Informed Consent

Informed Consent.

That is how our host and moderator, Ron Suskind, described our method of democracy. The public, informed with appropriate knowledge about the candidates, will consent to the judgment of their leaders to make the decisions that will govern our nation. Ideally, the founders hoped that the decisions to grant this consent would be made with reason. The best candidate, in possession of strong leadership qualities and in tune with our values, will head our government based upon this hope. But as Suskind notes (and as I am also finding out in Drew Westen's The Political Brain), humans often make their decisions based in emotion and anger. Suskind went on to reiterate that the role of the media is to attempt to present information to the public so that they may make a well-informed decision. This is especially true for the political media.

He then told a few stories about how easily things can be misinterpreted when presented en masse. Notably, he recounted the Dean Scream episode of Iowa, 2004. Calling it “an issue of his microphone,” Suskind talked about how that night, after losing Iowa in an upset, Vermont Governor Howard Dean was addressing supporters in a loud, crowded auditorium. The noise level and excitement live in the gym were unmistakable, yet from watching news clips one would never know. Dean was using a new type of microphone intended to cut out ambient background noise. So for those people who were fifteen rows back from the stage, the so-called “Dean Scream” was almost inaudible. But for those people tuned into the FOX News, it sounded like a crazy man screaming out loud to himself. Last I checked, there must have been tens of millions more people watching on television. As Suskind put it, because of a mostly unreported microphone issue, “from then on it was RIP for Dean…A wildly unrepresented nugget, borne of technology essentially crucified him.”

So can the media represent the true goings-on of the march to the nomination? Suskind mentioned that there are “enormous issues we face now in ‘08: al Qaeda, Iraq. Will we follow reason?” He then posed the following question to the panel:

In your role as an intermediary on informed consent, what do you most hope for? What do you most fear?

The panelists' answers all tended to address the need to portray specialized information without being too sensational, especially when it comes to giving excessive amounts of press to youtube flavors of the week. Walter Shapiro in particular brought up an interesting point about the need for journalists to, in essence, tell readers something about the person who is in line to be the next President that has predictive power about how he will behave in office. He then goes on to take some responsibility for being suckered into believing Bush’s “compassionate conservative” motto on the 863^rd time he heard it. He also mentioned that he feared that, in the future, the primary “calendar will go Iowa, New Hampshire and then bedlam” followed by nine months of buyer’s remorse before the general election due to the lack of access to the candidates and little time to adjust to information post-New Hampshire.

Tumulty noted the increase in now-style journalism, creating a need for journalists to finish stories under overwhelmingly short deadlines. Instead of chewing on a story for a week and really checking facts, too often the media is forced to slam out a story in one night just to beat everyone else to the scoop. In my brief time here at 3Q, I can vouch for the difficulty of putting out something of high quality versus the strain of wanting to put it out instantly for all the laptop quick-click combatants in the blogosphere who are constantly waiting for some new chunk of news to satisfy their political dopamine requirements. Lucky for me, no one reads my blog. But I still act like they do. Dammit, I always will!

Suskind then discussed the weakened role of the press these days. Weakened as a result of one big, fat, ugly word: Message. He called the use of spin, message and marketing “the dark arts” and told a story relayed to him by fabled political reporter Walter Pincus about how, long ago, corporations didn’t distribute message until after their products were examined. Same went for politicians. Now it is fed to us as the standard before we have a clue what to think. Pincus also told him that, “back in 1974 we didn’t have a slug everyday called POTUS. Most days he didn’t do anything interesting.” This apparently changed with President Reagan (no surprise) who did something every day just to get out message about himself, whether it was to cut a ribbon at an opening or make a brief statement to the press to get his mug on the nightly news.

Suskind went on to say, half seriously, that a “journalist’s goal is to fight message. Their (the campaign staff) goal is to kill them.” He continued with the Bush example, “compassionate conservative. What a line, ingenious. In fact, a lie!” He went on to say that message intends to provoke a question. “The challenge of these people,” Suskind then said as he pointed to the panel, “is to punch through message.”

Question two asked the members to give some rules of the game to punch through message.

The panel all had interesting things to say about this question, and really how could they not? Busting through message is the true joy of reporting. People become journalists, I imagine, because they want to tell people the truth, and nothing is more gratifying about truth than when it doubles as calling people on their bullshit. David Chalian established the importance of really dissecting the message to figure out what it is, and matching it with the facts. Unfortunately, he notes due to the importance of timeliness in today’s media world, “we’ve basically outsourced our research to the campaigns.” David Mark added insightfully that a crucial way to break down message is to repeatedly ask questions about their message. Even if you can’t make them answer questions, he pointed out, you can show that they won’t answer, especially if you are specific. Tumulty and Walker continued on Chalian’s theme that “truth spotting” was key in fighting message, and again expressed worry that such an integral journalistic pillars as fact checking is slowly going the way of the buffalo.

Finally, Suskind presented the scary idea that, “the leadership of this great nation will be determined by a 3am half truth.” This is the implication that a half-asleep, overworked, message conscious politician will ultimately be derailed not by his or her policy stances, but instead by a misconstrued or exaggerated story told to a reporter late in the night on a cross-country campaign flight. Imagine Al Gore and the internet. Suskind then said how a campaign aide once told him that when it comes to negative attacks, “we look for things that are a little bit false, but hard to prove false. These things move, and we can get 3-4 days of making opponent defend himself.” Imagine Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Suskind, whose voice sounds like a calm version of Lewis Black, then stated, “I can say with almost 100% surety that there will be at least one Swift Boat type thing this time around.”

Question three: How do we avoid being manipulated? Avoid the little salacious truths?
What feeds informed consent? Will it be the little things that we bicker about, or the bigger truths? How do we guide to the bigger truths?

In this instance, the panel made a strong shift toward the John Edwards haircut flap. Was it just manipulation by rival campaigns and Republicans to show the guy as a reckless fop? Or is it a harbinger of something more serious. The journalists theorized that even in instances like this, a bigger truth may come out. Mark notes that how candidates manage their campaigns can be a sign of how they will run the oval office, and can give a sense of how careful things are scrutinized. Shapiro reiterated this notion when he said, “in further defense of Edwards on the haircut, what clearly happened was a muchkin paid for it with the wrong credit card. The bigger thing is that the people who scrutinized didn’t catch it and undo it.” Unfortunately, everyone got caught up in Haircutgate for this question, and nothing much was said outside of the discussion that a good Presidential candidate will run a good campaign, and not allow the little things to take over, ironically, their message.

At this point, the audience took over the duty of asking questions from Ron Suskind. This group of mostly older, highly in-tune voters, really only wanted to know about second tier candidates, with the exception of the seersucker man I mentioned earlier, who only wanted to excoriate Dick Cheney. This lack of faith in the media by the truly hardcore mostly made for a defensive stance by the journalists, imploring the audience to believe that they, too care to present the possibility of a 5% poller becoming better known to the electorate en route to victory, but that the frontrunners and such for a reason, and therefore need the spotlight, too. With time running out, and presumably a cocktail hour to attend, the moderator closed off debate with a closing statement that rehashed the themes of the afternoon, and ultimately asked the question: “Can truth triumph?”

