Category Archives: The Nation

Sec. Clinton helps point way to what’s next

Of course, at such an emotion-packed historic moment as this, one encounters a lot of foolishness, from the behavior of those drunken college kids outside the White House last night to people who will actually say (and this I find stunning), OK, we got him, let’s leave Afghanistan…

I thought Hillary Clinton’s remarks this morning addressed that rather nicely:

Here at the State Department, we have worked to forge a worldwide anti-terror network. We have drawn together the effort and energy of friends, partners, and allies on every continent. Our partnerships, including our close cooperation with Pakistan, have helped put unprecedented pressure on al-Qaida and its leadership. Continued cooperation will be just as important in the days ahead, because even as we mark this milestone, we should not forget that the battle to stop al-Qaida and its syndicate of terror will not end with the death of bin Ladin. Indeed, we must take this opportunity to renew our resolve and redouble our efforts.

In Afghanistan, we will continue taking the fight to al-Qaida and their Taliban allies, while working to support the Afghan people as they build a stronger government and begin to take responsibility for their own security. We are implementing the strategy for transition approved by NATO at the summit in Lisbon, and we supporting an Afghan-led political process that seeks to isolate al-Qaida and end the insurgency. Our message to the Taliban remains the same, but today it may have even greater resonance: You cannot wait us out. You cannot defeat us. But you can make the choice to abandon al-Qaida and participate in a peaceful political process….

Indeed, to the extent that the death of bin Laden sends a useful message to the world — to our friends and enemies — is that we will NOT give up. It’s about continuity and persistence. And it’s a powerful message. This is a time for following up the advantage provided by demoralization among the Taliban and al Qaeda at this moment, a moment created by the death of that movement’s chief symbol. Secretary Clinton explains it well.

Osama bin Laden is dead. So what happens now?

I originally wrote this BEFORE the president’s announcement. As you can see, I’ve now updated it with the video…

Waiting for President Obama to make the announcement that Osama bin Laden is dead.

And wondering what happens now. I’ve wondered that for 10 years: If bin Laden is dead, what does it change? Does the struggle end? Of course not. He’s now a martyr. But it’s still a huge moment.

And what will the president tell us it means, as he sees it? This is so un-Obama — Under my leadership, we have killed our enemy — what will he say? And what will he tell us to expect next? What will he say HE intends to do?

What does this mean NOW, against the context of the turmoil, the rise of democracy, sweeping through the region?

If I were the president, I’m not sure what I would say. So I’m preparing to watch, and listen.

I expect you are, too.

If you’d like to react, here’s a place to do it…

I do like me some Union Jacks

To me, the Union Jack is right up there with the SC State Flag as one of the most appealing flags ever. The US flag is, of course, the world’s most stirring to me, but it might be just a sentimental favorite. I think it’s the most beautiful in the world, but there’s no way for that to be an objective assessment. I associate it with all kinds of good things — such as the Republic for which it stands, the Constitution and stirring music and such, from the deeply meaningful (such as the greatest news photograph of all time) to the merely fun — to the point that I’m prejudiced. I’m not positive it would be one of my favorites, esthetically speaking, if I’d never seen it before. Or maybe it would — impossible to say. It’s not like I can wipe my mind clean and UNrecognize it, so as to evaluate fairly.

For that matter, while I have a lot of negative associations with it (and some positive ones, too), I think the Confederate flag we fight over is one of the most appealing, too. I’m talking pure esthetics, remember, setting associations aside. Something about the symmetry of the St. Andrew’s Cross gives it some of the same appeal as the Union Jack. Of course, symmetry isn’t everything — the crescent moon that throws off the symmetry on the SC state flag gives it just the right touch; the flag would lose much without it. Of course, what really makes the state flag is the little bit of white on indigo blue. I wish we used that more. I wish our license plates were solid dark blue with white letters (and maybe a small palmetto tree between the letters and numbers), which would be way classier than what we’ve got.

In fact — and this may be the most controversial statement I’ve ever made on the blog — I sort of wish that USC’s colors were indigo and white. On one level, that would be a smart move for the university, positioning it clearly as South Carolina’s flagship university. On another, however, it would be career suicide for anyone associated with the university to suggest it.

But back to the Union Jack — that is the way to use a St. Andrew’s Cross. I think the addition of the St. George’s makes all the difference, elevating it way above the Confederate image. The added complexity, or all that additional white, or something, just adds up to perfection.

Anyway, the people who watched the Royal Wedding were probably watching for other things. Me, I didn’t watch it. But without trying, I’ve seen images — on TV at Yesterday’s at lunch today, on a co-worker’s computer, and so forth. And two things have occurred to me. One, I Tweeted out this afternoon:

Prince William, it seems, has more uniforms in his closet than Glenn McConnell does…

Five reTweets on that one so far, I see…

The other was when I saw image number 26 on this CNN gallery (I don’t want to get in trouble with Getty by posting it, and there’s no direct link provided, hence the indirect reference) on Lora’s desktop this afternoon.

All the Union Jacks you could want to see, right there on the Mall (where I was myself recently).

Huzzah, say I.

Or is THIS the handsomest flag ever?

The most absurd thing I’ve ever heard a president of the United States waste time talking about

After a breakfast meeting this morning, as I was about to get out of my car to go into ADCO, I heard, live on the radio, the most insane presidential press conference I’ve ever heard in my life.

Barack Obama was actually taking time out of his day to address the insane birther “issue.”

Above is the image he posted on Twitpic. Here’s a story on it:

Obama’s ‘Long-Form’ Birth Certificate Is Released

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR

President Obama on Wednesday posted online a copy of his “long-form” birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, hoping to finally end a long-simmering conspiracy theory among some conservatives who asserted that he was not born in the United States and was not a legitimate president.

