow. Palin and husband Todd also received travel, food and lodging valued at $4,620.12 to attend a Republican Governors Association event in Gaylord, Texas, in April _ gifts that were not reported until August, according to disclosure forms. Palin and the other governors attending the event also received $1,000 Rocky Carroll cowboy boots. ___ On the Net: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin: http://gov.state.ak.us/

Here is the original:
Palin Files Disclosure For 2007 Free Trips, Finally

Remember Jeff Frederick, the Virginia GOP chairman who told McCain canvassers to compare Barack Obama to Osama Bin Laden? Well Mr. Frederick is sticking to his guns . Although he concedes his remark was dumb, he’s defending it as ‘true.’ Va. GOP chief: Obama remark was stupid but true Virginia’s Republican chairman said Tuesday that his remark tying Democrat Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden during the presidential campaign was stupid, but he refused to apologize… …Frederick was asked about the remark Tuesday during a discussion of the 2008 Virginia presidential campaign with a group of newspaper editors. Obama was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia in 44 years. “It was a stupid joke I gave to somebody in a small crowd of people and that’s what happens,” Frederick said. “But you know, it’s really unfortunate. We live in a ‘gotcha’ society.” Frederick said he got hate mail, angry phone calls and vicious e-mails for weeks. Even so, he stood by the comment Tuesday, defending it as true and saying he was taking cues from Republican John McCain’s campaign after running mate Sarah Palin said Obama had been “palling around with terrorists.” Notice that Frederick claimed he was just telling somebody a joke, and casts himself as a victim. But that’s a load of bunk. He’s no victim, and he wasn’t telling a joke. Here’s what actually happened , as reported in mid-October by Karen Tumulty of TIME: With so much at stake, and time running short, Frederick did not feel he had the luxury of subtlety. He climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: “Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon,” he said. “That is scary.” It is also not exactly true — though that distorted reference to Obama’s controversial association with William Ayers, a former 60s radical, was enough to get the volunteers stoked. “And he won’t salute the flag,” one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, “We don’t even know where Senator Obama was really born.” Actually, we do; it’s Hawaii. This is the modern GOP. A party for extremists — and liars.

Here is the original post: 
Virginia GOP Chairman Defends Comparison To Bin Laden

I do so want to believe that Barack Obama is on the right track. His brain is big, his style fresh, his pronouncements both logical and compelling, and it does feel good to have a president-elect elicit universal respect rather than make the world cringe. Indeed, he’s downright inspiring when he defends constitutional restraint on the presidency and shuns torture. Bush is so yesterday, but imagine how panicked we would now be if John McCain and Sarah Palin were about to take a turn at the wheel. Yet, it all does hang on him. Yes, Obama. The superstar, and not that supporting cast of retreads from a failed past that have popped up in his administration in the making. Now that we have the list of his top economic and foreign policy picks–mostly a collection of folks who wouldn’t know change if it slapped them upside the head–we’ve got to hope that it’s Obama who is using them, and not the other way around. Maybe he picked a bunch of Wall Street insiders to send a comforting message to the financial community that Obama was turning to folks just like them to get us out of the mess that they created. So far, Wall Street hasn’t done anything to pay back the taxpayers for the upward-of-a-trillion dollars wasted on that bailout. The credit markets remain frozen, and these banking grinches are stealing Christmas by further cutting individuals’ credit lines. If there is a grand arc to Obama’s appointments strategy, it seems aimed at providing the appearance of continuity on the part of a leader who still promises to be very different. Clearly that was the case in retaining Robert Gates as secretary of defense and Marine Gen. Jim Jones as his White House national security adviser. Both choices could have been far worse. Jones has been involved in the exercise of “soft power” initiatives and seems like an otherwise sensible fellow. Gates has been a vast improvement over Donald Rumsfeld in grasping the limits of military power. Gates also dared challenge the military-industrial complex over egregious military spending on projects such as the $65 billion F-22 stealth fighter plane that was designed to penetrate Soviet air defenses that were never built and has yet to fly a combat sortie in either the Afghanistan or Iraq wars. That’s a start on cutting military spending, which under President Bush grew to be higher than at any time since World War II, exceeding the levels of both the Korean and Vietnam wars. Thanks to Bush, the United States now spends as much as all of the rest of the world’s nations combined to defeat an enemy armed with a weapons arsenal that, in the case of the 9/11 attacks, could have been purchased for a couple hundred bucks at Home Depot. Unfortunately, on Monday Obama stuck with the absurd “war on terror” language he inherited from Bush in describing the attacks in Mumbai conducted by 10 lightly armed fanatics who should have been quickly dispatched by a well-functioning local paramilitary force. These terrorists did not, as available evidence would indicate, have anything to do with the Taliban or al-Quaida based in Afghanistan, where the United States continues to wage the good war, as opposed to the bad one in Iraq, that Obama invoked during the presidential campaign: “Afghanistan is where the war on terror began and where it must end.” Both wars are bad in representing exactly the wrong way to deal with “terror,” which should properly be thought of as representing pathology to be excised with surgical precision rather than bludgeoned with conventional warfare, which only recruits new fanatics through the killing of innocent civilians. Finally, the appointment of Hillary Rodham Clinton seems a good one. To paraphrase Obama’s remark during the primary debates, Hillary is peaceable enough, and also has the smarts to make a fine secretary of state. Her more hawkish rhetorical side will be muted by the position’s obligation to emphasize diplomacy. My prediction is that she will leave her mark by exploiting her pro-Israel creds to complete President Bill Clinton’s once promising Mideast peace initiatives to finally provide the Palestinians, and Israelis, with viable states. The problem with Obama’s national security team is not that he has picked hawks who he cannot control; they are all professionals, who took the job expecting to go along with his game plan. The danger here, as with his economic advisers, is only that Obama may stop being Obama, the agent of change who electrified a nation. Robert Scheer is author of a new book, “The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America.”

More:
Robert Scheer: Will Obama Stay the Course?

Katie Couric is an outstanding talent and journalist. She is also courageous. These facts are immutable. In May 2006 Katie gave up her co-anchor position on the Today Show, a position she successfully held for fifteen years. She wanted to try something different. She also had important personal reasons for wanting a change; she is a single mother raising two young daughters. Katie chose an opportunity to anchor the CBS Evening News, the flagship newscast for America’s most storied broadcast news organization. Katie would be the first woman to solo anchor a network evening newscast. This was a truly historic move. But from the moment she arrived there were issues. CBS News had a long and rich tradition of growing anchors. It had been through a very difficult decade of budget cuts and internal turbulence. And CBS News also had a rigorous organizational culture, an abundance of ambitious employees and an enormously loyal audience. This was a most difficult transition to execute. The ratings for all evening newscasts had been declining precipitously over the past decade, so it was time for a change. But CBS News may have changed the broadcast too dramatically. Since people who watch the evening news actually want to watch the evening news, many rejected these changes as non-traditional. Some of them defected to NBC or ABC. Expectations were poorly managed. Today the CBS Evening News is as good as its competition. Its political coverage this election was very strong and most informative. Katie’s interviews with Governor Sarah Palin may have been the most decisive event in a truly historic election. Critics, politicians and viewers all praised Katie for her smart and thoughtful questioning of Governor Palin. Katie “has hit her stride” reported most accounts. For months CBS executives complained that some viewers and some press could not accept a woman as a national anchor. Charges of misogyny flew, but I couldn’t believe them. Yet today’s New York Daily News had a story about Katie’s new hairstyle which she first wore Monday night. It was picked up by other national publications. There were even several Internet polls on how people liked Katie’s new do. Isn’t it sad, that on a day when India is struggling with the aftermath of a despicable terrorist attack and America is reeling through a depressing recession, CBS News anchor Katie Couric’s new hairstyle would create such a national stir. I guess I was wrong. Women are still viewed differently.

