Who Moved?

A married couple of 40 years are driving together on a long trip.  The husband is behind the wheel while the wife is up against the passenger side window watching the scenery.  The husband brakes the car at a stop light.  Through the window, he can see a young couple in the car in front of him.  The young couple is sitting close together and they have their arms around one another.  

“Will you look at that?” said the husband.

The wife looks at the couple in the other car and comments, “That’s nice.  Why aren’t we like that anymore?”

The husband replies, “Who moved?”

I heard this joke at church on Sunday and while the priest was not talking about politics, my mind drifted that way nonetheless.  It’s my curse.  This is the kind of joke Obama could tell to illustrate what has happened to the Republican Party over the past 4+ years.  In his version, it would be the GOP that has moved and it’s not funny.  It’s sad.

The Republicans used to support cap and trade legislation as recently as 2008, until Obama supported it.  Then they moved.  The Republicans used to support an individual mandate as recently as 2009, until Obama supported it.  Then they moved.  The Republicans used to support the DREAM Act, until Obama supported it.  Then they moved.  Being against Obama seems to be the only criterion for evaluating a policy position these days for the GOP.

The same play is being run when it comes to comprehensive immigration reform.  It is a fairly simple formula:

Step 1: Demonize the President for not leading and demand to see his plan.

Step 2: Once the President presents a plan, demonize him for being partisan and encroaching on Congress’ ability to get things done.

Step 3: See Step 1.

The GOP has called out Obama for not leading on immigration reform (even though he called on Congress to address the issue in every State of the Union of his Presidency).  This week, his reform plan leaked to the media, a plan pretty much exactly like the one John McCain championed in 2007.  The GOP was for it before they were against it.  

This release of the immigration outline in response to GOP Step 1 triggered GOP Step 2.  Sen. Mario Rubio called the President’s plan dead on arrival and that his “interference” in Congressional matters made a final agreement less likely.

For Obama, it’s the Kobayashi Maru, the no-win scenario (look it up).

Recent polls show that Republicans favor the President’s plan, but only when it is described without partisan attribution.  Add one variable - Obama’s name - and popularity of the plan for GOP voters drops almost 20 points.

I think the Republicans are the ones that have moved.  They have even moved when it comes to their Number One objective of the past 4 years.  Today, the GOP has vowed to limit Obama to a “two term Presidency”.  The difference is subtle, but it is a difference for their earlier plans. 

I don’t think that our political parties should act like newly in love teenagers, all cuddled up holding hands.  Both parties do enough of that with their real lovers, the major campaign donors.  I do think we can clearly identify who done the moving away though.

BONUS Material (as it relates to the subject of moving away):

I recommend a recent op-ed in the New York Times by conservative writer Ramesh Ponnuru.  He argues that the GOP needs to move away from Ronald Reagan, especially as it relates to dealing with policy issues 25 years after he left office.  Ponnuru reminds us that Reagan cut taxes at a time when the top rate was 70%; now it’s half of that. 

“In his first Inaugural Address, Reagan famously said that ‘government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.’ The less famous yet crucial beginning of that sentence was ‘in our present crisis.’ The question is whether conservatism revives by attending to today’s conditions, or becomes something withered and dead.”

Republicans, you can worship him if you like (he could give a very good speech, a skill you used to value, but then you moved), but stop worshipping the specific 1980s solutions for 21^st century problems.

Makers and Takers

Who are the Makers and who are the Takers?

According to my friends on the Right, the Makers are the patriotic class of the mythical entrepreneurs that grant the unwashed gainful employment as a favor to this nation.  These Makers contribute to the greater good by giving work to others, and they set a powerful example for self-reliance by making as much profit as they possibly can at the expense of the workers.  If you work hard for a Maker, maybe someday, you could be one of them, a self-made Maker.  This is some sort of Maker’s tough love.  

According to my friends on the Right, the Takers are best represented by the 47% made famous in Mitt Romney’s secretly recorded talk to a group of Makers.  You may remember this video as detailing the message that Romney initially embraced, then disavowed, then embraced again after the election.  The Takers make nothing.  The Takers are killing the Makers, he explained.  That giant sucking sound you hear are the Takers doing what they do best – sucking the will to produce from the Makers.  