The birth certificate, which is posted at the White House Web site, shows that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, and is signed by state officials and his mother.

“The President believed the distraction over his birth certificate wasn’t good for the country,” Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, wrote on the Web site Wednesday morning. Mr. Pfeiffer said on the site that Mr. Obama had authorized officials in Hawaii to release the document broadly.

In a statement to the news media Wednesday morning, Mr. Obama said he decided to release the document in an effort to end the “silliness” about his birth that threatened to distract from the serious issues facing the country.

“Over the last two and a half years, I have watched with bemusement,” he said in brief remarks. “I’ve been puzzled by the degree to which this thing just kept on going.”…

Yeah, ditto, Mr. President.

And today in the paper, I see that 41.2 percent of GOP voters in SC belief that Obama was definitely or probably born in another country. Which tells me that 41.2 percent of GOP voters should be barred from ever entering a voting booth again. Yeah, I know that there are certain constitutional problems that raises, but come on. When we talk about the drawbacks of democracy, the fact that people who would believe something like this about a guy, just because they don’t like him (for reasons that don’t bear a lot of close scrutiny, if you’re at all squeamish), get to vote just like everybody else is one of the biggies.

Oh, and for those of you who want to spend more of the precious moments you have remaining in your lives on this “issue,” here’s the president’s correspondence with the state of Hawaii Department of Health, seeking the document he posted today.

A defense of public broadcasting, from one who knows whereof she speaks

Sometime today, Senior Correspondent Gwen Ifill of PBS is accepting, on behalf of the PBS Newshour, the 2011 Walter Cronkite Award for Excellence in Television Political Journalism from the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.

She was to be accompanied by Political Editor David Chalian. I don’t know what he was going to say, but here’s a copy of her prepared remarks:

CRONKITE AWARD CEREMONY
Norman Lear Center
(GWEN IFILL’S PREPARED REMARKS)

University of Southern California
APRIL 26, 2011

ON BEHALF OF JIM LEHRER, JUDY WOODRUFF, LINDA WINSLOW OUR EXECUTIVE PRODUCER AND DAVID CHALIAN, OUR POLITICAL EDITOR…

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THIS WONDERFUL AWARD, AND FOR ALLOWING US TO JOIN ALL OF THESE AMAZING JOURNALISTS ON THIS STAGE.

IT DOES US ALL GOOD TO SEE THAT – NO MATTER WHAT YOU READ, SEE AND HEAR OUT THERE – SERIOUS JOURNALISM STILL MATTERS.

IT’S ALL I EVER WANTED TO DO, AND I THINK I SPEAK FOR EVERYONE HERE IN SAYING THAT WE ARE DRAWN TO JOURNALISM FOR THE NOBILITY THAT CAN BE FOUND IN TELLING UNTOLD STORIES, OR IN SHEDDING LIGHT RATHER THAN HEAT ON THE OVERTOLD ONES. MOST OF US GOT INTO JOURNALISM TO SAVE THE WORLD…AND THEN REALIZED WE OFTEN HAD TO SAVE THE WORLD FROM US.

I REALIZE I AM PREACHING TO THE CHOIR HERE TODAY, SO I PROBABLY DON’T HAVE TO TELL THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, THIS IS TOUGHER THAN IT SEEMS.

FOR MOST OF US, IT MEANS DOING MORE WITH LESS ON A DAILY BASIS. RESISTING THE LURE OF A CHARLIE SHEEN STORY ONE DAY OR ANOTHER ROYAL WEDDING CURTAIN RAISER ON ANOTHER.

AT THIS POINT IN MY CAREER, I’VE WORKED FOR NEWSPAPERS, AT A COMMERCIAL NETWORK AND NOW AT PUBLIC BROADCASTING, WHERE LIKE CLOCKWORK, WE ARE PERIODICALLY ACCUSED  BY THOSE ON THE RIGHT AND THOSE ON THE LEFT
OF BIAS. TOO MANY OF THESE CRITICS DON’T ACTUALLY WATCH OR LISTEN TO WHAT WE DO.

THIS IS WHAT WE DO.

JUDY WOODRUFF AND I TAKE YOU AROUND THE COUNTRY TO GET TO THE HEART OF OUR NATIONAL POLITICAL DEBATE…MARGARET WARNER AND RAY SUAREZ TAKE YOU TO NORTH KOREA AND GUATEMALA AND EGYPT AND SOUTH AFRICA TO TALK ABOUT GLOBAL HEALTH AND GLOBAL CHALLENGES.

ROBIN MCNEIL JUST COMPLETED A SIX-PART SERIES ON AUTISM, DEVOTING THE KIND OF TIME AND CARE TO THE TOPIC THAT FILLS A VOID IN THE DEARTH OF DOCUMENTARY TELEVISION.

AND AFTER 35 YEARS, WE’RE JUST GETTING STARTED. LAST WEEK AT THE ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE GULF OIL SPILL, WE LOOKED BACK AND COUNTED 232 STORIES WE’D DONE ON THE TOPIC….AND NOT JUST ON THE AIR.

OUR ONLINE OIL SPILL WIDGET WAS EMBEDDED ON MORE THAN 6,000 WEBSITES AROUND THE WORLD AND WAS VIEWED MORE THAN 20 MILLION TIMES.