Read the original: 
Joe Peyronnin: Couric’s Do

In recent weeks, as part of an uncanny attempt to behave as generals fighting the last war, many in the Republican leadership have been floating Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, as the next Republican hope, or even the Republican Obama. The thinking behind this, while not particularly sophisticated, is, at least on the surface, easy to understand. Jindal like Obama is well educated, young and has an attractive family. These are not, however, the main reasons Jindal is so appealing to many in the Republican leadership who are looking for their Obama. Jindal’s personal story and ethnic background are the key to his appeal for Republican strategists. Like Obama, Jindal comes from an immigrant family and can trace his roots to somewhere other than northern or western Europe-in Jindal’s case, South Asia. Jindal’s personal story also shares the elements of hard work and modest origins, which helped make Obama appeal to many. Jindal is a long way from being the Republican candidate for president, but his nomination would certainly be a major breakthrough for his party. While having two parties that seek to represent all Americans would be good for our democracy, nominating Jindal would only be a small step in this direction for the Republicans. From a strategic angle, Jindal may be a strong Republican candidate in 2012 or 2016, but if he is it will not be due to primarily to his ethnic background. Republican strategists should keep in mind that Obama’s race was only a peripheral part of his general election success. Obama’s connection with African American voters was essential in his efforts to win the Democratic nomination from a well-known front runner who was thought to have a strong base among African American voters. Had Obama not been able to do this, he probably would not have been able to win the nomination. However, in the general election, being African American had very little direct effect on Obama’s victory. Had the race been closer, it is likely that the higher turnout among African American voters would have been decisive, but because the election was not particularly close, the only states where higher than normal turnout among African Americans seemed to make the difference for Obama were, Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia; and Obama would have won the election even without these states. Clearly, in some critical respects, the Republican Party is misreading the election results if they think the main reason Obama won was because of race. Equally importantly, Jindal’s background would play out very differently than Obama’s if he were the Republican nominee. First, South Asians are still too few in number to make an impact at the voting booth comparable to African Americans or Latinos, so Jindal would have to appeal to other groups. It is not clear how Jindal would be able to substantially increase Republican numbers among those African American and Latino voters because of his background, although, in fairness, it would be hard to do worse than McCain with these voters. For Jindal to help the Republican’s chances, then, he would need to help them among white voters, a majority of whom already supports the Republican Party. Jindal would have some appeal among the Republican base, but his personal story would be no more compelling among the Republican base than that of Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or a number of other possible socially conservative candidates. Essentially, while Jindal will not be able to move a significant number of non-white voters into the Republican column, the Republican hope is that Jindal’s presence on the ticket will send a message to swing voters who are largely, but not entirely, white that the Republican party is more diverse than it actually is and thus better attuned to today’s America. There is a certain logic to this approach, the problem is that it does not address the more serious problems which the Republican Party, and it ignores the central finding of the 2008 election. Obama’s victory was not just historic because Obama will become our first African American president, but it was also historic because it was a once in a generation defeat of an incumbent party. In this respect, as many have pointed out, the 2008 election looked something like 1932 and 1980, elections which were followed by landslide victories four years later and which ushered in a period of dominance by the Democratic and Republican parties respectively. The central problem which the Republican Party faces is not that they lack a young, dynamic nonwhite leader but that like the Democrats in 1980 and the Republicans in 1932, they are perceived as having failed and as being out of ideas. In this context, positioning Jindal to run in 2012, based on the notion that he could somehow become a Republican Obama, is more of a gimmick than a serious effort to move the party into the post-Bush era.

Original post:
Lincoln Mitchell: Bobby Jindal, the Republican Strategists and the Last Battle

Some excerpts from President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s remarks today at the National Governors Association in Philadelphia. Vice President-elect Biden: Over the course of the campaign, I had the opportunity to travel through many of your states. Often, I’d be on a bus, and one of you – or a local official – would point out local landmarks. And the commentary was almost always, “This used to be.”This “used to be” a steel mill. This town “used to be” the ceramics capital of America. This factory “used to” employ 1,200 people.  A company “used to have” their headquarters here. We’ll know we’ve turned the corner when we hear a lot less “This used to be…” and a lot more “this is going to be.”   We believe that, together, we can make this country again, in the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, a place “of beginnings, of projects, of vast designs and expectations.” Despite all of our challenges, I’m struck by how hopeful our nation remains…People understand the serious challenges we face – but they also believe that with leadership in Washington and in your states that gives people the chance to succeed – there’s nothing we can’t do. And from President-elect Obama: It always feels like a bit of a homecoming when I meet with governors. Because while I stand here today as President-elect, I will never forget the eight years I served in the state Senate in Illinois. It is in state and local government that the rubber hits the road. Of all our elected leaders, you are the ones people count on most to solve the problems in their communities and to help them get by in difficult times. And it’s your state governments that bear some of the toughest burdens when an economic crisis strikes.   To solve this crisis and to ease the burden on our states, we need action – and action now. That means passing an economic recovery plan for both Wall Street and Main Street that jumpstarts our economy, helps save or create two and a half million jobs, puts tax cuts into the pockets of hard-pressed middle class families, and makes a down payment on the investments we need to build a strong economy for years to come. But we also have to recognize that any true solution will not come from Washington alone. It will come from all of you. It will come from the White House and the State House working together every step of the way. That is the kind of strong partnership I intend to build as President of the United States. Today is our chance to lay the foundation for that partnership. Over the next few hours, I look forward to hearing about the problems you’re facing, learning about the work you’re doing, and discussing some of the ways we can work together to reduce health care costs, rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges, and schools, and ensure that more families can stay in their homes. But the partnership we begin here must not – and will not – end here. As President, I will not simply ask our nation’s governors to help implement our economic recovery plan. I will ask you to help design that plan. Because if we’re listening to our governors, we’ll not only be doing what’s right for our states, we’ll be doing what’s right for our country. That’s how we’ll grow our economy – from the bottom-up. And that’s how we’ll put America on the path to long-term prosperity.   It was Justice Brandeis who said, during a period of far greater turmoil in our markets, that one of the blessings of our democracy was that – and I quote – “a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory,” experimenting with innovative solutions to its economic problems. That is the spirit of courage and ingenuity that so many of you embody. And that is the spirit I want to reclaim in this country – one where our states are testing new ideas, where Washington is investing in what works, and where you and I are working in partnership to move this country forward. Thank you. And for those who were wondering, yes, Sarah Palin was there.

Original post: 
The National Governors Association

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s rock-star status could solidly position her to lead the Republican Party in four years, but former top Bush aide Karl Rove said the “marketplace of ideas” will ultimately decide her political future. “Republicans believe in markets, so the marketplace of ideas will decide what the answer [to her future] is,” Rove told NBC Tuesday. “These people are going to get out there, campaign, offer their ideas, offer themselves.”