According to my friends on the Right, It’s not easy being a Maker.

After careful consideration, I am starting to wonder if the Makers might actually be the Takers in sheep’s clothing.

According to me, not enough attention is being paid to the idea that, considered another way, the Makers are the Takers.  The Makers are taking from taxpayers.  The Makers have taken from Taker pension funds.  The Makers take the Taker's livelihood when they allow unsafe working conditions in exchange for greater profitability.  That giant sucking sound you hear are the Makers doing what they do best – sucking the will to produce from the Takers. 

To even make this point, I am now libeled a class warfare warrior, out to discredit Makers and by extension, freedom.  But aren’t those discrediting the Takers also class warfare warriors?  

Thankfully, we have a new Senator from Massachusetts who is questioning the right wing preconceptions of the Makers and Takers.  She is asking questions that I would hope the Tea Party would cheer with the same passion as those East Coast liberal elites who financed her campaign.

Who is the Maker and who is the Taker?

Thanks to Rick Manfredi for the head's up on this clip

I don’t know what kind of Senator she’ll be, but I appreciate the questions.

This is the kind of message that the Tea Party should embrace.  This is the story of the Little Guy getting crushed by the Big Guy.  Unfortunately, some Rich Big Guys convinced the Tea Party Patriots that it was Other Little Guys taking their stuff, not the Makers.  The Little Guys are easy to pick out, too.  They are mostly brown, or young, or talk with foreign accents.  

The ranks of the 47% grew larger after the Bush recession wiped out 40% of the wealth of the middle class.  The banks and the bank heads were then rewarded with taxpayer dollars.  Remind me again – who are the Takers?

Could be the ones covered in the cookie crumbs.

A great song from a great band that wears its politics on its sleeve.

I Give Up

In America, it is customary, even for the non-religious, to celebrate the Lenten season by depriving ourselves of pleasure, temporarily of course.  After all, we are Americans.  These 40 days of sacrifice barely put a dent in the damage done the other 325 days that we spend indulging our every whim without remorse, but it’s the thought that counts.  At least for 40 days, we are reminded that there is life without Facebook, life without chocolate, and life despite the futility of grueling P90X session.  We know there’s life after P90X because the pain is something that only the living could experience.

Food is usually the first thing on the annual I Give Up list.  Catholics commemorate the season by skipping meat in meals on Fridays.  I wonder if Catholic vegetarians skip vegetables on Fridays and force themselves to have hamburgers exclusively for the day.  That’s the kind of sacrifice that defines the spirit of Lent to me. 

As expected, the famous enjoy publicly promoting their specific Lenten sacrifices to the rest of us.  The goal of these pronouncements is two-fold: first, a goal publicly declared becomes more likely to be achieved, and second, it makes the rest of us feel badly about ourselves.

I reached out from my desktop and electronically asked hundreds of individuals and organizations (per the Supreme Court, aren’t organizations people?) to tell me what they plan to sacrifice for the next 6 weeks.  Here is a list of the Lenten sacrifices of the rich, famous, and powerful (otherwise known as “The Respondents”) in our modern world.  Maybe we can learn through their examples:

What Will I Give Up for Lent?

·         Pope Benedict XVI – Alarm clocks

·         Barack Obama – Pretending to like John Boehner

·         Rep. John Boehner – Pretending not to hate Barack Obama

·         Steve Martin – Sleeping in

·         International Olympic Committee – Wrestling

·         Sen. John McCain – Reason and accountability

·         North Korea – Irrelevance

·         Sarah Palin - Relevance

·         Fox News – Sarah Palin

·         Princess Kate Middleton – Wearing heels 

·         Washington Nationals – Innings limits

·         Taylor Swift – My boyfriend (whoever it happens to be at time of publication)

·         Redskins QB Robert Griffin III - Mobility

·         The New Orleans Superdome – the position of Director of Electrical Affairs