WE ARE CONVINCED THAT TELLING THE STORY WELL MATTERS – WHETHER IT’S JEFF BROWN’S CONVERSATION LAST YEAR WITH THE WAR PHOTOGRAPHER TIM HETHERINGTON, WHO WAS KILLED LAST WEEK IN LIBYA… OR JOHN MERROW ON EDUCATION… OR PAUL SOLMAN MAKING SENSE OF ECONOMICS… OR HARI SREENIVASAN HONCHOING OUR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COVERAGE.

IF IT SOUNDS LIKE I’M BOASTING, YOU’RE RIGHT. WE ARE JUSTIFIABLY PROUD OF WHAT WE DO, AND ARE CONVINCED THAT EVEN IN A DRASTICALLY SHIFTING MEDIA ENVIRONMENT THERE IS A HUNGER FOR THE WORK WE DO.

WHEN I VISIT COLLEGE CAMPUSES, STUDENTS OFTEN TELL ME “I ONLY WATCH JON STEWART.” AND I TELL THEM: “JON STEWART WATCHES ME.”

NOT TO WORRY. WALTER CRONKITE ONCE TOLD ME HE WATCHED THE PBS NEWSHOUR EVERY NIGHT TOO.

THAT’S BECAUSE JOURNALISM, AND EVEN FAUX JOURNALISM, CAN ONLY FLOURISH WITH A FIRM FOUNDATION.

AT THE PBS NEWSHOUR, OUR FIRM FOUNDATION IS JIM LEHRER. FROM THE DAY HE CREATED THE PROGRAM WITH ROBIN MACNEIL UNTIL NOW, WHEN HE APPLIES HIS CONVICTIONS AND HIS CORE BELIEFS TO THE BROADCAST EVERY SINGLE NIGHT, HE IS OUR GUIDING STAR – TRULY THE CAPTAIN OF THE TEAM.

SO THAT’S WHAT WE DO. THAT’S WHAT MORE OF US CAN DO. AND ON DAYS LIKE TODAY, I AM REMINDED OF HOW MANY MORE WHO ARE DOING IT. AND WELL.

WE MIGHT NOT BE SAVING THE WORLD, BUT AT LEAST WE ARE MAKING IT A MORE UNDERSTANDABLE PLACE TO LIVE IN.

ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU TO THE NORMAN LEAR CENTER AT USC ANNENBERG FOR THIS MARVELOUS WALTER CRONKITE AWARD.——-

Admittedly, I don’t see PBS as much as I listen to NPR, but to a great extent the praise I often offer to NPR can apply to the television counterpart: I seldom encounter better journalism anywhere. Ms. Ifill mentions the interview with Tim Hetherington… one of the things that consistently amazes me is how comprehensively public broadcasting covers things that just happened (often fleshing it out with a recent interview with the person who is in the news). They present information so thoughtfully, so soberly and completely, that it generally exceeds the best that print can offer. And I can’t say that about anything else on broadcast media.

How ridiculous can we get?

Just noticed this headline over at the WashPost:

Fuel prices cut into Obama popularity

How ridiculous, how fickle, how petty can the voting public be? Yeah, I know, we’re always like this, but whenever I see statistical proof of the capriciousness of the public affections, I am disillusioned yet again.

This, of course, is why we have never come up with a rational, comprehensive  energy plan. We have a conniption over gas prices going up a little bit — something that would certainly happen, along with a lot of other things, if we were to get serious about energy policy.

So we don’t. Ever. Because our politicians only work with one hand at a time, because they have one finger of the other constantly held up into the wind.

I mean, Obama didn’t even DO anything to make prices rise, and this happens, just the way it always does:

Obama, like previous presidents in times of high oil prices, is taking a hit. Only 39 percent of those who call gas prices a “serious financial hardship” approve of the way he is doing his job, and 33 percent of them say he’s doing a good job on the economy.

No wonder politicos are terrified to take action.

Haley Barbour drops out: What does it mean?

OK, so that last post about the 2012 GOP presidential field was a few days old. This one happened today:

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) announced today that he will not run for president. The decision comes as something of a surprise — the Associated Press reported just Sunday that Barbour could launch his campaign as early as this week. He had been making moves toward a campaign, including a recent visit to New Hampshire.

“A candidate for president today is embracing a ten-year commitment to an all-consuming effort, to the virtual exclusion of all else,” Barbour said in a statement. “His (or her) supporters expect and deserve no less than absolute fire in the belly from their candidate. I cannot offer that with certainty, and total certainty is required.”

Barbour had previously voiced concerns about the time commitment involved in running for president, and both his wife and son had expressed reservations about the campaign.

He was also struggling to get above the low single digits in polls, even in the south. His past career as a lobbyist, though he tried to present it as an advantage, was expected to dog Barbour on the trail. His stumbles in statements on civil rights raised questions about his readiness…

So what does it mean? I like that Aaron Blake of The Fix says that “Barbour already had obstacles as a southern governor with a thick accent…” Huh. And we-uns down heuh thought that was one of his strengths…

The Post speculates that this promotes Barbour buddy Mitch Daniels. Maybe so. Or maybe Pawlenty. I would imagine it would make the aforementioned Huntsman a little more sanguine about his chances in SC.

Something it just might indicate — and the slowness of the GOP field is getting rolling this cycle tends to back this up — is that Republicans who know what they’re about don’t think they can beat Obama. And it’s hard to get, as Barbour says, a “fire in the belly” for a long, hard campaign that would in the end be unsuccessful.