Here is the original post: 
Rove: "Marketplace Of Ideas" Will Decide Palin’s Fate

Today’s the big day in Georgia, and we’re all pulling hard for a shocker from Orange to Blue Democrat Jim Martin. The race is going to come down to turnout - for Martin to win, it would take low turnout overall, coupled with relatively high turnout in the African-American community. It looks like turnout is fairly high, which may not bode well : About 100 residents had voted by 8 a.m. at Westminster Presbyterian Church in Snellville. An hour after voting started, there was no line and balloting took five minutes. But poll workers said the morning turnout was higher than they expected in a runoff. If you live in Georgia - if you know anyone who does live in Georgia and is a Democrat - please vote, please call them and get them to vote. A Martin victory is a long shot, but the potential reward is too great to leave any stone unturned. Sarah Palin was in the state recently, selling Saxby’s…well, something, and using precisely the same talking points she used to use for McCain :      Palin On Independence:        On CHAMBLISS: Saxby has not forgotten why he was sent to Washington. He has stayed true to his principles. Today those principles are needed more than ever. Senator Chambliss, he has such a strong, independent spirit . And that’s another reason I really like him.        On McCAIN: John McCain and I, what we represent is that maverick independent spirit that will not let the self-dealing and excessive partisanship get in the way of what’s right.    Palin On Herds:        On CHAMBLISS: Saxby doesn’t just run with the Washington herd .        On McCAIN: John is his own man. He doesn’t run with the Washington herd. Apparently all it takes to be a Maverick Independent is to vote down the line with the GOP, and play lots of golf. Meanwhile, here’s what others have to say about the Saxman. Iraq War Veteran Tammy Duckworth : In 2004, when I was flying my Blackhawk helicopter north of Baghdad and I got hit with that rocket-propelled grenade that blew up between my legs and took them off — and almost took off my right arm — the only thing that saved me was my buddies and the armor that I was wearing. … In his six years in the United States Senate, Saxby Chambliss has voted against providing armor for our troops. He has been against providing armored vehicles for our troops. And then, when my buddies and I came home, he has been against the G.I. Bill. Saxby continues not to know what a recession is, of course. And naturally, Wonkette is having a laugh : Here’s heavy-petting Saxby Chambliss defending himself, on the Fox News, against a Jim Martin ad that quotes Chambliss saying he doesn’t even know what the term “recession” means. We’ll cut him some slack on that, because a new person is declaring a new version of the word everyday. But what’s notable is that Chambliss defends his comment by saying that he was quoting Alan Greenspan, people. He appears still to think that this is the ’90s/early ’00s, when name-dropping Greenspan worked as a blanket defense against criticism or, more importantly, an excuse not to learn anything about economics. This caused several problems. On the web: Jim Martin for U.S. Senate Orange to Blue ActBlue Page MyBO Phonebanking

View original here: 
GA-Sen: Election Day!

Rahm Emanuel, President-elect Barack Obama’s White House Chief of Staff, spoke with reporters on the press plane after a meeting with governors from both parties. He gave some details on the private meeting between Obama and the governors. Reporters note that he was in high spirits. Emanuel: There was a consensus [among] Democratic and Republican governors about the need, given their economic situations, not just in their budgets but their economy, about the need for investments in infrastructure. Some talked about roads, bridges, sewer systems, new schools. Some talked about what I would call the infrastructure for a 21st century economy: Medical IT, broadband. A lot of the infrastructure was around green technology, some on … high speed rail, mass transit, that stuff. Consensus around that. After awhile there was also a discussion about getting the economy moving again and … not losing sight of our overall fiscal picture. Also talked about doing all this infrastructure but with reforms associated with them. Governor Schwarzenegger brought up the fact that when they had situations in California some people said it would take two years to rebuild bridges etc. [but] they were able to do it in a shorter period time because they cut through what he described as generically ‘red tape.’ The criticism about investment in infrastructure is, ‘Can it move fast enough.’ There’s a general sense if you put a lot of reforms in, you can move resources that are critical in a fast way if you cut through the normal periods of times and studies, etc. All of them agreed that they had projects today on the books pre-approved, ready to go whether that was the physical infrastructure of schools, roads, bridges, water systems, as well as other things that I would call 21st century infrastructure, medical IT, broadband … all of them had kind of a green technology, green infrastructure direction. There was Democrat, Republican consensus about that. Q: Jeff Mason: Consensus about what? That the federal government should fund that? A: No, no. They didn’t say anything about themselves not participating, as you all know all these investments are state and federal partnerships, but that the need for doing that in an Economic Recovery Act that Congress brings up and that it can’t be done quick enough for them. They need those resources, we need those resources. It’s good for the economy, it produces jobs immediately. I think Governor Kaine said - I don’t want to just cherry pick - but Governor Kaine said we’ve spent a lot of time in last couple of years investing in roads and bridges and schools in Iraq but denying those same investments here at home. We need to rebuild America, we need to build those critical areas today to do it and an Economic Recovery Act has to do that. If Congress, the 111th comes back, and they are already focused on this, but a recovery act that’s focused on infrastructure you have Democratic and Republican governors who see that as essential to own economic recovery in their states, and we see it as essential to the economic recovery for the country. There are some projects that are there, ready and have been pre-approved but never have gotten the resources to do it. In addition to that, a number of governors also noted that FEMA was not in good shape. Governor Bobby Jindal said a lot of stuff has been still from Katrina the money is appropriated but the papers are still not being processed to get the resources out. He couldn’t have been blunter that FEMA is not working. There was also a bipartisan sense … that one of the more important things you can do is get a FEMA that is operable and helps states process what needed to be processed to get a recovery, when you are hit with a natural catastrophe, up and running. Q: Did Napolitano weigh in? You all know FEMA is under the Department of Homeland Security so you have somebody who’s close at hand and somebody you all know and there was an applause done for her at that time. Q: So it was indicated to the governors that FEMA would remain under Homeland Security? A: Well it was indicated was the Department of Homeland Security Sec- Janet Napolitano. I didn’t we did not, nobody got into that subject -(interjection- “of whether or not it would”)- but it was no, that particular subject was not brought up. It was the general sense that FEMA was not responsive. And that it could do a better job and that was where it was set. Q: Is there anything that was brought up in the stimulus package that hadn’t been considered yet? A: I mean there were I mean there were other pieces like on the F-MAP (family medical assistance program) as it relates to helping states dealing with health care, how to do it in the different way. Those were good ideas. There was also discussion of the issue of mortgages, foreclosure, how to help states who have a pretty good. Uh Governor Corzine–I don’t want to read in, by naming names I’m also, other people had ideas so I’m not trying to shortchange them ok? Uh he had an idea about some (inaudible) it’s a lot of their states also help people in the kind of moderate to low income housing. They have the home bondage, they are very good at how maybe Freddie and Fannie help to buy that so they can continue to keep the housing market growing and get back to growing. So that was one idea. I got um an idea from Governor Gibbons of Nevada who wrote something down and I have yet to look at it, it’s in my bag he just gave it to me. So the mortgages were discussed the state budgets were discussed. The healthcare, I don’t want to call if F-MAP the state and federal, children’s healthcare was discussed and the need to move on that. The first half of the discussion was all about what I would call the infrastructure, green infrastructure, physical infrastructure, 21st century infrastructure in that area and then those were things that were related to the economy. Q: Is the figure 136 Billion acceptable to you? You know that they named, as a figure they want for infrastructure, is that in the ballpark? A: I think what they said and I have to go back and look at my notes. The number that Schwarzenegger had was the number of pre-approved, ready-to-go projects that’s what it was limited to but they got stuff that if given they could get going today they wouldn’t have to go through studies. You know that’s 136 billion dollars (press: billion or million?) Billion. Did I say million? B-i-l-l-i-o-n. I was going to say a joke but I’m going to leave it right there. (Inaudible crosstalk) No, it was 136 billion–the reason I’m a little leery is I think Schwarzenegger said 128. I want to go back and look at my notes. Lets just take it in that ballpark of stuff that’s ready to go today, doesn’t require any more analysis. If you’ve got the resources people would be begin to work in short order of time. Q: Is that a figure that you think will be funded in this recovery package? A: You can see through all the stuff that’s out there that I have seen etcetera. The top priority is to invest in these areas. There is a you know if you look at it over a long (inaudible) what used to be discussed as you had to make investments in the rebuilding of America I’ll just call it that. A lot of people say you know ‘it doesn’t happen, it takes too long.’ There’s now a consensus that we’ve for a long time had deny our investments in our critical needs of road of moving our goods and services be that uh refurbished schools, our water treatment facilities, our roads, our bridges, our mass-transit system, our 21st century infrastructure, universal broadband, medical ID, that if we did that we would be a more productive economy. And that was shared by governors of both parties. Q: What about the 40 Billion in Medicaid they’re seeking? A: Well that was one of the things they talked about but that figure did not come up in the latter half of the discussion. The need for reforms but also of meeting the critical needs given that the economy is now in a recession, of more people that would be coming out of the states. Q: Is that what they want for the current year? Is that something you all would be willing to do? A: I mean we’re going to review all of that, I mean that’s we’ve got to talk and consultation and all the members of the House and Senate are gonna be you know hearing from their governors. One of the things he did say I mean, let me back up a little. Is they were all very clear they were going to be talking to their delegations, not just Congressional but Senate about the need to move quickly to the 111th. As Emanuel left the press section, reporters asked about immigration, Sarah Palin, but he gave no more answers.