I shut off my computer, hoping to save at least twenty minutes of battery in the event of an outlet-free coffee shop, and meandered up to the stage to listen in as a few stragglers asked the journalists more detailed questions about specific candidates, and they told a few more war stories and gave their insider opinion. After a while, I became too confused as I challenged myself to listen to three conversations at once. Why was the Biden supporter talking about Mike Huckabee’s chances? Or was someone telling a Joe Liebermann story from 2004, and if so why did Ron Paul’s name come up? So many stories, so much truth, so little time. Can truth triumph? I don’t know, but I think the best person to ask is a guy who lives somewhere above your legs and below your shoulders. He’s called your gut.

The quasi-transcript that is my notes from the event can be seen in the post below.

Reporting on Reporting: Ruff Cut

I should have posted this much earlier, but here are my notes from the political media forum at Dartmouth last week. If you are a poli-dork, you may find this useful, otherwise please don't read. Note: the words below are some mixture of paraphrase, summary and direct quotation. Do not take as pure fact.

---------------------------------

In your role as an intermediary on informed consent. What do you most hope for? What do you most fear? Read below for my notes on the respondents answers.

DC:

Hope: take these 17 candidates, try to show audience who they are, what makes them tick, where they want to take the country, stance on issues

Fear: youtube videos can get in the way (can add) fears the balance will shift toward

DW: illuminate what happens behind the scenes that candidates don’t want people to see, try to explain it

Fear – the trend where campaigns create ads to leak to media but not run on tv free buzz & media. Be careful and discerning about what is a legit ad.

WS – trying to bring old media values to internet. Simple goals – tell readers something about the person who is next president that has predictive power about how he will behave in office. Useful info to predict who will win. Press fails terribly in that. Takes some responsibility for not showing how conservative Bush would be in 2000. Fell for Compassionite Conservatism on the 863^rd time he said it.

Fear – loves the NH primary, “fears the calendar will go Iowa, NH, and then bedlam” People will Choose a candidate with no thought, no deliberation, no time to adjust to info post-NH. Followed by 9 months of buyers remorse with little or no access to the candidates. Bad for democracy

KT – economic reality of the business. Time is half the size it was in 2000. Cites lack of bureaus both there and at the Globe. Recently wrote a story about Obama telling constituencies things they didn’t like to hear. Used to have a week for it, now needs to do it in one day sometimes.

RW – able to compile a lot of information about each candidate, all the votes, all the money, all the ads. Internet can offer those goodies as well as long form reporting.

Fear – the pack journalism and intensity to get a story can create bad judgment by writers. Cites the Hilary ’84 video, says all the energy who went into that could have been better used doing actual reporting.

Suskind – the enemy (politicians) knows that we (the press) are weakened. The giant word “message” is debilitating to the press. Back in the day, Walter Pincus said, corporate didn’t give message until after. (Now they do it before). Calls it the dark arts.

Pincus - In 1974 we didn’t have a slug everyday called POTUS. Most days he didn’t do anyting interesting.

This changed in the 80s with Reagan. Did something silly every day just to get out message like cutting a ribbon or saying something on the lawn. President off message can be criticism.

Journalists goal is to fight message. Their goal is to kill them.

Compassionate conservative. What a line, ingenious. “In fact, a lie!”

Message tries to start the seedbed of a question. I call it a discipline punishment curve. Don’t talk to reporters without permission. Stay on message.

The challenge of these people (points to panel) is to punch through message.

Rules of the game to punch through message:

DC – start with message, useful to dissect what it is. What it is they are selling. Often we buy what we shouldn’t but mostly we pick it apart. Truth spotting – taking the rhetoric and matching it up with facts. Research shops have been gutted. “We’ve basically outsourced our research to the campaigns” There used to be robust orgs for truth spotting. Truth squadron

DM – following andidates repeatedly. Putting it on record that you are asking the questions. You can’t make them answer questions, but you can show that they won’t answer. Ask what their messages mean. Be specifici in questions.

WS – you have to remember how disciplined the candidates are. I talked to someone saying how galling it is to have only one minute, staffer said one minute answers keep the answers from being a bunch of soundbytes. Will not use material from a campaign about another candidate without being able to source it.

KM –truth squatting tends to go after little truths. She was the reporter to whom Gore claimed Love Story was about him. Less than one sentence in a 9-page story. More true than not true. Said in passing in a 3.5 hour interview But still created a media frenzy and marked his character. So horrified to see what can happen. Truth squatting another way of saying “gotcha”. Easy to get, anyone can get. If there are 4-5 journalists, it is useless for her to be there.

RW – a lot of campaigns run on leaking oppo research. News doesn’t do a good enough job of citing the sources. Swift Boat examples, thefact that there was a media storm to check facts only made the ads that much more important. Be careful not to be manipulated.

Suskind – the leadership of this great nation will be determined by a 3am half truth.

Campaign aide – we look for things that are a little bit false, but hard to prove false. These things move, can get 3-4 days of making opponent defend.

I can say with almost 100% surety that there will be at least one Swift Boat type thing this time around.

Sounds like Lewis Black.

How do we avoid being manipulated. Avoid the little salacious truths.

What feeds informed consent? The little things that we bicker about. Or the bigger truths.

How do we guide to the bigger truths?

DM – how candidates manage their campaigns can be a sign of how they will run the oval office. Can give a sense of how careful things are scrutinized.

WS – in further defense of Edwards on the haircut. What clearly happened was a muchkin paid for it with the wrong credit card. The bigger thing is that the people who scrutinized didn’t catch it and undo it.

Questions from the audience:

Where is the coverage of the 2^nd tier?

DC - The process is driven by polling and money. I don’t think anyone has been uncovered to the point they would be invisible.

Geffen said Bill Clinton is reckless, won’t support Hillary. Is Bill as First Man a legitimate story?

KT – whenever I talke to democrats it doesn’t take long to get from Hillary to Bill.

DM – she is making Bill the centerpiece of her campaign. The coverage isn’t what he would do as first man, but rather how he is affecting the way her campaign is being run.

Back to the first question.

KT – Kuci is the only one advocating a single payer system, wants all the troops out immediately. Wants him there even though he can’t win.

WS – ranking candidates based on polls even though voters are saying they aren’t firm. Many things can happen. 6 months is a long time. Anyone who runs once and doesn’t come close renders himself a vanity candidate when he runs a second time.

DC – web and digital products drive broadcast themes, not vice versa.

KT - 2 things that drive up voter turnout – knowing it is a close race, or knowing that the two candidates are different and the vote makes a difference.

DM – responsibility lies with voters for being too lazy. Voting is relatively easy these days.

How often have you failed to report something because you feared something was too out of mainstream?

WS – more of a problem is people thinking I am not left enough, example giving the same coverage to Liebermann as Lamont. Danger these days to write something that doesn’t fit talking points.