·         The NHL Owners – Locking out the players

·         The NHL Players – 7% of our money

·         NRA spokesperson Wayne LaPierre – Nothing…I will give up nothing

·         Ted Nugent – My citizenship

·         Sen. Marco Rubio – Thirst

·         General David Petraeus – G-Mail

·         Tom Cruise – Half my money

·         Suri Cruise – Yeah, right

·         Honey Boo Boo – Taco Bell

·         Go Daddy.com – Good taste

·         Americans – Carnival Cruises

·         The Republican Party – I think we’ve given up enough already

·         The Democratic Party – I think we’ve given up enough already

Whatever you give up this year, don’t quit me, baby.  That kind of sacrifice won’t make you better as a person.

Good luck, quitters.

Biden His Time

It is no secret that Vice President Joe Biden has his eye on upgrading his West Wing office view come 2016, and this should be his moment.  Sadly, Biden’s out of bounds behavior in his quest for Obama’s endorsement may have placed him on the 2016 bench in favor of Hillary Clinton.

According to newly obtained classified communications from the administration, the game changing moment of the race for the 2016 Democratic nomination may have already happened on a White House basketball court. 

Buried within some leaked diplomatic cables was a treasure trove of intimate White House Instant Messenger exchanges between the President and Vice President.  It seems that in Biden’s zeal to impress Obama and discredit Clinton, he may have committed one too many fouls. 

CLASSIFIED

Biden:   Hey, Barry.  U there?

Obama:  I have told you a thousand times, Joe – stop calling me Barry.

Biden:  OK, Barry ;)-  Hey, BO.  Can I play in the big game this week?  It’s a big deal to me.  I’ve got sick ball handling skills.

Obama:  No. 

Biden:  You scared I’ll show you up?  I am a Veep Wrangler, baby, ready to drive through the lane, dribble the rock to the hole.

Obama:  I think I’ve seen enough of your dribbling at late afternoon Cabinet meetings, Joe.

Biden:  I’ve been working on my game.  No daily briefings until I hit 100 free throws.  Drilling the baby hook with consistency, too.  C’mon, let me play, my brother.

Obama:  You are not my brother, Joe.  Cut it out.

Biden:  It’s all good.  I think you won’t let me play ‘cause I’m white.  I talked to Holder.  He’s with me.  That’s reverse discrimination, man!  I got a case.  LOL.

Obama:  It’s not discrimination.  We just don’t need another Salami out there.  Geithner’s our Salami.  That’s our quota.

Biden:  You need my experience.  I’ll bring my ABA vintage ball.  It’s the schezel.

Obama:  Help me, Lord.  

Later that same day:

Biden:  Nice game, Who-Sane.  BTW, Cantor was right - that last basket was a travel.

Obama:  No, it wasn’t.  Please call me Mr. President.

Biden:  Not a travel?  You could have walked halfway to Kenya on that last move.

Obama:  That’s a cheap shot, Joe.  Speaking of cheap shots…

Biden:  Hey, I had open looks.  Maybe if you redistributed the ball once in a while.  You were feeding the biscuit to Reid all day long.  All he did was hold the ball and stall.  He was lost out there while McConnell ran circles around him.  At least I tried to make something happen.

Obama:  You are too easy to defend.  You always go left.  We can’t use you on the team if you can’t go right once in a while.

Biden:  That’s my signature.  I fake right, then BOOM goes the dynamite!

Obama:  When I talk about transparency, I don't mean for you to disappear on defense.  And you missed 10 straight shots.  Why don’t you shut up and just play sometimes?

Biden:  I couldn’t concentrate out there with McCain screaming “Benghazi!” every time I touched the ball.  You try it.

Obama:  I have. 

Biden:  Yo, I think Hillary likes me.  Hear how she squealed when I took that charge from Boehner?  I think his bronzer stained my jersey.  Think he’ll pay the cleaning bill if I bury it into the next Defense authorization?  Ha ha. 

Obama:  You need to apologize to Hillary, Joe.  She had clear position and you ran right over her.  I think she has a concussion.  For a guy that wrote the Violence Against Women Act, you sure don’t show much mercy in the lane.