Original post: 
Obama Governors’ Meeting: Emanuel Shares Details

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia’s Republican chairman said Tuesday that his remark tying Democrat Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden during the presidential campaign was stupid, but he refused to apologize. During the campaign, GOP head Jeff Frederick told a small group of Republican volunteers that “both Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden have friends that have bombed the Pentagon.” The remark, a reference to Obama’s ties years ago to 1960s-era radical William Ayers, was condemned by Democrats and Republicans after it was published in Time magazine. Ayers was a founder of the Weather Underground, a radical, Vietnam War-era group that claimed responsibility for a series of bombings, including nonfatal explosions at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. Frederick was asked about the remark Tuesday during a discussion of the 2008 Virginia presidential campaign with a group of newspaper editors. Obama was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia in 44 years. “It was a stupid joke I gave to somebody in a small crowd of people and that’s what happens,” Frederick said. “But you know, it’s really unfortunate. We live in a `gotcha’ society.” Frederick said he got hate mail, angry phone calls and vicious e-mails for weeks. Even so, he stood by the comment Tuesday, defending it as true and saying he was taking cues from Republican John McCain’s campaign after running mate Sarah Palin said Obama had been “palling around with terrorists.” “The McCain campaign, for quite a while, was getting on me about not being on message, about not delivering their talking points,” Frederick said. “And in an effort to do more of what they wanted … I was doing that, and the Ayers talking point came out.”

See original here:
VA GOP Chair: Tying Obama To Osama Was Stupid But True

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia’s Republican chairman said Tuesday that his remark tying Democrat Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden during the presidential campaign was stupid, but he refused to apologize. During the campaign, GOP head Jeff Frederick told a small group of Republican volunteers that “both Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden have friends that have bombed the Pentagon.” The remark, a reference to Obama’s ties years ago to 1960s-era radical William Ayers, was condemned by Democrats and Republicans after it was published in Time magazine. Ayers was a founder of the Weather Underground, a radical, Vietnam War-era group that claimed responsibility for a series of bombings, including nonfatal explosions at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. Frederick was asked about the remark Tuesday during a discussion of the 2008 Virginia presidential campaign with a group of newspaper editors. Obama was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia in 44 years. “It was a stupid joke I gave to somebody in a small crowd of people and that’s what happens,” Frederick said. “But you know, it’s really unfortunate. We live in a `gotcha’ society.” Frederick said he got hate mail, angry phone calls and vicious e-mails for weeks. Even so, he stood by the comment Tuesday, defending it as true and saying he was taking cues from Republican John McCain’s campaign after running mate Sarah Palin said Obama had been “palling around with terrorists.” “The McCain campaign, for quite a while, was getting on me about not being on message, about not delivering their talking points,” Frederick said. “And in an effort to do more of what they wanted … I was doing that, and the Ayers talking point came out.”

Read the original here:
VA GOP Chair: Tying Obama To Osama Was Stupid But True

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia’s Republican chairman said Tuesday that his remark tying Democrat Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden during the presidential campaign was stupid, but he refused to apologize. During the campaign, GOP head Jeff Frederick told a small group of Republican volunteers that “both Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden have friends that have bombed the Pentagon.” The remark, a reference to Obama’s ties years ago to 1960s-era radical William Ayers, was condemned by Democrats and Republicans after it was published in Time magazine. Ayers was a founder of the Weather Underground, a radical, Vietnam War-era group that claimed responsibility for a series of bombings, including nonfatal explosions at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. Frederick was asked about the remark Tuesday during a discussion of the 2008 Virginia presidential campaign with a group of newspaper editors. Obama was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia in 44 years. “It was a stupid joke I gave to somebody in a small crowd of people and that’s what happens,” Frederick said. “But you know, it’s really unfortunate. We live in a `gotcha’ society.” Frederick said he got hate mail, angry phone calls and vicious e-mails for weeks. Even so, he stood by the comment Tuesday, defending it as true and saying he was taking cues from Republican John McCain’s campaign after running mate Sarah Palin said Obama had been “palling around with terrorists.” “The McCain campaign, for quite a while, was getting on me about not being on message, about not delivering their talking points,” Frederick said. “And in an effort to do more of what they wanted … I was doing that, and the Ayers talking point came out.”

Read the original post: 
VA GOP Chair: Tying Obama To Osama Was Stupid But True

Now what? by Dave Hackel The obvious answer to “Now what?” is “Who the hell knows?” But I made a wish list. Barack Obama : You’ve excited this country. Thank you. You’ve given a new generation of voters the exhilarating feeling that they matter. That’s invaluable. So, from this point forward your job is pretty clear - do your best to make good on the promises you’ve made. They excited us, so we remember them all. And if you find that you’re unable to keep a promise, talk to us. You’re welcome to do so without any pre-conditions. You’ve gained our enthusiastic trust. You’ll keep every bit of it if your actions continue to earn it. John McCain : Try to remember the best of who you used to be, then go back to the Senate and be that way again. Those you disappointed with your “low road” presidential campaign will forgive you. They’ll forgive you for the eye-rolls, the inappropriate grins and for rendering the “thumbs-up” gesture totally meaningless. They might even forgive you for Sarah Palin. Though that’s going to be a tough one. Do you really think she’s the foremost expert on energy issues in the entire United States? Did you honestly think she was ready to lead this nation? Please, Senator McCain, be honest with yourself. Then, my friend, if anyone ever seeks your opinion on anything again try being honest with all of us. Sarah Palin: Go back to Alaska and get some well-deserved rest. Then once the dust has settled, take a look at footage of yourself on the campaign trail. I think you’ll see why people were so worried. And if the stars misalign and you do somehow remain a national political figure, it might be very helpful for you to have at least a cursory understanding of the Constitution and world political and economic issues. You might be a nice person, but you were in way over your head. You see, we don’t want our leaders to be “just like us.” We want them to be much better. In your heart of hearts, don’t you? Joe Biden : Take a deep breath. In fact, take one before answering every single question that’s ever posed to you. That way you’ll have a better chance of reminding us all how smart and caring you are. As you’ve pointed out many times, the world is balancing on a dangerous precipice. You’re a brilliant foreign policy expert and your president will need your counsel. We all will. George Bush : Be ashamed of yourself. Be very ashamed at what you’ve done and have allowed to be done to this country. You’re fond of saying that history will judge you “in the future.” I think you’re right. And, even though it’s hard to believe, I think that the harshness of that judgment will grow with each passing year. Now that your strings have been cut, look up and join the rest of us as we take a very fearful look at your puppeteers. You’re all complicit in the moral and economic bankruptcy of our great country. Dick Cheney : Please go away. Would that the number of years you’ve served your country eclipsed the number of lives you’ve helped to ruin. But, alas, that’s not the case. If you ever were a good man, you’ve lost your way. In fact, at this point those who refer to you as Darth Vader are demeaning the good name of the evil lord from the dark side the Force. Hillary Clinton : Thank you for being so smart. Your campaign helped to open up national politics in an exciting way. And not just for women — for everyone. So please, whether you go back to the Senate or to the State Department, continue to make a difference. No, your desk’s not going to be in the Oval Office, but hopefully President Obama will ask you to visit him there often and give him your wise council. Bill Clinton : Please continue to be available. Our new President will need you to share your uncanny ability to navigate the roiling waters of our imperfect governmental process. And please continue your work around the world for those less fortunate. People need to know that they’re cared about. And you seem to understand that in these troubled times there is no currency more highly valued than kindness. Sean Hannity : Quit spreading hate. Yes, you do. It’s your right to disagree with whomever you please, but I’ve got to tell you - the way you do it makes you seem kind of smarmy. Yes, it does. You tell your listeners that objective journalism has died. If that’s true, you’re one of its primary assassins. You see, Sean, it’s just not objective to present lies as questions and then answer them yourself. Otherwise it would be okay to say something horrible like, “I’m not saying Sean Hannity is a racist, anti-Semitic bully, but if he were - wouldn’t we all like to know?” You employ that tactic all the time. Yes, you do. Oh, by the way - you say that even if we disagree with our President we have to respect the office and not make derisive comments about him. I’ll expect you to hold yourself to that standard when it comes to President Obama. Let not your heart be troubled - he’s going to do a great job…even for you. Keith Olberman : Thank you for fighting the good fight. You’ve been an island in a sea of insanity. So please stay right where you are. Fox isn’t going away so we need you. But maybe take it down just a notch. Let those on the extreme right sell crazy to their minions. All yours need is the truth. And, time and time again, you’ve proven to be a great salesman for that rare product. Rant on. Bill O’Reilly : When you take up the cause of abused children you can honestly claim that “you’re looking out for us.” And for that, we thank you. But when you attack people just because they choose to disagree with you, you’re only looking out for you. So how about trying to be more tolerant and less smug? Remember, all that money that Rupert Murdoch pays you makes you a richer man - not a better one. Rush Limbaugh : Call Dick Cheney. Find out where he’s going and go there with him. You can have a money-counting contest and then go hunting. Then at night you can sit by the fire and read to each other from the Bill Of Rights. It’s always exciting to learn something new. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, CNBC, and MSNBC : Be even better at what you do. Find a higher standard and hold yourselves to it. FOX : I know you won’t go away, so how about this? Quit using the phrase “fair and balanced.” You’re not. And quit calling yourself Fox “News.” Except with rare exception - perhaps Shepard Smith — you don’t deliver any news. You deliver the right wing talking points that you say you don’t receive. Yes, you do. The rest of us : Thanks to our recent election, we’ve got a toehold into a better democracy. So let’s just keep climbing. Yes, we can.