DM – too often people think journalists have an agenda, really they just want to put out the best product.

Suskind

Can truth triumph?

Pride and Poise

I fully realize that I bailed on that McCain article I promised about a week or so ago. I did a lot of thinking about it and I set up the links that I wanted to use, but by the time I got around to writing it, the issue was pretty well kicked. Not to mention my theory that McCain was done for and would potentially drop out of the race by July's end was all but squashed by everyone and their brother. Well, maybe not the Five Brothers. This viewpoint was just reiterated in Jonathan Martin's GOP blog on The Politico. He reports that McCain has released a 7-page memo about his latest campaign strategy - some magical combination of "living off the land" to preserve funds and adopting Al Davis' motto of "Just win, Baby!" Yes! Now that is a strategy that we can believe in here at 3Q, as long as it includes building fires with flint stones and using pine boughs as mattresses.




Entirely unrelated, but speaking of the Five Brothers, is this Craig Romney or Max Piana?
Yet more unrelated news, boy am I getting old. It was an ugly day down at Holyoke's Ashlie Reservoir.

Reporting on Reporting

Hanover, NH -

We are live blogging from Dartmouth College's Silsby Hall here in the upper Connecticut Valley on a dark, wet afternoon. Apparently they have wireless internet in college classrooms these days. I feel so old. I didn't even have a cell phone in college, and correct me if I am wrong but I don't believe wireless internet had been invented.

Today's panel discussion, Reporting on the Primaries: There Has to Be a Better Way to Pick a President, is hosted by Ron Suskind and Linda Fowler and features the following panelists: David Chalian, ABC News; David Mark, The Politico; Walter Shapiro, Salon; Karen Tumulty, Time; and Russ Walker, washingtonpost.com.

It is scheduled to start in about five minutes. Back with more as the talking heads show up to their seats.

In the meantime, a fellow in a seersucker jacket behind me is bemoaning the lack of student presence in spite of some of the greatest journalists in the country. He counted one student - me. Looking around, there are a few more, but not even ten.

Recurring Brownback Bitch Slap

In the latest NH poll*, Senator Brownback has dropped from 2% in June to below 1% in July. Biblical prophesy states: the end is nigh.

What I find the most interesting about the poll isn't that McCain and Romney have traded places at virtually the same rate since February '05, nor is it that Giuliani has practically flatlined at 20% for two straight years aside from a few high 20s debate-fear-induced blips. Rather, it is that Duncan Hunter has been at ZERO for his entire candidacy. Are you telling me that these guys aren't supporting him? But I guess that is Duncan Hunter's biggest problem. In a state like New Hampshire, much of the pro-excessive force voting bloc is too often holed up in a tax-evading compound to vote in a Federal election. And of course, Tancredo has these guys locked up.

As I've predicted all along, Romney is a force. Maybe I'll ask some of the media wizards what they think of it later today. I'll be up in Hanover to listen to a slate of "all-star political journalists" talk about the primaries. Uhhhhh...jackpot!




* The official position here at 3Q is to pay no attention to poll when determining the true legitimacy of candidates. At times, though, they are very helpful.

Out-FOXed

There is an interesting article in the HuffPost today by Thomas Edsall about the amount of money the top three Democratic candidates took from FOX executives despite refusing to debate on that channel because of it's right wing views. While hardly the world's biggest jolt of hypocrisy, it certainly provides easy hate fodder if you are looking to pile on. Then again, I guess that $30+ Mil from Q2 doesn't grow on trees!

No Dodd-ling on Climate Change

Concord, NH -

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) was in the heart of Concord vegan country today, but to listen to his words it was clear that political vegetarians need not apply. The topic was energy policy, the scene was the NH Sierra Club headquarters, in a second floor office overlooking the sleepy mill-era brick facades of downtown Concord, and on the menu was a whole lotta red meat. Served rare, and char grilled to boot.

After Dodd blogger and fellow Wes '04er Matt Browner-Hamlin finished setting up the live streaming webcam for D-TV (no, not that D TV) and all the local environmental dignitaries found their places, the room settled in to a polite silence as Senator Dodd entered from stage right. His appearance was typically patrician - a dark navy suit with anchor-emblazoned buttons topped off by his signature slicked-back fine white hair. He clipped on his webcam mic, cracked a joke about Clinton and Edwards' mic awareness, and got to work. He spoke quickly and fiercely, rarely mincing words when it came to the road blocks of serious energy policy.

The first item of business, that which he believes best sets him apart from his peers, was the issue of a corporate carbon tax. Dodd couldn't go on enough about this policy tool. No other Democratic candidates will even say the "t-word", he claimed, and it is the only stick that will get us moving toward his 80% carbon reduction ideas in a timely fashion. He spoke of cap-and-trade in addition, but reiterated that the carbon tax was A-1 in mitigating global climate change.

Dodd suggested the revenues from the carbon tax would bring in some $50B, which would then be used for a number of mitigating factors. The money would hurry along sustainable technology, subsidize and incentivize the use of efficient technology by homeowners and small businesses, and help industry make the changes necessary to achieve the 80% reduction. He shushed the idea that a $50B tax increase was too high a burden on our nation. Instead, he would challenge anyone who to the notion that we are currently paying somewhere between $60B and $300B in taxes and revenues to countries who produce foreign oil. "Am I willing to go to the deli across the street and make the same case?" he asked, "I will and I have." It was the first time I had ever been to a campaign stop held specifically for an interest group so I wonder if Dodd really is that frank and fiery about climate change mitigation on a normal basis.

General carbon reduction wasn't his only topic. Referring to the critical notion that establishing a 50mpg CAFE standard is untenable, Dodd said the idea "that we can't do it is offensive to me. It insults my intelligence." He cited his wife's old 1983 Honda CRX's 43mpg efficiency rate and continued to say that doing this "may save the automobile industry" from foreign competition. He spoke often about the need for more transit, both to give people a chance not to drive and even to relieve the soon-to-be saturated continental airline routes.

More importantly, Dodd told the crowd to demand answers. Don't let the other candidates simply re-state the goals that we all agree with, like becoming more energy independent and reducing greenhouse gases. After closing his speech with his ability to reach out to people who disagree by mentioning the many GOP co-sponsors of his bills over the years (Orrin Hatch, Kit Bond, Jesse Helms, Phil Gramm, Arlen Specter) he mused out loud, "I gotta learn to calm down." And how! Dodd's fiery rhetoric flowed naturally within the Sierra Club gathering, but to outsiders it likely would have smacked of the lofty oratory that only comes from years in the Senate. Dodd certainly had some good ideas, not the least of which was his claim to host a Kyoto-like summit in the US within the first 100 days of his Presidency to show the world we care about climate change, but the package was a little sharp.

If America is a toy consumer, today's package was closer to Johnny Switchblade Adventure Punk than it was to a Beanie Baby. I don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence, of course. Chris Dodd, given all the legislative good he has done over the years, is about as far from Irwin Mainway as you can get. Who knows, maybe the American Public needs a nice romp with Bag o'Glass, after all, lest we all end up with the same fate as Johnny Human Torch.