We hear so much from the Obama-hating fringe of the GOP that it’s easy to remember that fringes do not constitute majorities. The people who’ve been involved in politics a bit longer than the Tea Party’s been around know that…

NLRB launches attack on Boeing, SC

Well, here’s a nice acid test on how you feel about unions and economic development. See what you think of this:

NLRB files complaint against Boeing over N. Charleston plant

By Matt Tomsic
mtomsic@scbiznews.com

The National Labor Relations Board filed a complaint today, calling for Boeing to open a second 787 final assembly line in Washington state to remedy what it calls an illegal transfer of work to non-union facilities in North Charleston.

Boeing is building a multi-million dollar facility near Charleston International Airport to complement its first final assembly line in the Seattle area.

The board is pursuing an order to require Boeing to maintain a second assembly line in Washington state, though the complaint does not ask for the line in South Carolina to be closed, according to a news release from the NLRB….

You know, I’m not sure the federal gummint wants to pull something like this on SC so soon after the anniversary of our firing on Fort Sumter.

Nice of the NLRB not to “ask for” Boeing to shut down in SC. No, it’s just saying the company has to open a line it doesn’t need.

Wow. I’m with Lindsey Graham on this one:

“This is one of the worst examples of unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of special interest groups that I’ve ever seen,” Graham said in a statement emailed from his office. “In this case, the (National Labor Relations Board) is doing the bidding of the unions at great cost to South Carolina and our nation’s economy.”

Could Obama lose? Well, yeah, but it seems unlikely given current trends

Saw this this morning on Twitter, from Political Wire:

Yes, Obama could lose… http://pwire.at/hfiOUM

To which I responded, “Yeah, and I could conceivably WIN – anything can happen – but what are the odds?”

ANYTHING can happen over the last 19 months (things that would turn this assessment around 180 degrees), but watching the sluggish “race” for the nomination to run against him — and seeing some of the characters getting the most attention (here’s a question for you conspiracy fans: Is the “liberal media” deliberately overplaying the likes of Michele Bachmann, Donald Trump and Sarah Palin in order to undermine conservative chances?) — it seems extremely dubious.

Dubious to the point that I’d really, really appreciate it if the opposition would stop acting like he’s somehow illegitimate, and seeking to undermine everything he tries to do (like the health care reform the nation so badly needs, as inadequate as his efforts in that regard may be). Because folks, not only did he win the last election, but he’s probably going to win the next one. And I think the stronger potential GOP candidates know that, which is why we’re not seeing much activity from anyone but the extremists.

By the way, did you follow the link on that Tweet, which quoted a Salon article asserting that, if the economy doesn’t get better, “the GOP will be well-positioned to oust Obama in 2012, provided the party doesn’t nominate a fringe candidate.”

Run that by again: “…provided the party doesn’t nominate a fringe candidate.” Right now, that looks kind of like a big IF.

In 08, we were blessed by having both parties’ nominees being the less partisan options. It seems unlikely that we’ll be thus blessed in ’12. Unlike Democrats, who are cheering for the GOP extremists because they want to run against them, I hope the GOP does come up with a mainstream, sensible nominee because… as I say, ANYTHING can happen, and I’d like to reduce the chance of a having a nut job in the White House. But will that happen? I actually suspect it will. But I do worry.

Some Bachman, in case you haven’t had enough

For those of you who may have missed Michele Bachman when she was in SC the last few days, here are some things she has said in the past, which a colleague sent to me today:

“Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.” -Rep. Michelle Bachmann, April, 2009

“Take this into consideration. If we look at American history, between 1942 and 1947, the data that was collected by the Census Bureau was handed over to the FBI and other organizations at the request of President Roosevelt, and that’s how the Japanese were rounded up and put into the internment camps. I’m not saying that that’s what the Administration is planning to do, but I am saying that private personal information that was given to the Census Bureau in the 1940s was used against Americans to round them up, in a violation of their constitutional rights, and put the Japanese in internment camps.” -Rep. Michele Bachmann, June 2009
“I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out under another, then under another Democrat president, Jimmy Carter. I’m not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it’s an interesting coincidence.” -Rep. Michele Bachmann, on the 1976 Swine Flu outbreak that happened when Gerald Ford, a Republican, was president, April 28, 2009

Hmmm. Wait a sec. This post may not be in my interest. Rep. Bachman has already been throwing around advertising money in SC, way out ahead of other prospective candidates. If she sees this, she’s likely to think, a) I’m glad to see that Brad Warthen is spreading my ideas for free, so I don’t need to send HIM any ad bucks; or b) That Brad Warthen is holding me up to ridicule, I’m not about to spend any ad bucks with HIM. Either way, I lose.

This is one reason why not many people, admire me as they might, see me as a good businessman.

Of course, I could have just shared with you what she said while she was here:

BLUFFTON, S.C. — Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann told a packed tea party gathering she doesn’t think President Barack Obama is “on our side anymore” as she blamed him for a “foolish” war in Libya and high gasoline prices…

Oh, and here’s what she said on the State House steps today:

You recognize that in Washington D.C., your rights are being taken away from you…

… something that I did NOT know, by the way. You?

Two kinds of (mildly) offensive on Palm Sunday

Two Tweets bugged me, just a little, on Sunday. I respected this special sabbath by not commenting on that day itself. But since I think it offers some insight to how both the left and right alienate me (and therefore help to define this blog), I offer them now. The first was from our governor:

Nikki Haley (@nikkihaley)
4/17/11 1:43 PM
Spending the day appreciating the sacrifices He made for us and our blessings on this beautiful Palm Sunday in South Carolina.

The second is from someone I never heard of — she was retweeted by Howard Weaver, a former McClatchy VP:

Annie Heckenberger (@anniemal)
4/17/11 1:19 PM
dreamt I stood in mass & told off a priest, closing w/ “ur the reason This Brand is failing in the western world.” James Franco was there.

