Hey, look on the bright side, folks! It could be worse! Am I right, or am I right?
Meanwhile, Joe "It's a Big F#cking Deal" Biden was on a roll of his own... In a fundraising email, Biden warned recipients that the GOP will be unleashing a "blitzkrieg" of attacks against Democrats this Fall. Nice.
Hope and change...
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Wake Me Up When There's An Election...Oh, Wait...
Hello to any "readers" of Bragging Writes who may still be out there. My sincere apologies for the complete and total lack of blogging for the last, well, let's not quantify it...let's just say it's been awhile!
So where have I been? Well...in a nutshell, it's really quite simple: when push comes to shove, this is a hobby and not a job, and so my job and any job-related activities must come first. But that's only part of the story. I must also admit that I seem to have misplaced my "muse". Or maybe I've realized that my muse only comes out during election years! Put differently, I find myself most inspired to write in the midst of the part of politics that I have always found most interesting -- the "horse race". Elections.
On that note, you may have heard there are a few elections today that have garnered some pretty significant national attention. In Virginia, the Gubernatorial Election has Republican Bob McDonnell facing off against Democrat Creigh Deeds. In New Jersey, incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine is up against Republican Chris Christie. And last but not least, in (way) upstate New York, near the Canadian Border, there is a race for the House of Representatives (New York 23) that now pits Conservative Party candidate -- note: not Republican Party candidate -- Doug Hoffman against Democrat Bill Owens. (The Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, dropped out of the race this past weekend and subsequently endorsed the Democrat).
These three races, all quite different in many ways, also have several very interesting things in common:
It's very important to note the involvement of the President and the White House in each of these races as well. Rather than try to analyze that myself, I'll leave it to a professional. John Fund of The Wall Street Journal summed it up nicely today when he wrote the following:
Obama, Pelosi and Reid should be worried because of the real concerns that many of the same independent voters who put Obama in the White House now have about him and his Capital Hill cohorts -- the same independents who will likely tip these three elections away from Democrats tonight. Obama needs them to pass healthcare, and he needs them for electoral purposes both in the midterm elections next year and his own reelection in 2012. So while this should be something that raises the stress level in the West Wing, let's not go overboard. Three elections in an off-year do not signify a catastrophe for Obama and his party by any means, but they do likely signify the need to recalibrate a bit in order to prevent further political erosion.
As for the GOP, the Republican "brand" is so very damaged -- rightfully so, some might argue, (this writer being one of them, at least on certain issues) -- that three elections in an off-year will be only the first step in a long process of recovery and rebuilding. Would a "sweep" tonight be a feather in the GOP's cap? Sure. Would it energize a Republican base still licking their (largely self-inflicted) wounds from 2008? You bet. But if Republicans try to make too much out of what happens tonight, they risk returning immediately to the cocky and tone-deaf politics that brought the party to its knees a year ago. So as a Republican, my advice to the GOP tonight is the same advice a good football coach gives his players about how to behave after scoring a touchdown. Do you spike the ball and start dancing around like a maniac? Absolutely not. You calmly hand the referee the ball, return to the field, and get back to work. "Act like you've been there before", the coach says. Bingo. Republicans tonight should "act like [they've] been there before". If they do, perhaps it will indeed be the first of many steps required to actually get them back there again.
So where have I been? Well...in a nutshell, it's really quite simple: when push comes to shove, this is a hobby and not a job, and so my job and any job-related activities must come first. But that's only part of the story. I must also admit that I seem to have misplaced my "muse". Or maybe I've realized that my muse only comes out during election years! Put differently, I find myself most inspired to write in the midst of the part of politics that I have always found most interesting -- the "horse race". Elections.
On that note, you may have heard there are a few elections today that have garnered some pretty significant national attention. In Virginia, the Gubernatorial Election has Republican Bob McDonnell facing off against Democrat Creigh Deeds. In New Jersey, incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine is up against Republican Chris Christie. And last but not least, in (way) upstate New York, near the Canadian Border, there is a race for the House of Representatives (New York 23) that now pits Conservative Party candidate -- note: not Republican Party candidate -- Doug Hoffman against Democrat Bill Owens. (The Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava, dropped out of the race this past weekend and subsequently endorsed the Democrat).