See more here:
Dave Hackel: Not What?

I watched Obama’s press conference announcing his National Security team yesterday, and I was struck by our president-elect’s team-building skills. Hillary Clinton was warmly and honorably named to one of the most prestigious appointments in his cabinet, but she wasn’t singled out with the genuflecting the Clintons had come to expect–and she didn’t project that arrogance. On yesterday’s stage, Hillary had become part of Obama’s inclusive and what-seemed-like-already-jelled team. Plus, in a moment of what I hope proves to be an inspired choice for Secretary of State, he gave the Clintons a lesson in generosity and class. I was caught up in the vibe that the good of our country was supremely being served; more than that, the good of the world was being fashioned right in front of our very eyes. Barack Obama ran an inspired and brilliant presidential campaign. I never lost faith with his strategy or choices then, and I’m trusting that he’s made all the right appointments now. Every single member of his new team was sending out that energy–team energy–in his or her body language, mannerisms, facial expressions, and in their entire comportment, while Obama was unequivocally the man in charge. All the critics who made fun of Obama’s community organizing experience ( Sarah Palin , are you listening?) were toothless wonders. That hard-won experience is going to help him successfully organize the community of the world. Beth Arnold lives and writes in Paris. To see more of her work, check out: www.betharnold.com .

Here is the original post: 
Beth Arnold: Hillary’s Best Incarnation Yet (Hail to the Community Organizer-in-Chief!)

President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden met in Philadelphia Tuesday morning with a bipartisan delegation of governors from around the country hosted by the National Governors Association. Biden’s remarks: Thank you, Governor Rendell and Governor Douglas. And Governor Palin, your being here today sends a powerful message that when campaigns end, we are all partners in progress. Thank you. I always love events where seating is done by when your state entered the union. That’s when it’s good to be a Delawarean, and it’s good to see Governor-elect Jack Markell here. Over the course of the campaign, I had the opportunity to travel through many of your states. Often, I’d be on a bus, and one of you - or a local official - would point out local landmarks. And the commentary was almost always, “This used to be.” This “used to be” a steel mill. This town “used to be” the ceramics capital of America. This factory “used to” employ 1,200 people. A company “used to have” their headquarters here. We’ll know we’ve turned the corner when we hear a lot less “This used to be…” and a lot more “this is going to be.” In order to get to “This is going to be” we need to build a partnership with you - that is much more robust and much deeper. And in doing that, the partnership we’re able to build with all of you is crucial. Eric Sevareid once told President Kennedy that: “It doesn’t make much sense when two people are sitting in a boat for one of them to point a finger accusingly at the other and say `your end of the boat is sinking.’” Our nation can’t succeed unless our states succeed. Barack and I recognize this. And we recognize that you’ve all been incredibly hard hit by this economic crisis. Already 41 states are looking at budget shortfalls this year or next. That is why help for you - everything from direct aid, to countercyclical investments, to benefit programs, to infrastructure investment - will be key parts of our economic plan. On infrastructure specifically, we have a huge opportunity. China invests 7-9 percent of its GDP in infrastructure projects. We invest just 1 percent. There’s a reason they have a mag-lev train that can go over 200 miles per hour. I may have a bit of a pro-rail bias, but think of the jobs we could create - in both construction and innovation - if we made similarly bold investments here. We should fast-track funding for the thousands of ready-to-go projects across the country that can quickly put people back to work and lay the foundation for long-term growth. In the longer term, we are calling for the creation of a new National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will help us make the investments we need to build a 21st century transportation system - while creating jobs and taking the politics out of infrastructure spending. And it has the added benefit of making American business more competitive in the world. We believe that, together, we can make this country again, in the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, a place “of beginnings, of projects, of vast designs and expectations.” Despite all of our challenges, I’m struck by how hopeful our nation remains… … People understand the serious challenges we face - but they also believe that with leadership in Washington and in your states that gives people the chance to succeed - there’s nothing we can’t do. We should view this moment of challenge as a moment of great opportunity — Perhaps most importantly, Barack understands that change is a means, and not an end. And together, we can change “this used to be” into “this is going to be.” It is now my pleasure to introduce a man who has inspired this nation, and who I am honored to join as a partner in leading this nation. Please join me in welcoming President-elect Barack Obama. Obama’s remarks: Good morning. It always feels like a bit of a homecoming when I meet with governors. Because while I stand here today as President-elect, I will never forget the eight years I served in the state Senate in Illinois. It is in state and local government that the rubber hits the road. Of all our elected leaders, you are the ones people count on most to solve the problems in their communities and to help them get by in difficult times. And it’s your state governments that bear some of the toughest burdens when an economic crisis strikes. That is what we’re seeing today. Every one of you is struggling to come up with a budget at a time when you’re facing great and growing needs. More and more people are turning to you for help with health care or affordable housing - even as tightening credit markets and falling tax revenues make it more and more difficult to provide that help. Forty-one states are likely to face budget shortfalls this year or next, forcing you to choose between reining in spending and raising taxes. Jobs are being cut. Programs for the needy are at risk. Libraries, parks, and historic sites are being closed. Right here in Philadelphia, over two hundred workers are being laid off - and hundreds more unfilled positions are being eliminated. Meanwhile, virtually all of you are facing the additional challenge of a state constitution that requires you to balance your budget, leaving you with the impossible choice of either helping families at the risk of violating your constitution or upholding your constitution at the expense of helping families. To solve this crisis and to ease the burden on our states, we need action - and action now. That means passing an economic recovery plan for both Wall Street and Main Street that jumpstarts our economy, helps save or create two and a half million jobs, puts tax cuts into the pockets of hard-pressed middle class families, and makes a down payment on the investments we need to build a strong economy for years to come. But we also have to recognize that any true solution will not come from Washington alone. It will come from all of you. It will come from the White House and the State House working together every step of the way. That is the kind of strong partnership I intend to build as President of the United States. Today is our chance to lay the foundation for that partnership. Over the next few hours, I look forward to hearing about the problems you’re facing, learning about the work you’re doing, and discussing some of the ways we can work together to reduce health care costs, rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges, and schools, and ensure that more families can stay in their homes. But the partnership we begin here must not - and will not - end here. As President, I will not simply ask our nation’s governors to help implement our economic recovery plan. I will ask you to help design that plan. Because if we’re listening to our governors, we’ll not only be doing what’s right for our states, we’ll be doing what’s right for our country. That’s how we’ll grow our economy - from the bottom-up. And that’s how we’ll put America on the path to long-term prosperity. Make no mistake: these are difficult times, and we’re going to have to make hard choices in the months ahead about how to invest precious tax dollars and how to save them - hard choices like the ones you’re making right now. I won’t stand here and tell you that you’ll like all the decisions I make. You probably won’t. But I promise you this - as President, I will seek your counsel. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And we will once again be true partners in the work of rebuilding our economy, strengthening our states, and lifting up our entire country. To our Republican colleagues, let me just say a special word. I offer you the same hand of friendship and cooperation that I offer our Democratic governors. We have a strong and vibrant democracy. We compete vigorously during an election. But with the end of that season comes the time to govern together - and that time is now. It was Justice Brandeis who said, during a period of far greater turmoil in our markets, that one of the blessings of our democracy was that - and I quote - “a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory,” experimenting with innovative solutions to its economic problems. That is the spirit of courage and ingenuity that so many of you embody. And that is the spirit I want to reclaim in this country - one where our states are testing new ideas, where Washington is investing in what works, and where you and I are working in partnership to move this country forward. Thank you.