Can you see, without my explaining, why these examples of typical attitudes on the left and right would put me off? If not, I’ll briefly explain…

The first is, simply put, an example of public prayer of the sort that was proscribed in Matthew chapter 6:

“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

Frankly, I have what some might regard as a conflicted view toward that passage, although I prefer to think of my position as “nuanced.” For instance, someone who doesn’t understand my view might say I should also be put off by my friend Warren Bolton when he writes such a column as his Passion Sunday reflection. Or they might wonder why I quietly return thanks before eating in public places. It’s because, in our cases, I see it as countercultural.

Jesus was speaking within the context of a culture that rewarded public piety. You advanced your position in society by praying on a street corner. In the United States of the 21st century, you’re asking to be regarded as a nut if you do that. Big difference. And if you’re a newspaperman, well… if you’re not, you probably don’t understand the degree to which that is NOT the way to get ahead in the world. (Of course, being a newspaperman, period, is no way to get ahead in the world, but I’m speaking of the times when Warren and I were coming up in the business, before the collapse.) So I always encouraged Warren to write columns like that, for the same reason I encouraged him and other board members to write columns, period (and to some extent why I started blogging) — so that readers would know the people behind the editorials. And that is definitely who Warren is.

But there are certain subsets of society where Pharisaic behavior is to your advantage. And that is the case among Nikki Haley’s political base. So I see something like that from her, and I think, “That’s exactly what Jesus was on about.”

Now, if she had done something WITH it — made some original observation or something, that somehow played off the liturgy — I wouldn’t have bridled at it. But what she said was so bumper-sticker, so unoriginal, so “Look at me; I’m a Christian,” that it saddened me to see it. (And yes, I know that judging other people’s expressions of faith doesn’t seem like something that puts me in too well with the Lord, either. But I thought there was some relevant commentary to be made here. I hope I’m right.)

Then there was the second Tweet, which is just a pointless little fling at religion (particularly the flavor to which I subscribe) that was SO gratuitous, and in its own way SO like what Nikki did, that it helped inspire this post. How, you ask, was it like what the gov did? Here’s how: This writer ALSO had nothing to say to the world except to declare, to a certain subset of it, “Look at me! I’m one of you!” In her case, it was, “I have generalized hostility to organized religion, and particular to those atavistic creatures, Catholic priests!” Or perhaps it was simply, “I am a thoroughly modern young woman!” to put it on its most basic level.

The thing that got me about it was that the object of her scorn in the dream wasn’t a particular person with a particular narrative that the reader might join her in condemning. No, he was merely “a priest,” making her dream diatribe a blanket condemnation of all priests — which was all that was needed to establish her credentials with the social subset she was appealing to.

Now, fact is, this one does have some extenuating features. For one thing, it includes self-deprecating humor, with the addendum about James Franco. That lightens up the whole tweet. (I mean, I assume it was self-deprecating. If I had a dream about James Franco, and told the world, I would certainly be holding myself up to ridicule.) And her bit about “the Brand” makes me slightly curious to hear more. Is she saying she cares about and wants to protect and/or improve The Brand, and how does she define that brand? Such a discussion might prove productive.

For that matter, I can defend the governor’s Tweet, too, as being innocuous, even positive. I certainly don’t disagree with anything she said. And I realize that criticizing her for it can be seen as nitpicking of a low order. I also realize that honest, praiseworthy expressions of faith can easily, and unfairly, be mistaken for cynical, self-serving public piety. There can be something wonderful and uplifting about pausing to say “Behold this beautiful day that the Lord has made,” and I’d hate to inhibit anyone from doing so. (And if Nikki had sent that Tweet back before she became the darling of the Tea Party and so nakedly, obviously ambitious, I might have retweeted it with an “Amen.”)

But as it is… I’m just sharing with you how I reacted to those two Tweets, which came within moments of each other — and soliciting your thoughts as well.

Rev. Charles Jackson of Brookland Baptist gives invocation in Congress

I enjoyed this video, shared by Luther Battiste. Luther is chairman of the board of the Capital City Club, on which Rev. Jackson and I both serve. It’s hard to imagine a better choice Congress could have made than Rev. Jackson. It makes me think better of Congress.

If you watch it past the invocation itself, and the Pledge of Allegiance, you’ll get another treat — or at least it was a treat to me, by UnParty standards — both Joe Wilson and Jim Clyburn agreeing in praising Rev. Jackson and the wonderful witness to the community that Brookland Baptist provides. I’ve long regarded Reps. Wilson and Clyburn as the two most partisan members of the SC delegation. At least, I thought that until the recent election. And in the conventional sense of party, they still may be the most fiercely orthodox Republican and Democratic members. I’m not sure those new Tea Party guys fit in that category.

In any case, even if you say they are just being polite, I enjoy watching and hearing them get together on something.

Obama’s just looking better and better to me (and the UnParty) all the time

And no, this isn’t just because the Republicans who would oppose him seem engaged in a contest to see who can be the biggest whack job. It’s more about Obama himself.

Earlier, I indicated that Obama was, after a weak outing in 2008, looking more and more like the Energy Party candidate for 2012.

Well, now… and I’m even more happy about this… he’s looking more and more like he wants the nod of the UnParty.

I saw this most clearly reading a piece in the NYT’s Week In Review from Sunday, “Obama, Searching for a Vision.”

Well, first off, I don’t think Obama’s searching for a vision. I think he’s got one, and it looks clearer, and better, every day. Perhaps he is, as the piece suggests, “being pressed as never before to define what American liberalism means for the 21st century.” At least, pressed by some.