These three races, all quite different in many ways, also have several very interesting things in common:
- All three are states (or districts, in the case of NY-23) carried by President Obama just a year ago;
- All three are races in which President Obama and/or his White House have had significant involvement;
- All three races -- as of this writing at 6:15pm Tuesday evening -- will, in my opinion, likely be won by the Republican (or, in NY-23, Conservative) candidate.
It's very important to note the involvement of the President and the White House in each of these races as well. Rather than try to analyze that myself, I'll leave it to a professional. John Fund of The Wall Street Journal summed it up nicely today when he wrote the following:
"It can't be said that President Obama hasn't gone all-out for Democratic candidates in the three marquee off-year elections that will be decided today.
In Virginia, Mr. Obama appeared twice for Democratic nominee Creigh Deeds. The visits only stopped a few weeks ago after Mr. Deeds began dropping in the polls, when unnamed White House aides then contributed to a front-page Washington Post story that effectively had Team Obama washing its hands of any responsibility for his likely loss.In the wild upstate New York special election for a House seat, the White House has been deeply involved from the start. It effectively created the vacancy by enticing GOP incumbent John McHugh to become Secretary of the Army. It also helped recruit Democrat Bill Owens, a wealthy trial lawyer, and President Obama held a fundraiser in New York for him. Just yesterday the White House dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to the district to drive up turnout and lambaste Republicans as intolerant. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel also played an instrumental role over the weekend in convincing Dede Scozzafava, the now-withdrawn GOP nominee in the race, to endorse Mr. Owens rather than Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.But it's in New Jersey's governor's race that the White House footprint has been most visible and heavy. Last August, Team Obama was so worried that incumbent Governor Jon Corzine was trailing in the polls that it effectively ordered him to install top Obama political pollster Joel Benenson to mange strategy for the campaign. White House officials David Axelrod and Patrick Gaspard traveled to New Jersey to deliver the message in person to Mr. Corzine. Politico.com, citing three Corzine aides, reports that at one point the New Jersey governor even 'began to suspect that the White House was considering pushing him to step aside for another candidate -- a tactic the White House unsuccessfully tried against another northeastern Democrat in similar trouble -- New York Gov. David Paterson.'That didn't happen, but with Mr. Benenson installed in the campaign, the White House jumped into the race with both feet. President Obama has been to New Jersey three times to rally Democrats. Sunday's visit lasted an entire day, a sharp contrast to the in-and-out stump campaigning most presidents do on behalf of candidates.The fact is, President Obama has poured a lot more time and energy into these races than incumbent presidents usually do. At least some of his prestige and clout are on the line tonight along with the fate of his party's nominees."
And so the narrative is apparently written, right? Any Republican win tonight is a sign of trouble for Obama and the Democrats, and a Republican sweep would be a (politically) seismic event signaling a direct repudiation of Obama and the Democrats and the potential beginning of a Republican comeback, right? Well, maybe. You see, this is where I differ with many other Republicans and even with the way the headlines have already begun to be crafted by the media. Because again, as I write, I think we are looking at a Republican sweep tonight -- (assuming Hoffman is a de facto Republican in NY-23). And while I think this is certainly significant and while it would have been thought improbable six months ago and impossible twelve months ago, I don't believe the GOP should pop the champagne just yet.
In short, I think this is likely more of a rejection of Obama and Congressional Democrats than it is a sign of renewed confidence in or newfound affection for Republicans. Should my prediction hold true, I do think Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid ought to be concerned. I do not, however, think that Republicans should begin licking their chops and dreaming of regaining majorities in the House and Senate next year on the way to taking back the White House in 2012.Obama, Pelosi and Reid should be worried because of the real concerns that many of the same independent voters who put Obama in the White House now have about him and his Capital Hill cohorts -- the same independents who will likely tip these three elections away from Democrats tonight. Obama needs them to pass healthcare, and he needs them for electoral purposes both in the midterm elections next year and his own reelection in 2012. So while this should be something that raises the stress level in the West Wing, let's not go overboard. Three elections in an off-year do not signify a catastrophe for Obama and his party by any means, but they do likely signify the need to recalibrate a bit in order to prevent further political erosion.