Biden:  Her position was not set.  I couldn’t tell if she was shifting left, right or staying in the center.  She needed to get out of my way.  It’s a contact sport!

Obama:  You deliberately ran over her.

Biden:  She’s a flopper.  You’re not buying those tears, are you?  Remember New Hampshire? 

Obama:  She’s likable enough.  And Joe – she was on our team.  I hope she’s OK.

Biden:  She’ll come back.  She always does.

Obama:  Gotta run.  60 Minutes on the other line.

If Biden can’t improve his game in Obama’s eyes, there’s no chance he’ll be asked to lead the team in 2016.

Did You Know?

…The White House basketball court “shot clock” was renamed the “time of possession clock” in January by executive order?

…Bill Clinton holds the all-time record for most personal fouls committed during a Presidential term?

…Hawaii is considered by some political scientists to be one of the 50 states?

…The White House basketball team has never lost a home game to the Washington Generals?

The Walking Lead

I have seen parts of some episodes of the AMC show The Walking Dead, along with some inside parts of the characters on the show.  As the show’s title would suggest, the content can be graphic and on that count, the show does not disappoint.  If you don’t need to close your eyes and look away, it can’t be good television anymore.  Fear sells.  

It’s not just about blood and guts.  The blood and guts is merely the sexy window dressing for the standard human drama of different people thrust into a stressful situation, coping and conflicting together.  In that sense, it’s no different than Survivor or The Bachelorette or Hockey Night in Canada.  We tune in for the fights and for the violence.  

I have never been much of a fan of zombies and the thought of watching zombies gorge on a living human smorgasbord turns my stomach.  The show does have a loyal and motivated following however, so I was curious about all the hype. 

I did watch about 30 minutes of an episode the other day on an empty stomach.  The cast was in constant fear of the soulless creatures breaking into their encampment and attacking the innocent without remorse.  The citizens protected themselves with rifles equipped with high capacity magazines, and they were not afraid to use them.  Thank goodness for the 2nd Amendment or else zombies would have taken over their world. 

 

Watching the TV drama unfold put today’s gun culture in perspective for me.    Without guns and high capacity magazines, the zombie apocalypse would lead to the end of humanity as we know it.  In the same way, without guns and high capacity magazines in our communities, the invasion of illegal immigrants and gangbangers would lead to the end of American humanity as we know it.

Guns will save the world from criminals and zombies.  Fear sells, and right now, it’s selling a sh*tload guns in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Scared.

My wife visited the store recently and the store shares a parking lot with an expo center that was sponsoring a gun show.  The parking lot was packed.  Men, women, zombies and families were bustling in and out of the show, happily shopping for new gun and ammo options.  These folks were exercising their legal rights under the 2nd Amendment.  Have a good time.  

What brought them out to the show wasn’t just a deep belief in freedom.  I believe that the traffic at the gun show represents less a display of Constitutional solidarity than a display of fear in action.  The large number of attendees is a validation that fear drives the sales of weapons, and sales drives the profitability of the gun industry, so more fear is on tap.  

In The Walking Dead, the bad people are infected with a disease, and they are coming for you.  They will not stop unless you destroy them by being constantly vigilant and exercising superior firepower.  In modern America, we’re being told the same thing and many believe it.  Bad people are coming to get you, so buy a gun.  Only another more powerful weapon will protect you and your loved ones from the criminal (or federal) apocalypse.  Be armed and ready because anything could happen. 

Of course anything is possible, which is the same rationalization used by families in the 1950s who dug bomb shelters in their backyards and germophobes who wash their hands 30-40 times a day.  Anything can happen.  Statistically, however, anything rarely happens.

   

Statistically you are between 12 and 43 times more likely to be shot or killed if you own a gun than if you do not.  That’s a wide range and it depends on whose research you trust most, but suffice to say, owning a gun makes being shot more likely than not.  That’s factually true.  But the gun show parking lot was at overflow with people lining up for the chance to own one, before the Obama Zombies come to take them away I guess. 