But what I think he’s doing is something much higher and better — defining pragmatism for the 21st century. This is what I’ve always liked about him, but as he comes to embody it more fully, as the right hates him more passionately and the left whines louder about how disappointing he is, I see him more favorably than ever.

Perhaps this can be explained most simply by the fact that he keeps doing stuff I agree with. Take this passage from the piece:

Mr. Obama has always cast himself as a pragmatist and he seems to be feeling his way in the post-midterm election environment. In some areas, he has retreated. The decision announced last week to try the accused Sept. 11 plotters in a military commission at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, represented a 180-degree reversal under pressure from congressional Republicans and some Democrats. His embrace of a free-trade pact with Colombia continued a new emphasis on trade for a Democrat who once vowed to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, or Nafta.

The war in Libya represents one of the most complicated issues for Mr. Obama as he sets out his own form of modern liberalism. The hero of the anti-war movement in 2008 effectively is adopting Mr. Clinton’s humanitarian interventions in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s as a model, while trying to distinguish his actions from Mr. Bush’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Most of that I knew about, and have applauded. But somehow I missed that he had shaken off the completely irrational, amoral opposition of Big Labor to the Colombia Free Trade pact. Way to go, Mr. President!

Most political commentators, trapped in the extremely limiting notion that the politicians they write and speak about must either be of the left or right, can’t make him out. But he keeps making perfect sense to me. Perhaps I should send a memo out to the MSM letting them know that there’s a third way they can think of a politician (actual, there’s an infinite number of ways, but let’s not blow their little minds; one step at a time). There’s left (as “left” is popularly and imperfectly described) and right (as “right” is popularly and imperfectly described), and then there’s Brad Warthen. As in, “The candidate’s recent statements have been Warthenesque,” or “That was a distinctly Braddish move he made last week.”

It would open up whole new vistas for our national political conversation. Certainly a broader landscape than what we’re used to, with its limited expectations.

I LIKE a guy who at least tries to give us health care reform. I thought he didn’t go nearly far enough on that, but now that I see Republicans’ internal organs have turned inside-out in apoplexy at what little he’s done, I suppose he lowered his sights out of compassion for what REAL reform would have done to them.

I like a guy who realizes that closing Guantánamo (as both he AND McCain wanted to do, and generally for sound reasons) and trying all those guys in civil courts was impractical, and moves on.

And folks, please — he was never the “anti-war” candidate. Come on. He considered Iraq to be the “wrong war” — a respectable position to take — and that the “right war” was Afghanistan. Yeah, I have a beef with his timeline stuff, but at least he’s left a hole in that wide enough to drive a Humvee through. He’s been pragmatic about it. And yeah, maybe he got out-toughed by the French, but that’s a GOOD thing. Let France feel like the knight in shining armor for once. Maybe it will be less surly in the future.

But seriously, the guy just looks better all the time — from an UnParty perspective.

I’m glad I don’t work for Lindsey Graham

This came in from Lindsey Graham this afternoon:

Graham To Refuse Pay, Close Offices, Furlough Staff During Government Shutdown

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this announcement on how his Senate office will function, should the Congress and President fail to come to agreement on the federal budget by midnight.  Each Member of Congress is responsible for establishing their procedures for operation during a government shutdown.

  • Senator Graham will refund his salary to the Federal Treasury for the time the government remains shutdown.
  • Senator Graham’s offices in Columbia, Florence, Greenville, Mount Pleasant, Pendleton, Rock Hill, and Washington will be closed during the shutdown.
  • Senator Graham’s staff — both in Washington and South Carolina — will be furloughed and placed on unpaid leave.

“I will refund my salary to the Bureau of the Public Debt within the U.S. Department of Treasury,” said Graham.  “Our brave men and women serving in uniform will not get paid during the shutdown. I believe Members of Congress should think twice about putting their way of life before those who fight to protect it.

“I’m disappointed Democrats in Congress and President Obama have not agreed to our very reasonable requests for spending reductions,” said Graham.  “What we’re seeking is belt-tightening at the federal level, a practice millions of Americans have already gone through.  It’s long past time we get our nation’s fiscal house in order.  The essence of our proposal is to take spending back to 2008 levels plus inflation.  Our proposal is by no means extreme.

“I’m very proud of my staffers who deliver high-quality constituent services to the people of South Carolina,” said Graham.  “It’s a tradition I’ve tried to carry over from Senator Thurmond.  However, I cannot justify having the offices open during a government shutdown when the staff will be unable to meaningfully help people.

“Therefore, my staffers will be furloughed without pay,” said Graham.  “I truly believe with the government shut down, we can’t deliver services to the people of South Carolina in a way to justify the expense.  In light of those facts, closing the office and furloughing the staff is the fiscally-responsible step to take.”

#####

Of course, I went without pay for about nine months not so long ago. I suppose I could tell these folks to buck up, that it’s a character-building experience. But I know better. I know that it’s just a lousy situation. And it’s caused by polticos in Washington acting like children over the budget. (And no, senator; it’s not just the Democrats failing to be “reasonable.”)

I heard some highamuckymuck on the radio today pontificating on the subject, saying that the disagreement came down to one thing: spending.

And I’m like duh, yeah, I guess so — seeing as how it’s the budget we’re talking about here. Congrats on figuring that out, Einstein.

Feelings, nothing more than feelings: The video launching Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign

Have you viewed the video kicking off Obama’s re-election campaign (which was all anyone was Tweeting about this morning, it seemed)?

Not much to say about it — because it doesn’t have much, or really anything, to say.

All it really conveys is… feelings. Vague feelings at that. And even for communicating vague feelings, it’s low key.