As for the GOP, the Republican "brand" is so very damaged -- rightfully so, some might argue, (this writer being one of them, at least on certain issues) -- that three elections in an off-year will be only the first step in a long process of recovery and rebuilding. Would a "sweep" tonight be a feather in the GOP's cap? Sure. Would it energize a Republican base still licking their (largely self-inflicted) wounds from 2008? You bet. But if Republicans try to make too much out of what happens tonight, they risk returning immediately to the cocky and tone-deaf politics that brought the party to its knees a year ago. So as a Republican, my advice to the GOP tonight is the same advice a good football coach gives his players about how to behave after scoring a touchdown. Do you spike the ball and start dancing around like a maniac? Absolutely not. You calmly hand the referee the ball, return to the field, and get back to work. "Act like you've been there before", the coach says. Bingo. Republicans tonight should "act like [they've] been there before". If they do, perhaps it will indeed be the first of many steps required to actually get them back there again.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
A 'Healthy' Debate
Tonight, President Obama will hold his fourth primetime press conference since taking office in January. Obama's primary topic for tonight will be the hotly debated issue of health care reform. With polls showing the public's approval of Obama's handling of the health care issue slipping, he undoubtedly realizes that his chances of signing meaningful reform into law are diminishing daily.
The House revealed its version of a health care reform bill last week, and the bill's unveiling was met with almost instantaneous controversy. Obama did not seem worried, though, and forcefully reiterated his intention of passing a health care reform bill before Congress' August recess, telling reporters:
The sweeping changes proposed by the House (and supported by Obama) would, according to the Associated Press:
The president was dealt a blow last week when the head of the Congressional Budget Office, Doug Elmendorf, testified before the Senate Budget Committee. From The Washington Post:
I think it would be beneficial for every American to tune in to the president's press conference tonight (8:00pm Eastern). If the press are appropriately inquisitive -- not always the case when they question Obama -- we could all learn a lot about what may be in store for us in the near future, and how, precisely, it will all be paid for.
The House revealed its version of a health care reform bill last week, and the bill's unveiling was met with almost instantaneous controversy. Obama did not seem worried, though, and forcefully reiterated his intention of passing a health care reform bill before Congress' August recess, telling reporters:
"We are going to get this done...Don't bet against us...We are going to make this happen."I don't know anyone who would argue that the country's current health care system is good. Indeed, there are unquestionably problems with the status quo, not the least of which being the number of uninsured Americans. So the debate, it seems to me, does not hinge on the issue of whether or not improvement is needed, but rather on how that improvement should be made.
The sweeping changes proposed by the House (and supported by Obama) would, according to the Associated Press:
"...require everyone to have health insurance and make employers provide it or pay a penalty; subsidize the poor to help them buy care; and create a new public insurance plan modeled after Medicare to compete with private insurance companies."While the merits of these proposed changes are debatable, what is not debatable is that health care comprises one-sixth of our entire economy, and that changes like those in the current House bill will literally affect every single American. Making any fundamental change to a system that holds such economic significance and that will be felt by every person is no small task. Making the sorts of changes that Obama is asking for will be an extraordinarily complex task. The logistics of implementing such a change are not only maddeningly complicated, they are also very expensive.
The president was dealt a blow last week when the head of the Congressional Budget Office, Doug Elmendorf, testified before the Senate Budget Committee. From The Washington Post:
Congress's chief budget analyst delivered a devastating assessment yesterday of the health-care proposals drafted by congressional Democrats, fueling an insurrection among fiscal conservatives in the House and pushing negotiators in the Senate to redouble efforts to draw up a new plan that more effectively restrains federal spending.By no means do I pretend to be an expert on health care or health care reform. Further, I would in no way classify myself as one who is diametrically opposed to making necessary changes to a system that is not working properly. That said, there are a few areas where I differ with the President and with the Democrats in Congress. The following is a sample of some of the questions and areas of concern I have:
Under questioning by members of the Senate Budget Committee, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, said bills crafted by House leaders and the Senate health committee do not propose "the sort of fundamental changes" necessary to rein in the skyrocketing cost of government health programs, particularly Medicare. On the contrary, Elmendorf said, the measures would pile on an expensive new program to cover the uninsured.
Though President Obama and Democratic leaders have repeatedly pledged to alter the soaring trajectory -- or cost curve -- of federal health spending, the proposals so far would not meet that goal, Elmendorf said, noting, "The curve is being raised." His remarks suggested that rather than averting a looming fiscal crisis, the measures could make the nation's bleak budget outlook even worse.