Afterward I spoke with him about a mutual friend of ours, Chris Foster. Foster is Dodd's nephew and a former teammate of mine at Wesleyan. Dodd's eyes lit up when I mentioned the connection and had nothing but good things to say about both Foster and the Wesleyan team that ushered him in as a freshman back in '03. Respect to the Senator for recognizing that young and dirty '03 team that went something like this - Kiely, Bissell, King, Greeney, Battaglino, Brady, Foster. Future NESCAC and New England champs abound in those ranks!

Again, the webcast of the Dodd visit, potentially starring the back of my head (2nd row, next to the aisle) can be viewed on DTV:
http://www.chrisdodd.com/dtv

Gilmore, We Hardly Knew Ye

Leverett, MA -

Seriously, we hardly knew ye. Who are ye? Well it doesn't really matter anymore, and it really isn't too big of a surprise that the former Old Dominion State governor is the first man down since Evan Bayh, and the second Presidential casualty of Virginia after Mark Warner (third if you count George Allen). Not to toot my own horn, but I did seed Gilmore #12 of 12 back in my GOP bracket in January. Our next article will examine the plight of top-seeded John McCain's bid for the presidency. Looking back, the top half of the bracket is in shambles. We can discuss that later. Happy Sunday from Cushman's.

I

Although I frown on the term "blogosphere", I hereby submit that if 3Q were to take the form of one of the many elements in the blogosphere relative to our earth's atmosphere it would be Iodine. Questions? Comments? Weigh in.

NH 2008Pic of the Week

I found this pic on http://nh2008.blogspot.com/ although they just took it down in favor of the Clintons, but what a classic shot of the healing powers of politics. Go Joe.

HRC: READY for Change. Ready to BLEED (hearts).

KEENE, NH -

While The Times opted to cover the 'Tons from 3Q's home turf of Keene, we decided to go for the later, presumably better rehearsed show in Nashua.

I woke up on Andy Comings' couch with 4 long strands of dark blood covering at least half of my left heel, the result of a minor dancing accident from the night before as the 80s vinyl spun and my flip-flops provided inadequate protection from the uncoordinated oafs surrounding me. Inherently, I knew this would be a day of metaphorical bloodshed, or at least it might shine some light on the lifeblood of my early political life. Or was the bloody Achilles heel just the metaphor of the day? Either way, I was getting ahead of myself.

I set off for the unusually long journey from Allston, where just a day earlier a local icon's life was tragically cut short, to Nashua via train and automobile, and some four hours later after the quaint drive through unknown Northern Massachusetts towns like Pepperell and Townsend I arrived in The Gate City. Aside from a brief stopover back in the summer of 2003 when I hit the outer Nashua strip to purchase a cd player for my old car (The Puget Sounder), and eat lunch at Hooters while it was installed, I had never really been to town before. I drove into the downtown area, where signs continued to point me toward a dining and shopping district that never really appeared, but I figured must have existed because the signs stopped. Then again, I guess I did see one restaurant. Hardly the proper downtown that dominates a place like Manchester, Portsmouth, or Plymouth, and fittingly I cut bait and headed out toward the airport for the rally at Daniel Webster College.

Even thirty minutes before the scheduled start, traffic was slow heading into the overflow parking lot, set up on a patch of grass next to a small pond on the edge of campus. I followed the crowd to the stage, which meant a lot of people walking nearly a quarter mile who, quite frankly, looked like they weren't used to walking nearly a quarter mile. We approached the rally in a great funneling motion, where we were more easily intercepted by clipboard-wielding activists and campaign staffers looking for our names, numbers and addresses. As an older woman would mention after I was sitting inside the ropes, "I've never signed my name so many places in my life."

Ay, but were you as identity-savvy as the survivalists out in Quabbin Qountry, you would have escaped Scot-free, having smiled and glared your way through a dozen or more refusals. The final entrance to the show was blocked off by two ten-foot folding tables, the last garrison to collect the information cards the campaign staff had been whoring all the way down the previous eighty yards of sidewalk. It was a classic rouse, leading people to believe that they weren't allowed in without some sort of "free ticket" that doubled as fodder for their mailings lists. A young kid in front of me put forth a similar fight for his right to enter without a ticket. Of course he was let in, but not without a look of pure disdain from the staffers. "Well, you can go in without a paper, but we reallllly would prefer if you had one." We were really dealing with the pros.

Not just professional field organizers, but professional campaigners. Professional politicians, really. This was an event for the inevitable candidate and her husband, the 42nd POTUS. Amateurs need not apply. Bomb sniffing dogs abound near the stage in the early moments of the rally, a 20-foot tall American flag served as the back wall of the crowd, and the backdrop for the stage, which included a full set of bleachers and a 10-foot crowd buffer, was a massive sign reading, "READY for Change" on the top line above a make-shift 3-star flag logo sitting over a line which read "Ready to LEAD". Around 3PM the campaign staff, mostly consisting of attractive girls in their early 20s, began passing out pro-Hillary signs, including fake-homemade ones. That latter really made me wonder how many of the major media photos, like the one in today's Times about Biddies for Hillary, are full of it.

Once the bleachers on stage were carefully packaged with a diverse group of old and young multi-cultural supporters (in fact, it was potentially the first time I have seen a black person in New Hampshire) all the pedestrian music played its notes and the moment we were all waiting for came to a head with the first notes of Celine Dion. Up the stairs from stage right walked a trio of dignitaries, a local state senator, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. The couple shook hands with the people on stage, smiled, and touched one another a lot. The crowd went wild.

After a red meat intro of Bill Clinton, touting the seemingly endless glory of his Presidency, the ex-President provided a full introduction for his wife. He promised to keep it short given the heat, but it was yet another campaign promise that went unfulfilled. As was probably the will of the people, Bill spoke nearly as long as the Senator, providing what he felt was the case for a Clinton Presidency, part 2.

The first words out of his mouth, after the usual blather about how good it was to be back in New Hampshire, were that he "would be here doing this even if we weren't married." Although he thanked the audience earlier for voting for the Clinton/Gore ticket twice in the 90s, he slighted Big Al by saying that Hillary was the best prepared non-incumbent candidate to become President that he could think of in all his 40 years of voting history. It is this exact reason, Clinton assured us, that it is important to elect Hillary as the Democratic nominee. He wasn't nearly as fear-mongering as Joe Biden, going on to say how it was the first time that he could remember when he would be happy with any of the Democratic candidates, going on to express his interest in reading news stories about Obama and Edwards, and to celebrate his long friendships with Biden, Dodd and Richardson. Sorry, Kucinich and Gravel, you guys must have been implied.