Read the rest here: 
Obama, Biden Governors Meeting Statements

Jon Stewart declared MSNBC the new Fox News Monday night on “The Daily Show,” saying MSNBC has stepped up to be “the mouthpiece of this new administration.” Stewart ran down a list of MSNBC’s “foot-soldiers” and their Fox News equivalents: Chris Matthews and Bill O’Reilly : “freakishly oversized, ruddy-faced Irish multi-millionaire still clinging to his blue collar roots — and it helps if he’s quick to anger” Keith Olbermann and Sean Hannity : “partisan ideologue who fears for the world if it’s in any way touched by the hands of his political enemies” Joe Scarborough and Alan Colmes : “token from the other side of the aisle, a good-hearted yet somewhat hapless fellow who exists purely to give drunks in bars a name to shout out when they’re in arguments over your network’s ideological purity” Rachel Maddow and Steve Doocy : “complex eloquent even-tempered lady” But as Stewart pointed out, citing their recent ad depicting a dark, change-filled world , Fox News won’t go down without a fight. Stewart summarized the ad as follow: “Stay with Fox News: we will protect you from raging fire, Iranian nut jobs, angry gay lovers, and the Jew whispering to the black man.” Watch: The Daily Show With Jon Stewart M - Th 11p / 10c MSNBC Replaces Fox News Barack Obama Interview John McCain Interview Sarah Palin Video Funny Election Video

See original here: 
Jon Stewart: MSNBC Is The New Fox News

Tuesday is election day in Georgia, and voters will go to the polls to either choose newer, progressive representation in the United States Senate, or return a man to the Senate so embarrassing to Republicans that even FOX’s own Chris Wallace is forced to skewer him: Democrat Jim Martin has had some great people stumping on his behalf, like retired Gen. Claudia Kennedy: Kennedy is the first female three-star general in the U-S Amy and is reaching out to veterans for Martin who served in Vietnam. “Jim Martin believes that we should have better body armor for our soldiers and should have better G. I. Bill benefits,” said Kennedy. Things that are also important to Alva James, who is also Vietnam veteran. “I have some veteran friends who are really in need of medical help.” “Jim Martin has gone to war and he knows the impact that it has on people,and knows the importance of having a strong veteran affairs program,” said Kennedy. Today, Sarah Palin will be Chamblissing in metro Atlanta (and fundraising at “tony hotels”…so Martin counters by campaigning all over the state, with a sharper and shrewder political mind, that of musician (and Atlanta native) Chris “Ludacris” Bridges: Palin will appear at public rallies in Augusta, Savannah and Perry, and in metro Atlanta at the Gwinnett Center at 4 p.m. Jim Martin will spend the day on a statewide bus tour that will take him from a MARTA stop in Atlanta in the morning to Augusta, then Macon and back to a rally at the state Capitol at 5:30 p.m. with civil rights veterans and hip-hop star Ludacris. Given the early-voting numbers among African-Americans, Martin needed to shore up support among the AA community, and it seems he’s certainly working on that, campaigning with civil-rights legend John Lewis and fellow Representative Bennie Thompson: At historically black Morris Brown College, surrounded by former Barack Obama campaign staffers and African American Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the normally unassuming, bespectacled white lawyer had discovered his inner preacher. “We’re all in this together!” Martin, 63, intoned. “Talk to me!” a man shouted in response. “The Republicans believe if they have 41 votes in the Senate, they can stop this great president!” “That’s right!” “Now this isn’t Landslide Jim you’re talking to,” Martin said. “I need your help.” President-elect Obama isn’t coming to Georgia any time soon, but his Georgia field team is still in the state, working to get out every last vote. If Jim Martin can win this thing, he needs your help. If you haven’t called, call for him. If you have called, call some more. If you can’t call, donate. And keep your fingers crossed. More to come. On the web: On the web: Jim Martin for U.S. Senate Orange to Blue ActBlue Page MyBO Phonebanking