- Why is President Obama in such a hurry to "get this done" before Congress' August recess? It seems to me that if such significant changes are going to be made to such a vital aspect of our country and her people, they should be done with extreme caution and only after careful deliberation. Rarely (if ever) is there an effective "quick fix" to a big problem, and I see no reason why this is an exception. Obama's arbitrary deadline seems based more on politics than on ensuring that whatever reform he signs into law has been thoroughly evaluated and considered -- not only by the members of Congress who will vote on it, but by the American people who will be affected by it.
- When has the government ever really "fixed" anything? Does the government truly "run" anything well? Many opponents of the current proposal use the DMV as an example of what we can expect out of government-run health care, and while I think that's an extreme comparison, the underlying point has some validity. Do we want to entrust our health care to the federal government? Think about that for a bit, and I suspect you might have some concerns.
- Is raising taxes and spending -- undeniably required for this to be enacted -- the wisest course of action given the fact that we are already in a recession and already facing the largest deficits in U.S. history? It's not just Republicans who express concerns about the fiscal implications of the current proposal, but also the so-called "Blue Dog Democrats", a group of roughly 50 Democrats in the House of Representatives who pride themselves on their fiscal conservatism. Even some Democratic Governors have expressed concerns, with Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen referring to the House bill as "the mother of all unfunded mandates".
I think it would be beneficial for every American to tune in to the president's press conference tonight (8:00pm Eastern). If the press are appropriately inquisitive -- not always the case when they question Obama -- we could all learn a lot about what may be in store for us in the near future, and how, precisely, it will all be paid for.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Robert Gibbs (and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Week)
It hasn't been the best week for Robert Gibbs, President Obama's Press Secretary.
On Monday, he told NBC News' Chuck Todd that we should "begin to judge [Obama's stimulus package] now". Take a look:
Fair enough, Mr. Gibbs. With this morning's news that 467,000 jobs were lost in June and that the unemployment rate has climbed to a 26-year high of 9.5%, I don't think many people will judge the Obama stimulus plan to have been successful thus far.
Yesterday wasn't a very good day for Gibbs, either. When the White House Press Corps realized that Obama's "online town hall" about health care yesterday didn't represent as much "change" as Candidate Obama promised to deliver, things got a little testy during Gibbs' daily briefing. You see, the questioners at yesterday's town hall were hand-picked (and their questions were pre-screened) by the White House -- something that sometimes occurred for President Bush's town hall meetings, but for which Bush was routinely excoriated by the Democrats and the media alike. To my great shock, CBS News' Chip Reid called Obama and his team out on their hypocrisy, eventually aided by the always cantankerous Helen Thomas. I give a lot of credit to Reid and Thomas for doing something that the mainstream media have largely failed to do thus far: actually challenging the Obama Administration on what is now a series of hedges, broken promises, and examples of the "same old Washington politics" against which Obama so frequently railed on the campaign trail last year. Here's yesterday's exchange between Gibbs, Reid and Thomas:
So again, it's been a hard week for Robert Gibbs, and amid increasing signs that President Obama's proverbial honeymoon -- with the American people and with the mainstream media -- might be nearing its end, perhaps Gibbs should prepare for more tough weeks to come.
Note: Commenter "craig" indicated that he was waiting for me to weigh in on South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and his utterly disgraceful and increasingly bizarre behavior. I intend to do so in the near future, but quite frankly, I don't think we've seen the end of this story yet. Whether there will be additional revelations from Mr. Sanford (let's all hope not) or whether he ends up resigning in the coming days (I hope so), we haven't reached the conclusion yet. Once we do, I'll happily share my thoughts. Thanks for the comment, craig, and thanks to all for reading.
On Monday, he told NBC News' Chuck Todd that we should "begin to judge [Obama's stimulus package] now". Take a look:
Fair enough, Mr. Gibbs. With this morning's news that 467,000 jobs were lost in June and that the unemployment rate has climbed to a 26-year high of 9.5%, I don't think many people will judge the Obama stimulus plan to have been successful thus far.
Yesterday wasn't a very good day for Gibbs, either. When the White House Press Corps realized that Obama's "online town hall" about health care yesterday didn't represent as much "change" as Candidate Obama promised to deliver, things got a little testy during Gibbs' daily briefing. You see, the questioners at yesterday's town hall were hand-picked (and their questions were pre-screened) by the White House -- something that sometimes occurred for President Bush's town hall meetings, but for which Bush was routinely excoriated by the Democrats and the media alike. To my great shock, CBS News' Chip Reid called Obama and his team out on their hypocrisy, eventually aided by the always cantankerous Helen Thomas. I give a lot of credit to Reid and Thomas for doing something that the mainstream media have largely failed to do thus far: actually challenging the Obama Administration on what is now a series of hedges, broken promises, and examples of the "same old Washington politics" against which Obama so frequently railed on the campaign trail last year. Here's yesterday's exchange between Gibbs, Reid and Thomas:
So again, it's been a hard week for Robert Gibbs, and amid increasing signs that President Obama's proverbial honeymoon -- with the American people and with the mainstream media -- might be nearing its end, perhaps Gibbs should prepare for more tough weeks to come.