Bill rambled quite a bit more than I had expected, at times seeming to forget what he was supposed to say in what order, and toward the end making a noise with his mouth that sounded like he was sucking on ice. Nevertheless he highlighted her large role in his administration, having visited 82 countries in his first term as the "face of America" abroad. He implored us to "get the country back in the solutions business," as led by Hillary, touting her significant success as a New York Senator in bringing results to her constituents and winning a formidable amount of votes in rural, Republican-leaning upstate NY, where he said he most enjoyed campaigning for her, which he described as "teetling around the countryside" or something like that.

Oddly enough, Bill highlighted her early biography, much like Obama giving her credit for turning down lucrative jobs after law school in order to move down to Arkansas with him and improve the lives of children as an attorney for the Children's Defense Fund. Even more curious, he carried on about her work with prisoners, emphasizing that she truly cared for the welfare of those who had made mistakes in life, even to the point of making her seem truly soft on crime, Dukakis-style. Along the same lines, Bill made a direct appeal to our general election sensibilities, telling us not to buy the idea that Hillary is too polarizing to be elected on a nationwide basis. He told a story about her being more popular than him back in the Natural State, and theorized that the Republicans are only saying that stuff because they fear her. And fear not, because she will instantly restore America's reputation in the world once she is elected. Instantly.

I appreciated that Bill took the polarizing and unelectable themes head on, and it is undoubtedly impressive to hear someone with the gravitas of Mr. President give such a glowing endorsement. The two of them are a package deal for certain, and on the shoulders of that giant, Hillary took the stage.

She had been smiling proudly the entire time Bill was on stage, one of the many humanizing traits she expressed during the rally. They seemed like such a happy couple, and from those good feelings she bounded up to the microphone and began her speech. She quickly went over the basic Democratic platform, vowing with great applause to change the leadership in this country, improve health care, create an energy plan, get rid of No Child Left Behind and all the rest. Every theme she touched on began with the call of "Are you ready?"

Are you ready for change?
Are you ready for a better health care system?
"Are you ready for a President who will actually say the words 'global warming'?"

She even talked about bringing the troops home as soon as possible.

After the inevitability of the "are you ready?" calls, Hillary moved on to a theme of fairness and values. She mocked the Bush administration's questionable political appointees, and questioned the fairness of the tax system, most notably in terms of the current cause d'celebre, hedge funds. I don't think she mentioned that her daughter works for a hedge fund, but maybe I tuned out for a moment. This theme of fairness created a segue into the populist portion of the program. The sympathy in her voice ratcheted up a few notches as she spoke of middle class and poor America being "invisible" to the current administration, from the treatment of troops in Walter Reed to those everyday Americans with inadequate health care. On the other hand, Hillary "will be a President who sees, hears, listens to and tries to help" all people. In a HRC administration there will be no invisible Americans.

The most striking aspects to the speech lay in the tone. For starters, this was much less an intellectual policy treatise than it was an example of someone in power sympathizing with the people about the policies that are at the forefront of our government today. Every piece of the platform was accompanied with a brief and simple explanation of what they meant. Hillary wasn't trying to prove the superiority of her plans, she was simply trying to let us know that there are problems and she will fix them. She sounded very soothing and motherly in her explanation and sympathetic outpourings of her heart.

Between Hillary's soothing, womanly voice and Bill's emphasis on her bleeding heart background and her extreme suitability, the image that called out to me from this campaign rally was that the HRC08 Campaign is riding high on 2 themes going into the primary:

1) Hillary Clinton is a master of government, formidable in political skill and unmatched in readiness for the White House.
2) Hillary Clinton isn't the Hell-bent, cold, ambitious meanie that the vast right wing conspiracy has made her out to be. Quite the contrary she is a sweet, strong motherly figure worthy of your vote.

Given her unmatched name recognition, massive political network of campaign donors and Clinton family loyalists (and fond rememberists), those are two well-placed pillars on which to build a tall, tall lookout from which to peer into November, 2008. That in mind, I made the decision not to wait around in hopes of a handshake. Instead I quickly walked away from the rally as the blood crusted on my heel, making each step a painful one, and I remembered that I didn't owe Bill Clinton anything other than my civic engagement, a continued hope for a better America, and a little bit of pimp game on the streets. Instead, I just wanted to hustle out and beat the traffic jam which was, in my mind, the most inevitable thing I had seen all day.

Clinton Set List 7/13

NASHUA, NH -

I decided to spend less of my usual article detailing the musical selections of the campaign stop, and instead give it it's own section. Without further ado, here is how it went down in the Nash today:

Vertigo - U2
You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet - BTO
Beautiful Day - U2
Heroes - David Bowie
Start Me Up - The Rolling Stones
Conga - Gloria Estefan
Oye Como Va - Santana
Superstition - Stevie Wonder
Don't Do Me Like That - Tom Petty
I'm Like a Bird - Nelly Furtado
Free Ride - Edgar Winter Group
Takin' it to the Streets - The Doobie Brothers
Soak Up the Sun - Sheryl Crow
You and I - Celine Dion (official campaign song)
and
Right Here, Right Now - Jesus Jones (unofficial campaign song)

What a gamut of emotions! I was initially critical of the repeated U2 choices, then immediately uplifted by David Bowie (wow!) before being stopped in my tracks by Gloria Estefan. Although, to its credit, it made a bunch of hippie older women and all the babies dance. All in all, more variety than I would have expected, and not as bland as Obama's. At least he played Steve Winwood. (yes, I plan to evoke that moment as much as possible between now and January.)

DC Madam Speaker

Aha! The first moral casualty of the DC Madam is none other than Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who just happens to be Giuliani's Southern chairman. Sex and Drugs are now taken. The question remains, which Rock & Roll star will be the next campaign chairman for America's Corrupt Mayor?

Biden the Titan, Part 2

Kensington, NH -

Just a quick turn off of the small, rural Rte. 150, in the heart of the little place we call Lamprey Corners down in the Seacoast region sits a house with Nantucket shingles and a living room with big French doors opening into a view of great, hay-strewn fields and hardwood forests that had recently been put into a conservation easement. The house belonged to Jim Webber, Democratic candidate for state representative from the southeastern most district in the state. Webber was hosting the house party as part of a concurrent event to kick off his general election campaign with the help of Joe Biden and whatever media coverage and excitement that might entail.

Webber nervously began his stump speech, which he repeatedly promised would last less than three minutes, once word had arrived that the Senator was near the house, about a half hour after scheduled. I guess he was too close, or else Jim was too loquacious, or both. Halfway through the presentation, Joe Biden had arrived.

In he walked, from the far side of the room from me, decked out in seersucker pants and a navy polo shirt, with tiny brown wing tips on his feet. "Who's this Jim Webber guy, anyway?" Joe demanded to know with a big smile on his face as he walked up to the center of the room and poked the lesser candidate in the chest before disappearing into the kitchen to let Webber finish his speech. A few minutes later, he emerged sipping a can of Canada Dry ginger ale and munching on a bavarian pretzel. He swallowed, smiled, and announced, "to put it bluntly, I'm here to audition."