I don’t want to ban guns or confiscate guns.  Obama doesn’t either.  But I am asking the question - how many do we really need?  Why is everyone so afraid and what industry is benefiting from that fear?

The contagion of fear that is driving gun sales about as rational as the fear of the coming zombie apocalypse.  That doesn’t stop people from preparing, just in case, as this story from Montana illustrates:

A Montana television station’s regular programming was interrupted by news of a zombie apocalypse.

The Montana Television Network said hackers broke into the Emergency Alert System of Great Falls affiliate KRTV and its CW station Monday.

KRTV said on its website the hackers broadcast that “dead bodies are rising from their graves” in several Montana counties.

The alert claimed the bodies were “attacking the living” and warned people not to “approach or apprehend these bodies as they are extremely dangerous.”

The network said there is no emergency and its engineers are investigating.

A call to KRTV was referred to a Montana Television Network executive in Bozeman. Jon Saunders didn’t immediately return a call for comment.

The Great Falls Tribune reported the hoax alert generated at least four calls to police to see if the report were true.

No need to stock up, gentlemen, even though anything could happen.  It’s just a TV show.

Fear sells.

Nugent's TED Talk

The Motor City Madman, Ted Nugent, has been invited to attend tonight’s State of the Union address by Republican Representative Steve Stockman.  Congressman Stockman felt that having Nugent in attendance, a strong supporter of 2^nd Amendment extremism, would serve as a fitting counterbalance to Obama’s inclusion of innocent gun victims in the crowd.  This could be the beginning of an arms race of the stars. 

In order to counterbalance Ted Nugent, Harry Reid should invite Bruce Springsteen, a rock star with more than one hit song and a public record of supporting reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.  Of course, John Boehner might then counter with Clint Eastwood, famous movie star and amateur chair whisperer.  That could escalate Invitation-Gate and lead to Nancy Pelosi bringing George Clooney along.  At that point, Eric Cantor may have to invoke the nuclear option to get attention – Honey Boo Boo.

The State of the Union address is devolving into a 21^st Century Star Wars.  The more powerful the guest list, the better chance your message will be heard by the public.  It is stagecraft over substance and both sides have become regular practitioners.  

I never much cared for the tradition of bringing human props into the SOTU speech, despite its success in illustrating the human side of the President’s policies and goals as outlined in the address.  The first time I remember the gallery packed with 15 minute celebrities was during Reagan’s SOTUs.  Ron was a master storyteller and a master at stagecraft.  He and his advisors knew that the combination of real Americans in the crowd sitting and smiling in validation of his stories was a powerful force in politics.

I understood Obama’s need to humanize his gun control recommendations with actual Americans who have been impacted by gun violence.  At the same time I was cringing that children were thought necessary to act as human political shields.  His 23 executive orders were fairly benign, and should not have required extra scenery to make them palatable.  The public mostly supports his recommendations.  However, the kids were trotted out, and visual imagery concerns trumped common decency, which brings me back to Ted Nugent.

Last year Nugent was investigated by the Secret Service after saying at an NRA meeting that if Obama was re-elected, “I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.”

During the same address, Nugent called the president, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “criminals,” said the “government is wiping its ass with the Constitution,” and equated Democrats to coyotes who should be shot.

“If the coyote's in your living room pissing on your couch,” Nugent said, “it's not the coyote's fault. It's your fault for not shooting him."

There is only one reason Rep. Stockman would invite this nut.  Whatever comes out of Ted’s mouth will make news, and Stockman must think that there is no such thing as bad publicity.  I am not so sure.

A problem for the GOP is that it was only last month that Bobby Jindal spoke at the Republican National Committee winter retreat and begged his fellow party members to “stop being the stupid party”.  Rep. Stockman must have been on a bathroom break during that part since he has chosen to highlight the stupid side of his party by placing an angry, white, aging, delusional Ted Nugent front and center tonight.   Tomorrow morning, the headlines will not be about Marco Rubio’s official rebuttal.  The web and traditional media will lead with whatever dumb and incendiary thing burst out of Nugent’s mouth post-speech.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that liberals were planting Ted Nugent at the speech as a way to drive even more reasonable voters away from the Republican Party.   Who better to use as contrast for the reasonable position of more stringent background checks than the Motor City Madman who was investigated by the Secret Service for making what some perceived to be threatening statements against the President?