I’m a bit of a wonkish sort, and prefer a tad more heft than this — not much, just a bit would do. Presumably, more substance is to come. But then again, I’m reminded that Obama is a Democrat, and that party reflects the distaff side of the gender gap, so…

OK, there’s more I could have said there, but I thought better of it. Each party has its aspects that fail to connect with me, and with the Dems it tends to be a certain… femininity… in communication style.

There, I said it. Fine. I haven’t been yelled at all day; might as well start.

Of course, hats off to the ad wizards behind this because they DID start off with a Southern white guy. From the beginning, you hear that voice, over the touchy-feely strumming of an acoustic guitar, and you think: Who’s that? Certainly doesn’t sound like most Obama supporters I know. Which, of course, is what I’m supposed to think. What that guy is saying, by being who he is demographically, is “Don’t put Obama in a box.”

Anyway, what did y’all think of it?

The jig isss up the newsss is out/ They’ve finally found me

Imagine that Styx oldie being covered with a LOT of sibilance… This just in, from NPR:

The snake’s Twitter page is suspiciously quiet. He last checked in from the Yankees game a couple hours ago.

But MyFoxNY.com claims to have been told by a source that officials from the Wildlife Conservation Society are going to announce soon that the “Bronx Zoo cobra” has been recovered.

And NBC News says it’s been told “the snake is now in quarantine” and that a 4 p.m. ET news conference is planned.

If you’re not up to ssspeed on this story, you could start here.

Thus ends the best new Twitter feed of the week…

The terrible burden of hating the president

Catching up on messages and such…

Couple of nights ago, I Tweeted, “Missed the president’s speech. Too early. My wife caught it, though, and said he did well. And she’s a tough audience. So I’m satisfied…”

To which Burl responded,

Just imagine how tough it is to hate absolutely everything the prez says and does.

I imagine that it would be a burden.

Or would it just make life simpler?

I don’t know. It doesn’t seem to make them happy. The people on the left who suffered from Bush Derangement Syndrome didn’t seem happy, either.

So I’m thinking, “burden.”

Welcome to the Energy Party, Mr. Obama (I hope)

Hope. Change. Energy Party... /2008 file photo

Heard an encouraging report on the radio this morning that I can’t seem to find now online, but there’s this from the WSJ:

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama, under pressure to respond to rising gas prices, will outline Wednesday a series of initiatives to cut the nation’s reliance on foreign oil, including new initiatives to expand oil production, increase the use of natural gas to power vehicles and increase production of ethanol….

The political heat over energy policy is rising in tandem with the price of gasoline and diesel fuels at filling stations, in a ritual that has become familiar in Washington since the oil price shocks of the mid-1970s. “We’ve been having this conversation for nearly four decades now,” Mr. Obama said during a March 11 news conference. “Every few years, gas prices go up; politicians pull out the same old political playbook, and then nothing changes.”

The White House will cast the new effort, a combination of new ideas and previously announced initiatives, as an effort to deal with the nation’s long-term energy challenge, not just the high gas prices of the moment.

Mr. Obama will put forward an overall goal of reducing oil imports by one third over a decade, with half the reduction from decreasing consumption and half from increasing domestic supply, according to two people briefed by the White House…

And this from the NYT:

WASHINGTON — With gasoline prices rising, oil supplies from the Middle East pinched by political upheaval and growing calls in Congress for expanded domestic oil and gas production, President Obama on Wednesday will set a goal of a one-third reduction in oil imports over the next decade, aides said Tuesday.

The president, in a speech to be delivered at Georgetown University, will say that the United States needs, for geopolitical and economic reasons, to reduce its reliance on imported oil, according to White House officials who provided a preview of the speech on the condition that they not be identified. More than half of the oil burned in the United States today comes from overseas and from Mexico and Canada.

Mr. Obama will propose a mix of measures, none of them new, to help the nation cut down on its thirst for oil. He will point out the nation’s tendency, since the first Arab oil embargo in 1973, to panic when gas prices rise and then fall back into old gas-guzzling habits when they recede.

He will call for a consistent long-term fuel-savings strategy of producing more electric cars, converting trucks to run on natural gas, building new refineries to brew billions of gallons of biofuels and setting new fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles. Congress has been debating these measures for years.

The president will also repeat his assertion that despite the frightening situation at the Fukushima Daiichi reactor complex in Japan, nuclear power will remain an important source of electricity in the United States for decades to come, aides said.

He will respond to members of Congress and oil industry executives who have complained that the administration has choked off domestic oil and gas production by imposing costly new regulations and by blocking exploration on millions of acres of potentially oil-rich tracts both on shore and off.

The administration is not prepared to open new public lands and waters to drilling, officials said, but will use a new set of incentives and penalties to prod industry to develop resources on the lands they already have access to…

Wish I could find the radio report, because it pretty much painted what the president will have to say as being VERY Energy Party. As you may recall I took both Mr. Obama and John McCain to task in 2008 for being unworthy of Energy Party support, however many other virtues the two may have possessed (and as you know, I liked them both — it was the first time ever that both parties nominated my first choices in their respective fields).

But increasingly, Mr. Obama seems to GET IT — that it’s not about keeping gas prices low; it’s not about pleasing the left or the right. It’s about freeing this country from its dependence from foreign oil, for all sorts of economic and geopolitical reasons. Nothing we could do would be more likely to make the nation stronger and healthier.

It’s about being a grownup, and taking the long view.