And audition he did, talking about the importance of the 2008 election and the need for Americans to pick the best man or woman for the job. "There is no room for error," as the Biden rallying call goes. He spoke of the loose nukes and prevalence of fissile material in the world right now, as well as the de-democratization of South America. As the next President of the United States, Delaware's senior Senator promised, he would restore America's place in the world and re-invigorate the middle class.

Biden immediately went on to talk about the necessity of a political solution in Iraq, touting his own plan as the best and only of such. He talked about the need for a weak federal and strong local way of governing Iraq, and cited the Dayton accords as the best evidence for how political solutions are the only way to solve long-term violence: "The Balkans were the most violent region in the world from Vlad the Impaler to Milosevic. But, knock on wood, there has not been one death at the hands of Nato forces since then."

From there he went on to talk about his vote for funding the war, mention his son's role in the Army Reserves and his recent notification of deployment. Funding the war, he argues, is a misnomer. It really is funding the troops, and Biden sees the only legitimate way to end our role in Iraq is to convince enough GOP senators to get out from behind Bush's shadow and make the right decision. Biden estimated that fewer than twelve Republican senators truly believed that Bush was doing the right thing, and that the rest would come around sooner rather than later. In the meantime he stressed the need to fund the transformation of our military transport vehicles from flat-bottomed death traps to v-shaped IED deflectors. He dismissed the idea of impeachment, saying to loud applause that "history will impeach these guys," and for now it was most important to make the right decisions on the ground.

With the stage now set, full of stories about military brain injuries and the potential horrors of a withdrawal of troops and our responsibility to see it out correctly, Biden became gravely serious, hushing his tone and squinting his eyes. There will be NO margin for error. Our next President had better be smarter than the advisers. It was a chilling moment, from a man whose sense of drama had clearly been concocted over years and years on the stump, and decades worth of firsthand knowledge of what sorts of bad things can come from foreign policy. But chills and spills will only get a candidate so far.

I, for one, left without convincing in spite of the earnest and heartfelt plea of the Great Blue Hen Orator. Despite his recent claim to eat Rudy's lunch in a debate, which he mentioned again (and I tried to get an interrupting round of applause going when he said it but was only joined by one other woman who sat distantly in the kitchen), Joe sounded a little Rudy-esque in his fear mongering. Although I appreciated what appeared to be a real belief in the Biden way to responsibly solve the mess in Iraq, I couldn't help but feel a tad unsettled by what seemed to be his charge that if we pick the wrong person we will be fucked. I've heard it before, from the likes of George W. Bush. I didn't like it then, and I don't really like it now.

Besides, how is he so certain that he won't make an error? If there truly is no margin for error, then aren't we all screwed? No one is infallible, and certainly no Presidential candidates, what with their money-whoring and triangulating. I even have reason to believe that Biden isn't the best on foreign policy, as he likes to think is the position that has been bestowed upon him by the people. So does no margin for error mean that a slight mistake will lead to American deaths beginning in January, 2009? How many more errors can Bush make before we are damaged beyond repair? Certainly there has to be a limit, or it is all a moot point.

Getting on to the 67 votes reasoning of Joe Biden, it is quite possible that he is too caught up in the senatorial way of thinking. 34 years is a long time, and perhaps he doesn't sense the urgency of the American people to get out of Iraq. Or even the mindset of folks like Ron Paul that our continued presence in the Middle East is making it more deadly, v-shaped hummers or not. Or, does he have the true vision that only true knowledge of the system can allow? Joe Biden certainly thinks so, and he'll be on the stump in Iowa and New Hampshire for six more months telling people that they had damn well better make the right choice. The best the rest of us can do is hope that he has made a mistake in his reasoning. It might not be too far-fetched of a hope.


Back on the Sawmill, a Smuttynose and a lot of sweat. Its a hot, hot summer day.

BTB

Vive Le Democracy

Once again, I hate to beat a dead source, especially when it is the Bourgeois likes of The Times, but my continued readership this afternoon brought me to this gem from Patrick Healy, whose vacationing dispatch from France brought to light the interest of the Parisians in our own election, notably when it concerns HRC. It is an interesting read on the whole, but best characterized by this outside observation, reminiscent of the truth spoken most recently by Jean Girard:

My friend Julio underscored the questions about Mrs. Clinton this way: would she be a president who told the truth to Americans about Iraq and terrorism and other challenges? Or, he asked, “would she continue to triangulate, as she and other Democrats did on Iraq and the Patriot Act, in order to win power?”

Julio, my friend, you must have spent plenty of time down at the schoolyard. Even if Paul Simon is a Dodd supporter.

So Much, So Fast

Today's Times has an article about the excitement, or "hoop-de-la", as one Iowan puts it, of the 2008 campaign and the wariness that so many feel about it. Outside of Iowa or New Hampshire it must be difficult to understand the true extent of candidate saturation, but imagine living in a state where it takes less than three hours to drive across from stem to stern, and in the middle sits six candidates on a given day with 7 months to go before you cast your vote. And tomorrow, as you drive back, there are four candidates meeting and greeting, reiterating their platform for the fifth time that weekend, smiling and waving and enlisting your volunteer help. Better still, your money. All along I have blamed this phenomenon on the likes of California, New York, Illinois and all the other big state bullies who moved their primaries up from Super Tuesday of old (early March) to Super Tuesday anew (early Feb). But the theme of the Nagourney article hints not at frontloading, but rather at our old friend George Bush, and by old I mean old. Like, we are sick and tired of him and we can't wait to see who comes next. Interesting. But the question remains, is Bush's terrible approval rating, sufficient enough to create a raucous primary campaign calendar, all a Rovian ploy to give the electorate an awful case of Democrat candidate fatigue, and thus ensure a permanent Republican majority? It is enough to blow your mind if you are a normal political observer. Luckily, for 3Q, it is almost enough to blow my load. Almost.

Biden the Titan

Brattleboro, VT -

Not wanting to go back to Portsmouth, 30 minutes in the opposite direction of the Qabin, I opted instead to go West. Due West. So Brattleboro it is, some three hours after the house party, and in time for gallery walk. That said, McNeill's is on point and a couple of old Mohawk warriors are tradin' war stories. This post is to be resumed later.

Here Comes the Rain Again

Portsmouth, NH -

The blue skies suddenly darkened into a thick, hard gray and the humidity of the warm summer day bubbled up in great steamy wafts from the streets and sidewalks as the sidewalk revelers rushed to clear their plates, pick up their newspapers and grab cover. Within minutes the sky opened up with watery vengeance for what must have been some terrible, terrible wrong done to it. Such was the case just before 4PM here in Portsmouth, causing me to wait out the storm from Breaking New Ground. If there is a coffeehouse in all of New Hampshire that I have to wait out a storm in, it may as well be this one. I initially resisted it's move across Congress Street into a bigger space a few years back, but I have grown to appreciate the new digs.


Anyway, it looks like I won't be able to hit the Seacoast double of Biden at 5 and Mike Huckabee's live performance with Capitol Offense at 6 in Dover. The photo in the link, by the way, shows pre-diet Huckabee. Fat Huckabee. Back with more in a few hours.