Here’s the stagecraft: video clips of Ted Nugent in camouflage shooting a flaming arrow across the stage during a heavy metal concert, and then a quick edit to the survivors of the Newtown massacre sitting quietly in their Sunday best applauding as Obama speaks.  Which image will resonate with the swing voting public?  Will either image help the GOP capture the women’s vote in 2014?

Boehner thinks Obama is trying to destroy the GOP by dividing it.  I think Boehner should look at his own party of saboteurs.  The official GOP rebuttal by Rubio will then be rebutted by Rand Paul as the token Tea Party representative.  I thought Rubio was a Tea Party darling, but perhaps his insistence that work gets done in Washington has cast him as today’s RINO du jour (pardon my French).

I will listen to Rubio and Rand Paul rebut the SOTU, but I really can’t wait to hear what Ted Nugent has to say.  Is that what the GOP wanted?

“Please proceed, Mr. Nugent.”  This is the TED Talk we've been waiting for.

Paved Paradise

Come visit me at my new home, www.TheMSRP.com. 

“There goes my youth.”

This is what my son said to me when he saw that the soccer fields of his youth were being paved over to make room for a shopping center or a retirement community or a business park or some other eyesore that will cater to adults at the expense of the children.  In reply I might have quoted Joni Mitchell and said that they had “paved paradise, and put up a parking lot”, but that historical lyric would have been lost on a boy who doesn’t even remember Justin Timberlake’s first band.  His relative inexperience in life doesn’t make his feeling of loss any less genuine however.

This was the second time within a week that he had mourned the metaphorical loss of his childhood.  During our kitchen remodel, we took the opportunity to purge some dishes that no longer fit our mature family profile.  Gone to the Great Recycling Bin in the Sky were the Bugs Bunny, Winnie the Pooh and Aladdin plastic plates, and that caused some teenage angst in our home.  Who knew that those plates had hidden meaning within their cracked exteriors and faded cartoon images?  

We threw the plates away thinking they were merely hand-me-down plates that had been over-dishwashed and over-microwaved for too many years.  Little did we know we were actually tossing the boy’s youth into the trash without a hint of remorse.  It was another example of heartless adults taking actions for their own convenience during what must have been an emotional week for the child.  First his fields of play become part of the suburban concrete jungle, and then his plates become part of a landfill for a thousand years.  Could his baby blankies be next?

I understand assigning sentimental meaning to certain objects and saving them to serve as vessels for our fading memories.  I have baseball cards from the 1970s and ticket stubs from sporting events and concerts long past.  Each small token has a rich story poured inside, and I would be upset if they were lost or worse, deliberately thrown away to make room for newer versions.  Take that as a warning, family members.  Keep your hands off my stuff that looks like garbage but is really important to me for reasons I can no longer remember.

Some objects from our past can give us comfort and security.  Too many objects from our past can give us clutter and confusion.  I believe that I was teaching a lesson to my son that the clutter of cartoon plates was holding back his personal growth.  He’ll be in high school soon.  Time to grow up, boy.  Time to embrace the china plates of life.  They may be more fragile, but they are also more beautiful...and age appropriate.  

I told him that we should learn from the past but live in the present.  There’s a fine line between a sentimentalist and a hoarder.  A sentimentalist thinks of the past fondly through objects; a hoarder refuses to let go of the past through objects. Hoarders can also get their own reality shows, but that’s a topic for another day.  

I have tried to convince him that his youth will always be there for him in his memories, safe from my thoughtless decluttering sweeps through cabinets and drawers.  His youth doesn’t live in my cupboards.  It lives in our hearts, and in the permanent stains on the carpet and the gray hairs on my head. 

What we have here is a failure to communicate.  I saw a plate; he saw his childhood.  I threw away a plate; he felt I was throwing away his childhood.  I guess it depends on your point of view.