Standing up for civilization, harrumph

Ever since the WSJ added a third daily opinion page (when they followed the rest of the industry and went to narrower pages to save newsprint), at about the same time we were cutting back on pages at The State in my desperate bid to get through bad times without cutting people (see how well that worked out?), I have…

Wait. I got lost in the multiple parentheticals… oh, yeah… ever since then, I’ve been hooked on the daily book review that runs all the way down the right-hand side of that page, Mondays through Fridays. For the first time in I don’t know when, I go into Barnes & Noble and am well familiar with pretty much everything on the “new arrival” shelves. And I’ve always got a list of books I want when Father’s Day, my birthday and Christmas roll around. To the point that I’m backed up on reading, and so intimidated by the stack of new books that I avoid the issue by rereading the Aubrey/Maturin series instead (I’m now on my fifth time through The Fortune of War).

But here’s another one I might have to request and add to the shelf, reviewed in today’s paper:

Among academics, the word “civilization” has long had a sinister ring to it, carrying associations of elitism and luxury. Worse, it is linked to imperialism, having provided Europeans with the justification for their far-flung conquests in centuries past—and, these days, for endless self-flagellation.

With “In Search of Civilization,” John Armstrong, the resident philosopher at the Melbourne Business School in Australia, sets out to restore the reputation of a word that, to him, represents something infinitely precious and life-sustaining, a source of strength and inspiration. The great civilizations, he says, provide “a community of maturity in which across the ages individuals try to help each other cope with the demands of mortality.”

As he makes clear, his purpose is not to provide a history of various civilizations or to update Samuel Huntington’s seminal 1996 book on the post-Cold War world, “The Clash of Civilizations,” though he cites Huntington’s conclusion that today’s real conflict is between civilization and barbarism. Mr. Armstrong wishes to convey what the idea means to him personally…

Indeed. Too bloody right. The real conflict — at home and abroad, is between civilization and barbarism. And it so often seems that civilization is losing, especially on the domestic front. And most especially in our politics, increasingly defined by mutually exclusive factions screaming pointlessly at each other.

I mean, what’s the world coming to when a guy who is supposedly all dedicated to having a civil blog starts using modifiers like “bloody?” I ask you…

Anyway, the book sounds interesting, and possibly edifying. I like the ending. After lamenting the state of the humanities in academia, the review concludes:

Our artists, too, have failed: The author sees Andy Warhol, Damien Hirst, Jeff Koons and their ilk as representatives of a decadent cultural elite that insists on provocation and newness as the only criteria for judging art. “Mockery, irony and archness,” Mr. Armstrong says, “is not what we need.” What is needed is hope and confidence. The treasures are all there to be rediscovered, if only we would bother.

Indeed, again. And harrumph, say I.

Watch out! Nancy’s had enough

As accustomed as I am to the familiar tone of these appeals from the parties — you know, the ones that are all about whipping you up and making you really, REALLY hate the opposition, so that you’ll be angry enough to give money — I was still taken aback when I looked at my Blackberry and saw that I had an e-mail from Nancy Pelosi beginning, “Brad, I’ve had enough…”

First, I didn’t know we were such intimates. Second, whatever did I do to upset her? That concerns me, seeing as how we’re so close. Apparently.

Anyway, here’s the message:

Brad —

Do you know what House Republicans have done to create jobs since claiming the Majority three months ago? Nothing.

However, they’ve found time for votes to restrict access to reproductive health care, take teachers out of our classrooms, nurses out of our hospitals, and even to defund NPR. All told, Republican cuts would destroy 700,000 jobs.

I’ve had enough of the Republicans’ extremist anti-jobs agenda and I think you have too.

On March 31st, we’ll hit the first FEC quarterly filing deadline since the outrageous GOP power play in Wisconsin and Republicans took the reins in the House. The eyes of the nation will be on our fundraising numbers to judge our grassroots determination to fight back against the radical Republican agenda. We must have a strong showing.

Contribute $5 or more to the DCCC’s Million Dollar Matching Gift Campaign right now. This deadline is so important that if you contribute today, my fellow House Democrats and I will match every dollar you give with two of our own up to our $1 Million goal.

Fight Back

An extreme Republican majority has launched an all out assault on middle class America. It began in Wisconsin, but has spread to Congress and state houses across the country.

Secretive groups like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS are already up on the air running vicious attack ads against House Democrats who are standing up against the Republican assault and fighting for middle class working families.

I’ve set a goal of $1 million before the March FEC deadline to show the world that we have the grassroots strength to fight radical Republican budget cuts and to stand up for middle class American families.

Contribute $5 or more to the DCCC’s Million Dollar Matching Gift Campaign right now. This deadline is so important that if you contribute today, my fellow House Democrats and I will match every dollar you give with two of our own — tripling the impact of your gift.

The DCCC counts on individual donors like you for 75% of their funding. Together, we can turn back this Republican attack on the middle class and move America forward. Please contribute today.

Thank you.

Nancy Pelosi
Democratic Leader

P.S. The first FEC quarterly deadline of the year is just 10 days from now. We must exceed our $1 Million grassroots goal to show the world that Democrats are strong, united and determined to fight back against the radical Republican agenda. Contribute Now.

The radical Republicans? What! Reconstruction is back? Has anyone told Wade Hampton?

These messages leave me really torn. On the one hand, I want to get off the mailing list, because I don’t want them thinking I’m the kind of sap to whom all this nasty partisan stuff would appeal (and really, is there anything more inimical to civil discourse in a free society than deliberately trying to get people angry so that they’ll give you money?). I’ve written about this before, quoting the sage Bugs Bunny. (“He don’t know me very well, do he?”)

But on the other hand, it’s kind of nice to know that Nancy thinks we’re such good friends.