Read the original:
GA-Sen: Election Day is tomorrow

There’s an old inside-the-Beltway joke where a new House member is being shown around by a veteran of his own party. He is awed by entering the House floor for the first time, and is shown his new seat. He asks, pointing across the aisle to where the other party sits, “Is that where the enemy sits?” The older and wiser Congressman replies, “No, no, here in the House of Representatives we call our opponents ‘the loyal opposition.’ You’re new, so you need to understand this. ‘The enemy’ is the Senate.” This joke came to mind while listening and reading to Republicans talk about tomorrow’s runoff race between the incumbent Saxby Chambliss and his Democratic challenger Jim Martin. Because they’re using a talking point which is false and which points out their own ignorance. And since it is ignorance we speak of, where better to begin than a Sarah Palin quote? (Ahem.) Here she is today, at a rally in Georgia on “Saxby’s” behalf (others have pointed out that she never used Chambliss’ last name, but I refuse to believe it was because she can’t pronounce it): We need Saxby because we need checks and balances in Washington. And we will not have that if Saxby is not reelected, Georgia. With one party in control of the House and the Senate and the White House we need a conservative who will speak for themselves. Putting aside how “Saxby” (singular) morphs into “themselves” (plural), notice the phrase “checks and balances” and how it is being used. It’s not just Palin, either. Here is the Savannah Morning News’ “SavannahNow” webpage, with the paper’s runoff endorsements : Returning Mr. Chambliss to the Senate means Democratic leaders won’t be able to ramrod bills through the upper chamber without serious deliberation. Checks and balances still have places in Washington, despite impressive wins at the polls by President-elect Obama and other Democrats. And, finally, here is the candidate himself on “Fox News Sunday” yesterday , being interviewed by Chris Wallace: WALLACE: But you have campaigned against the president-elect and the Democrats. I want to take a look at something you said a few days ago. “If the Minnesota race was lost and this race was lost, then they,” meaning the Democrats, “will have a blank check.” CHAMBLISS: That’s exactly right. And Jim Martin, my opponent, is committed to doing everything that the president-elect wants him to do. And I’m simply not going to do that. You know, our government was based on a check and balance system: the administrative, legislative, judicial. Within the legislative, we’ve always had a check and balance by design. And if we give him a blank check, then I think it will not be in the best interests of the country and I will continue to promote that over the next 72 hours. This is either astounding ignorance from a sitting Senator, or else a Republican-spun talking point which everyone coincidentally seems to be using. But, either way, the concept of having enough party strength in the Senate to filibuster bills simply was not a founding principle of the U.S. government. The word “filibuster” appears nowhere in the Constitution. The first filibuster didn’t even happen until 1841. Rules for filibusters were worked out by the Senate (and then subsequently eviscerated by the concept of “closure” later). So there is just no factual basis for saying “we’ve always” had such “a check and balance by design.” Because we haven’t. Checks and balances are a different thing entirely. They have largely been absent for the last eight years, so I suppose it shouldn’t be any wonder that Republicans have forgotten what the phrase originally meant. Checks and balances refer to the struggle for power between our three branches of government. Some powers are given to one branch or another with no such check or balance (such as the power to pardon, given to the president). These absolute powers are checks and balances — such as the power of the Congress to impeach and remove the president. Some of these absolute powers (astonishingly enough) have even been given away from one branch to another (Congress’ power to declare war, for instance, since World War II). And sometimes power grabs or power abdications by one branch or another actually realign the checks-and-balances structure of the government itself (see: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s term in office). Every day of Bush’s term has seemingly been a series of power grabs by the Executive Branch which go largely ignored by the Legislative Branch (see, just from last week: Bush’s new Status Of Forces Agreement with Iraq, which should have been voted on in the Senate as a treaty, but was not). This, at first, was aided and abetted by a friendly Congress of his own party, and (later) by the weakness of the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. But the real check and balance of the Legislative Branch over the president is what is commonly referred to as “oversight.” That, and the fact that the president doesn’t get to write the text of the laws, he merely gets to sign them or veto them as written. The entire concept of oversight has been woefully absent from Washington for the past eight years. The concept is that the Legislative Branch oversees what the Executive Branch is doing for the good of the country — no matter what party is in power in either branch . Anyone who believes this is not possible need only look back to Bill Clinton’s first two years, or Jimmy Carter’s term in office. Even though the Congress was Democratic, they still were not rubber stamps for every action of the President. Democrats in Congress will need to perform oversight of Barack Obama, whether they have a 60-vote majority in the Senate or not. Just as any Congress is supposed to, without regard to party. This transcends party affiliation, in other words. It’s not hard to see why Republicans have a hard time grasping this concept, but whether the Senate is 60/40 or merely 58/42 should not matter to the “checks and balances” they provide for the other two branches of government. I certainly didn’t hear any hand-wringing about checks and balances when Republicans took over both houses of Congress during George Bush’s watch. Of course, getting 60 seats in the Senate would change the dynamic of one single branch, but that really has nothing to do with constitutional “checks and balances.” It has much more to do with passing a single party’s agenda, and the relative power of the “out” party’s ability to influence or block such legislation. But this has nothing to do with how the Framers set up our government. Checks and balances do not equate to the relative balance of power between political parties. They are more important than that. Just because we haven’t seen much of them in eight years does not mean we should lose sight of the definition of the term itself. Political parties were originally seen as a corrosive influence on American politics, by none other than our very first leader. Here is President George Washington, talking about political parties: They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests. However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion. . . . The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty. So whether Saxby Chambliss retains his seat or not (at this point, it’s looking like he is going to win tomorrow), the checks and balances of American government will not be in peril. The ease of passing legislation in the Senate may be impacted, but there are still a few moderate Republicans (such as both of Maine’s senators) who might be induced to vote for Democratic proposals, so even that is doubtful. But I’m not too worried about whether checks and balances will disappear if Republicans don’t have more than 40 seats in the Senate. Because true checks and balances are more fundamental than party affiliation. And the fact that Republicans obviously don’t see it this way is but one more condemnation of the way both George Bush and Congressional Republicans view how our government is supposed to work — and how they attempted to govern while in power.   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  

Read the rest here: 
Chris Weigant: Political Parties Are Not "Checks" Or "Balances"

One of the greatest disappointments of November 4 was Wyoming, where one of our best Congressional candidates–Gary Trauner–couldn’t overcome the Republican flood of a presidential election vote. But there’s a very good bit of news out of that state with a Democratic legislative pick-up, coming by way of a highly unusual revote. Democrat Jim Roscoe, a home builder, marathoner and former ski patrolman who has never run for public office ran for the open District 22 seat in the state House against Republican Charles Stough, a recent transplant. Roscoe won in the general election in a complete squeaker, by just four votes– 2,991 2,891 to 2,887. But then it got kind of hinkey. Joe Albright, Teton County Democratic State Committeeman, explained what happened in an e-mail: Even though John McCain and Sarah Palin carried the legislative district with 60.2 % of the vote on Nov. 4, Roscoe manage to run more than 10 percent ahead of the Obama-Biden ticket. He won just enough to carry the legislative district by four votes on Nov. 4. But then the Republicans managed to find that in the Alpine precinct in the Lincoln County portion of the district, the election judges mistakenly allowed 11 voters to vote even though they lived in the adjoining legislative district. (As it turned out, all three of the election judges in Alpine that day were Republicans.) The upshot was an order Nov. 12 from the State Canvassing Board that new election had to be held Nov. 25 in the Alpine precinct where the 11 registration errors occurred. Calling for a revote in a situation like this is highly unusual, and the Republicans were probably certain that, with just a four vote margin, they could get this one back. This district was created expressly to keep a Democrat out of the House. Here’s Joe’s description of it: The district he won was a classically cynical Republican gerrymander, created by Republican state legislature after the 2000 census to be Republican forever. Intent on diluting the voting strength of the progressive town of Wilson in Teton County, the Republicans in the Legislature created House District 22 by slicing off half of Wilson and combining it with a heavily Republican swath of Lincoln and Sublette Counties. Until now, neither Lincoln or Sublette have ever been represented in the Wyoming legislature by a Democrat, at least as far as anyone can recall. Roscoe won the revote by a 320-163 margin, on the basis of an energetic door-to-door campaign. He got almost every one of the voters who had voted for him in the general election to come back out and vote again, while the Republican turnout was dismal. It handily decided the race. Wyoming Democrats still have a huge deficit in the state House. Republicans will have a 41-19 seat advantage over Democrats. But this win in one of the toughest districts in the state is reason to hope. This is the second House seat to flip in Wyoming in 2008. State party chair Bill Luckett is optimistic , something he probably didn’t think he’d be feeling about Wyoming when he woke up on November 5: “It just shows what we can do when we get a really good candidate who worked really hard to get his message out to the voters,” Luckett said. “It’s not rocket science, but it’s not easy when you start with a D next to your name.” That’s harder to accomplish state-wide in a presidential year, as we found out with Gary’s race, where a really good candidate worked really hard but couldn’t stem the tide. Roscoe’s win provides a little salve to the hurt of that loss. It’s also great news looking forward in Wyoming. Wins like this will help more as the state Dems are finally getting a solid farm-team building.