Billy Rich: Man with a Plan

Keene, NH -

There is a first time for everything. Today it was the first time a presidential candidate ever set foot inside tiny Marlow, NH. Stemming from an NPR search back in May to find the impossible - a Granite State town that had never had its babies kissed and its apple pie sampled - a viable runt emerged. At the intersection of NH Rtes. 10 and 123 sits Marlow, pop. 747, on the shores of the Ashuelot River with a town historical society, a gas station, a church, a war memorial and not much else. This afternoon there were a few more cars, and even a couple with out of state plates, but not enough to drastically change the face of the town.

The face that everyone who was in town wanted to see was that of New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, the first candidate to ever visit Marlow. My first impression was somewhat negative. I stood in the overflow section (leaning against a wall near the window overlooking Forest Street) about 20 feet from the stage and watched as Richardson entered the room with little fanfare - no campaign songs, no long-winded introduction from the local Democratic state senator - just a slight increase in energy as pockets of people began standing and chatting as they realized the Governor was in the room. Richardson made his way around the room and shook everyone's hand before heading to a seat in the front row where the head of the town historical society nervously introduced him from a stack of cue cards she had prepared. During the intro he seemed a lot like a slimy glad-handing pol as he snaked through the room with a smile on his face, decked out in his almost standard issue navy suit with dark red tie.

That sliminess melted away almost instantly when he took the stage. The governor spoke with sincerity, authority, directness and the humor for which he has been both renowned and ridiculed. One of the first things out of his mouth, when he was given a standing ovation by a handful of people in the crowd was, "thank you for standing. I thought you were leaving." Consider me sufficiently warmed up by that point. He then self-deprecatingly compared himself to the second coming of Taft (who jilted Marlow with a failed visit in 1912) by saying "you got the other fat guy, instead." Gold. After a couple of jokes he cut to the chase, opening his speech with what he would do in his first six days as President. In other words, he listed his political priorities in order.

1) Get out of Iraq
2) Create a National Energy Policy
3) Improve education
4) Create a health care plan to cover everyone
5) Improve economic conditions for the middle class
6) Fix the little things that have been damaged by the Bush Presidency

It was very refreshing to see a candidate be so candid about what his priorities are. Having just seen Obama, it was exactly what his speech was missing. Sure we all need hope and change, but can't a lot of people do that? Richardson suggests he can, and he intends to govern as well. And how. He brought the tough talk on energy, calling for an Apollo-like program to bring CAFE standards up to 50 MPG, reduce US oil imports to 10% of our energy use, and dramatic caps on our carbon footprint, to the tune of 90% in the near future. This stuff was no joke. Best of all, he called on Americans to sacrifice in order to do so, but of course under the aegis of a unified national effort. He even joked that Marlow was doing a great job of sacrificing by not providing air conditioning for the town hall meeting. Zing!

His education plan centers around strengthening early education, pushing science and math, expanding access to college and trade schools and using the arts to boost student interest in schools. He repeatedly brought children into his speech, mentioning that their futures are at stake . He also repeatedly called out little toddlers for not paying attention to his speech. Hey-o! There were also details for his other initiatives, but Iraq, energy and education were the big 3. Everything was tied together with what is probably Richardson's guiding principle in this campaign - that our foreign policy needs to be strengthened by way of inclusion. He repeatedly spoke to our need to engage our enemies in order to make peace, and to talk tough to our friends, as illustrated by Richardson bringing up an elderly woman from the audience and bestowing upon her the role of President of Mexico. He urged her to create more jobs for her people so they don't flood our borders, and to actually do it. He then smiled his way through a mock photo-op, which he said was typical of the worthless summits that have been the hallmark of the past ten years.

The crowd in Marlow was very different from the crowd in Laconia, and this time around the biggest applause lines came from respecting the constitution, talking to Mexico about jobs and getting rid of No Child Left Behind. These are the things that small town Marlow cared about. They also cared about guns. The first question came from a man who stood up and immediately bullied his way into the spotlight, claiming his position as the man with the first question. He wanted to know what Bill Richardson thought about the 2nd Amendment. The Governor touted his role as a Western governor who "is a believer in the 2nd Amendment" before qualifying it with the need for background checks for criminals and mentally ill, respectfully citing the Virginia Tech shootings as a case in point. The questioner was pleased. Richardson also showed courage in going out of his way to voice his support for abortion and gay rights in a town where that probably wasn't the best slogan. He did the same to advocate against genocide in Darfur and sexual slavery in the third world. Richardson suggested that we project that values of the 4th of July to the world by what we say and do.

He closed with the case for Bill Richardson, asking us in the audience to support him not because of his celebrity status and money (or lack thereof) but because of the grassroots support he is building, because of his qualifications and plans and because of what he says he will do for the country. I must say, Richardson made a fine case for the America he wanted to create, and more importantly the America he felt he could and would create. Afterward, he spent another 20 minutes shaking everyone's hand, but I snuck off without seeing it all the way through. I hopped in the car, pushed into 1st and headed down 123 to 10 to 9 while the Ashuelot flowed down toward the Connecticut amid the boulders, the great herons, the deer and the turtles that crowded the road in Western New Hampshire. I had some blogging to do, and some thinking, and of course I was excited to get back to my beloved Keene. Railroad, anyone? It is Thursday, after all.

Ahoy,
BTB

Penn is Mightier Than Sword

Yet more evidence that HRC is a sleazemeister. Just when America is clamoring for a leader who eschews eavesdropping and dirty tricks, we have in the top polling candidates people who surround themselves with characters arguably just as shady as Scooter Libby.

Obama, Not Much Drama

Laconia, NH -

Greetings from the heart of the Lakes Region, where 3Q is coming to you live from Barack Obama's latest appearance in the Granite State. First let me tell you how good it feels to be back in the land of the Free (or the Dying). Relative to my other early-season campaign events from the last cycle (Edwards, Kerry & Clark) this one was much more of a big deal. Whereas, in early August of 2003, Edwards only drew about 30 people, at least 10 of which were homeless and only in attendance for the free hot dogs in downtown Manch-Vegas, today's speech brought together some 350 listeners by my rough estimation. Granted, Edwards was sitting in 4th or 5th place in the polls at that time to Obama's 2nd, I can't imagine an event for anyone other than Mike Gravel bringing so few people together this time around.

I have always been intrigued by the And1 Mixtape Tour that is a presidential campaign. Some of the highlights of Obama's music were sung by such bland Betties as Jack Johnson, recent-era DMB, Bono in a duet of One with some indeterminable woman, the full U2 for Beautiful Day, and best of all Higher Love by Steve Winwood (certainly the favorite) before entering to Think by Aretha, which was solid enough. Even as I write this, The Outfield's I Don't Want to Lose Your Love Tonight is on the radio here at 3Q's Laconia HQ and it begs the question - why didn't he rock that? It's got the coffee shop moving right now. Bring it on!