Note: Commenter "craig" indicated that he was waiting for me to weigh in on South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and his utterly disgraceful and increasingly bizarre behavior. I intend to do so in the near future, but quite frankly, I don't think we've seen the end of this story yet. Whether there will be additional revelations from Mr. Sanford (let's all hope not) or whether he ends up resigning in the coming days (I hope so), we haven't reached the conclusion yet. Once we do, I'll happily share my thoughts. Thanks for the comment, craig, and thanks to all for reading.
Monday, June 15, 2009
The Bragging Writes "Skinny"
Welcome to those who are visiting for the first time after reading "The Political Skinny" in this morning's Mobile Press-Register. I am flattered by the mention (though I was completely unaware it was coming)!
Had I known there might be a spike in "traffic", I would probably have put up a new post since, as it stands now, my most recent post was on May 12th! The recent dearth of updates is certainly not for a lack of compelling subject matter, and in fact, there is much to discuss, particularly as President Obama and the Democratic Congress continue to enact and propose significant changes. Quite frankly, work has kept me unusually busy over the last few months and, at the end of the day, my job comes first and this, my hobby, often suffers as a result. As we enter the summer months, though, work tends to quiet down a bit and so hopefully I'll be able to start writing more frequently, and I do hope you'll check back here from time to time.
Ironically, I had already planned to weigh in on a few Alabama-related topics in the coming weeks and months, including the fascinating position in which Senator Jeff Sessions now finds himself as the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is notable not only because of the upcoming confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor, but also because of the uniquely personal perspective that Senator Sessions has after his own experience in front of this same committee in 1986. On another note, I am very intrigued by Alabama's upcoming gubernatorial election, likely pitting Bradley Byrne against Artur Davis. I'm not sure I can recall an election in my lifetime in which Alabama has had two candidates for governor as intelligent and qualified as Byrne and Davis. Lastly, the recent economic and business developments in Mobile (as well as in Baldwin County) are very exciting, and the prospects for continued growth in the future seem very strong. I hope to take a closer look at that in the near future.
Below you'll find some previous posts, and while they may not be as timely today as when I initially wrote them, I hope you might find them interesting or thought-provoking nonetheless. Thanks for visiting the blog, and I do hope you'll come back again for more current (and hopefully more frequently updated) posts.
Had I known there might be a spike in "traffic", I would probably have put up a new post since, as it stands now, my most recent post was on May 12th! The recent dearth of updates is certainly not for a lack of compelling subject matter, and in fact, there is much to discuss, particularly as President Obama and the Democratic Congress continue to enact and propose significant changes. Quite frankly, work has kept me unusually busy over the last few months and, at the end of the day, my job comes first and this, my hobby, often suffers as a result. As we enter the summer months, though, work tends to quiet down a bit and so hopefully I'll be able to start writing more frequently, and I do hope you'll check back here from time to time.
Ironically, I had already planned to weigh in on a few Alabama-related topics in the coming weeks and months, including the fascinating position in which Senator Jeff Sessions now finds himself as the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is notable not only because of the upcoming confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor, but also because of the uniquely personal perspective that Senator Sessions has after his own experience in front of this same committee in 1986. On another note, I am very intrigued by Alabama's upcoming gubernatorial election, likely pitting Bradley Byrne against Artur Davis. I'm not sure I can recall an election in my lifetime in which Alabama has had two candidates for governor as intelligent and qualified as Byrne and Davis. Lastly, the recent economic and business developments in Mobile (as well as in Baldwin County) are very exciting, and the prospects for continued growth in the future seem very strong. I hope to take a closer look at that in the near future.
Below you'll find some previous posts, and while they may not be as timely today as when I initially wrote them, I hope you might find them interesting or thought-provoking nonetheless. Thanks for visiting the blog, and I do hope you'll come back again for more current (and hopefully more frequently updated) posts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)