Here is the original post:
A New Spot of Blue in Wyoming

Dear Latter Day Saints, I couldn’t help but be impressed by your swift mobilization in support of Prop. 8, and even more so, your unstoppable stand in sanctifying marriage. Indeed, your Church has become a shining example for the kind of moral stance this country must adopt in ushering in a new era. For that reason, I want to propose that the Church take its position one step further. As much as I hate to admit it, the gays have a point when they say, “Hey! Sanctity of marriage, my tush! Just look at all those shotgun weddings and failed marriages and abusive marriages and unfaithful marriages! Let’s talk about then sanctity of marriage a minute.” Indeed, the gays have a big point when they say this. So this whole paradox has really been keeping me up at night, and I finally came up with a solution. The scenario goes something like this: All U.S. marriages shall be rescinded, whether between man and man, woman and woman, or — here goes — woman and man. They shall be reinstated only once the couple applies to and has their marriage sanctified by the U.S. government, which is, in this scenario, a bit of a puppet (a good puppet!) of the Church and its friends. Now you guys are going to be experts at mashing up the details of this whole operation. I’m sure there’s a whole psalm in the Book of Mormon about all this, or fiat, or style guide. But here are a few of my thoughts, in no particular order. Clearly the first questions will be: “Are you a man?” and “Is your wife a woman?” You’ll have to lay out some ground rules for… well… validating those claims. We don’t want any funny business! Especially from a community so used to screwing with nature! (Maybe a marriage-certified doctor’s note would do?) Then there are maybe some letters of recommendations. Credit checks. Assessments by qualified Sanctifiers as to the long-term childbearing goals of the couple in question. And Sanctifiers… I almost forgot to mention them. They’re elected officials, who basically give the Green Light to couples that wish to marry, and like all elected U.S. officials, there will have to be some comprehensive background checking. I think Joe Biden would make a really good Sanctifier, or maybe even Sarah Palin. They agree the gay marriage is right out, and those choices would appeal to both sides of the aisle. Like I said, you guys are pros at this. I trust your judgment a hundred and ten percent in the refining of the details and strictures. I just want to emphasize that this should be an intensive process due to many of the best of us just won’t qualify to be married. (My boyfriend’s in my bed right now doing a striptease, almost a testament to our hopeless perversion. (He even found this ridiculous Barack Obama thong that just cracks me… and him up.) Hey, we know we’re sick! We’re the first to fess up to the fact that if we had children, we’d molest them and screw up all their instinctual notions about putting a square peg in a round hole, and things like that.) And that’s okay. The point is, we know ourselves well enough to know we should just continue living in sin. We stay away from children, we keep our perversion really discreet (none of that garish hand-holding stuff), and we let the righteous shine a light for us. We’re on the same page. This isn’t going to be easy. But who am I kidding? You Latter Day Saints have never had it easy. So in short, if we’re going to play fair, treat everybody like “equals,” like the Constitution says, we need to take away not only the gay couples’ “rights,” but the rights of all couples who don’t qualify. Only then can we say truly that marriage is a sacred institution. Godspeed and keep up the good work ;-), Johnathan Wilber

Original post: 
Johnathan Wilber: An Open Letter to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

THE COLLEGE BOARD CRISIS By Nicolaus Mills While the crisis of confidence in the nation’s banking system has been capturing headlines this fall, a second crisis in confidence—this one on the reliability of the standardized tests (SAT and ACT) used by most colleges and universities in their admissions process—has been going on just below the radar. This second crisis is no small matter, especially if you are a high school senior trying to get into highly competitive public or private school. Every year increasing numbers of students (1.5 million took the SAT in 2007) take these standardized admissions tests, hoping that high scores will get them into the college of their choice and help them win scholarships. The pressure to do well on these tests is so great that they have spawned a test preparation industry in which charges run as high as $1,500 for 24 hours of small-group tutoring and between $150 and $750 an hour for one-on-one tutoring. Colleges, fearful of losing out to rivals or not getting a high ranking in the widely read, annual U.S. News & World Report on higher education, have also gotten caught up in the test-preparation sweepstakes. This year Baylor University in Waco, Texas, offered its incoming freshmen a $300 credit at its campus bookstore if they retook their SAT’s, and Baylor students who raised their test score by 50 points were rewarded with a $1,000-a-year merit scholarship. Behind this crisis over standardized testing is the growing b elief, as William R. Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions at Harvard, observed, that standardized tests are “incredibly imprecise” at measuring academic ability and predicting how well a student will perform in four years of college. This fall at the annual meeting of the 11,000-member National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), the doubts of admissions directors such as Fitzsimmons took center stage. NACAC members were, however, willing to do more than just voice their doubts about the reliability of standardized tests and the special burden they place on students from the socio-economic groups that do poorly on them. NACAC members talked at length about taking steps that in the future would reduce the role that standardized tests play in college admissions. The question for the NACAC and for students across the country is, What to put in place of the tests? An “A” in a suburban high school or an elite prep school can be very different from an “A” in an inner-city high school, where half the students drop out by their senior year. At the college in which I teach, the answer we hit upon several years ago was to go cold turkey with regard to standardized test scores. We stopped asked for them, starting with the high school graduating class of 2005, and we have not looked back. We find that we are getting just as good students as we got when we used standardized tests, and we are benefiting from reaching out to students for whom our emphasis on grades, teacher recommendations, and writing samples is especially appealing. At its annual meeting the NACAC took a middle-of-the road stance on standardized testing. While few of its college admissions directors were willing to commit themselves to going test-optional in the future, they were prepared to consider reducing their reliance on standardized tests represented by the SAT AND ACT. In its 2008 report, the NACAC underscored its belief that these standardized tests “should not be considered as sole predictors of true college success” but instead viewed as one of many indicators of a student’s potential. There is every reason to see this middle-of-the-road step as a good beginning. The original idea behind standardized testing for college admissions, as Nicholas Lemann pointed out a decade ago in “The Big Test,” was to expand the pool of college students, and in 2008 we are only building on history if we take that original idea further. The catch is that we need to keep in mind that fixing our standardized testing problem, like fixing our broken banking system, cannot be done on the cheap. If colleges and universities are going to move past their current, undue reliance on standardized testing, they are going to have to invest more money in their admissions procedures and staffs. For schools with freshmen classes under 500, such an adjustment should be a smooth one. But for schools with freshmen classes numbering in the thousands, such change will be difficult if they are to avoid creating unwieldy admissions bureaucracies. The good news is that if colleges and universities can break the hold that standardized testing has on them, they will not just become more diverse. They will increasingly find themselves enrolling students with skills and interests that once went undervalued. Nicolaus Mills, a professor of American Studies at Sarah Lawrence College, is author of “Winning the Peace: The Marshall Plan and America’s Coming of Age as a Superpower.” Nmills@slc.edu. 212-663-4283.

More here:
Nicolaus Mills: College Board Crisis

Governor Palin Neglects Alaska Duties for Partisan Stumping on Campaign Trail in Georgia Alaska faces challenges that need attention now Anchorage - While Gov. Sarah Palin is out of state again, this time in Georgia campaigning for incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss on the eve of the runoff election, Alaska faces challenges including a lack of leadership from the Governor. Palin will stump for Chambliss, the draft-evading incumbent Republican who waged a notoriously misleading campaign against a decorated war hero, at rallies Monday in Atlanta, Augusta, Savannah and Perry, Georgia. Palin has been back in Alaska at work for only a few days since running for vice president. “Alaskans need our Governor here earning her salary and working on key problems facing Alaska families,” said Alaska Democratic Party Chair Patti Higgins. Alaska is facing significant challenges, Higgins said, including: * Oil prices have dropped dramatically to about $45/bbl from the peak of $144/bbl in July, which threatens the state budget. * Alaskans are paying some of the highest prices for gas in the nation, averaging $2.87 per gallon, while the national average is $1.91. * The state’s oil production continues to decline, due to falling prices and mature fields. * The global credit crunch and falling natural gas prices threaten the Alaska gas line. * The State is failing to meet its constitutional obligation to take care of public education as shown by the high drop out rates and the low graduation rates. * Many Medicare patients cannot find doctors. * There is continued flight from rural villages. * Alaska faces the prospect of reduced federal dollars from Washington, D.C. “Alaska’s challenges are significant, and there is much that needs to be done right now. Our Governor should remember that her primary job is to work on behalf of the citizens of Alaska, not engage in partisan politics in other states,” Higgins said. “Governing is more than creating photo ops. We’d like a commitment that the Governor is working, not just scheduling media appearances.” Enough is Enough! Someone needs to tell Sarah that SHE DIDN’T WIN. She has been paid for her governor job for months during a campaign. Show up or shut up.

Read the original post:
Shannyn Moore: The Alaskans Are Getting Restless….