Obama got started by acknowledging his massive fund raising haul and the great crowds he has been addressing at his urban stops around the country, attributing them not to his own charisma (which he poked fun at) but because of the American people "burning with desire for change." Of course, Barack positioned himself as the candidate who would lead that change. He moved from that to and address of his standard Dem platform, of which creating a national energy policy, getting out of Iraq, bringing people together, not taking PAC fundraising cash, and achieving universal health care garnered the loudest applause by far. He took questions, and in standard candidate fashion failed to answer them directly and instead sought to expand on his positions with a series of knowledgeable talking points. He scored the most when he chatted with an elderly woman about her youth and good looks, and spoke with a 5th grader like a concerned father, encouraging her to do her homework and turn off the TV. The latter received the loudest applause from your resident blogger.

Ultimately, it was a workday crowd of people who took time out of their day to see a candidate they were either supporting or highly interested in supporting. There were no hecklers, no major softballs, and it is too early in the summer for it to have the air of an important rally.
My biggest complaint was with Barack's handshake - a little too flabby for a hardy New Englander like myself. I might send him an e-mail about that. And now, give me leave for the White Mountains, those beefy gems of the Northeast. Three cheers for the Pemi, and until Marlow and Richardson on Thursday, keep your gameface on.

BTB

Kerfuckthat

It saddened me today to see that Frank Rich use the word "kerfuffle" in his weekly article. It is a word usually uttered by the likes of Maureen Dowd, dopey poli-sci profs, and the geeks over at the Post. I just wanted to point out that you will never hear me utter that word here at 3Q, unless to call people out for their poor choice in vocabulary. If I have one journalistic pet peeve, that strange Gaelic babble qualifies in spades. That's all.

BTB

Friday Clearinghouse

Welcome to the Friday Clearinghouse, a new feature here at 3Q where I'll be tossing down some of my favorite links from the week. It may not happen every Friday, and it may not happen every week, but for now we're going with it. In fact, while most of this post was written on a Friday, here it is Wednesday night.

Bill Richardson has launched a terrific website, No Troops Left Behind, poking a thumb in the eye of both parties. Even though he, in my opinion, botched the ideal launch of the slogan by using the word "zero" for emphasis the line is a killer. Though hardly the basis of a campaign, this is the kind of chicanery that wins the hearts and minds. Kudos to Bill.

Spoofed on the Borowitz Report, and certain to be widely panned by jilted Democrats, Ralph Nader gave an interview recently wherein he ponders another White House run. (Full interview here, at 1:44 into the transcript.) Most of the interview pertains to corporate welfare and it's disharmony with the spirit of America, but the interview invariably turns to '08, where Ralph gives his take on most candidates. It is interesting to hear how he sees them, mostly in terms of how bought they appear to be. His take on HRC is the most vicious, and rightly so: "She is a political coward," Nader said. "She goes around pandering to powerful interest groups on the one hand and flattering general audiences on the other. She doesn't even have the minimal political fortitude of her husband." Put that in your poll and smoke it! There is an article about Nader in the brain somewhere if any more noise is made, and in the meantime I would recommend catching a recent documentary if you get the chance, An Unreasonable Man.

It turns out that the electorate has a crush on more than just Obama. Here is Nashville's love song to F. Thompson. As it turns out, the Fix has uncovered a hate song, as well, coming from the far right. Love or hate, the "choice" is yours.

I'm not sure if Giuliani is considering changing his authoritarian stances on anything, but I am sure his SC state chairman might suggest some drug war efficacy in light of his recent cocaine indictment. That won't play well in the South.

I hate to beat a dead horse, but I am strongly considering devoting at least one paragraph a week to point out what a schmuck Sam Brownback is. In this campaign youtube video he not only bumbles nearly every sentence that comes out of his mush mouth, but he also closes his entry by saying that he is travelling "acrosst America". Oh man, we gotta get this guy out of the race.

So much to say, so many beers to drink, so little time.


Opa Opa at the Spoke-a,
BTB

Big Ol' Piece of Gravel

Yet another reason Mike Gravel won't win the Democratic nomination in 2008, he has positioned himself as a French filmmaker in this campaign video.


Absurdity? Existentialism? Metaphor? Check, check and double check.

Bordello of Boredom

Hillary Rodham Clinton released a video, too. This one a spoof of the Soprano's ending. Although I have never seen a single episode of Tony & Co., the finale got so much media attention that I knew exactly what to expect. The video was a preface to the release of the official campaign song. The spot is amusing, but ultimately a letdown when you realize that the song is...You and I by Celine Dion. Wow. Never ceases to disappoint. I am with Bill, it should have been Smashmouth.

Malbec and Pizza,
BTB

Super Hum-Mitt

My favorite part about Mitt Romney is the admiration I have for him as America's Mormon Political Superman. In time for Father's Day, the Romney campaign released a video on it's website, a home video no less, showing the 2006 Romney Christmas holiday from their beautiful, Western, woodsy Utah vacation home with pine walls and stainless steel appliances. Apparently it was over this vacation that Mitt made the final decision to run for President of the United States to cap off his charmed life. This video shows his outrageously all-American family - men with chiseled chins playing basketball, sledding and watching football alongside attractive wives and toddlers running around playing games and drinking juice. Bill Belichick and Tom Brady even make notable cameos in the background of a number of shots on the television. Coincidence? I don't think so. More importantly, only once does anyone appear to be actually watching the game, a grandson. What's up with that? Back to the point, we see Mitt as vigorous (sledding and being rammed into by his son), patriarchal (saying a thankful prayer before dinner), studious (shooting a piercing gaze into a book while his wife gushes about how intelligent he is) and successful. What better in a President? Sound judgment perhaps, but in terms of political pageantry I think we have as fine an actor as we will see in our lifetimes. I recommend the video (only 13 minutes) even for the haters out there. At the very least you will see that he has a son named Tagg. Whoops, I guess I ruined that for you.

See you out on the trail,
BTB

Live from Goffstown

Rather, the television is live from Goffstown, NH but here in Quabbin Qountry we are just plain alive. Wolf Blitzer looks like he is in a screening room compared to the candidates behind, but I'll believe CNN. I hate to do the same ol'-same ol, but alas here we go with some live blogging.

"I am the Senator from New York. I have seen firsthand the terrible damage" - Clinton echoes Giuliani. Not surprised.

"I opposed this war from the start. I think you're about 4 and a half years too late." - Obama in response to Edwards' barbs. Meanwhile, Hillary is trying to stay as neutral as possible, likely because she knows she doesn't have any capital. She strives to tell people that the real differences are not between the Democratic candidates, but rather between the Dems and the GOP.

Oooohhhh, Wolf just zinged Hillary by asking her whether she regrets her vote having not read the intelligence report. How can you answer that? You can't. Hence, she failed to say "yes" or "no". He comes back and gives the same question to Edwards. Damn, how you gonna not read that? That said, Edwards admits his mistake. He got the first applause of the night of anyone for giving props to Obama for being right from the beginning, followed by a brief speech on the need of honesty after Bush.

I don't know if I mentioned it last time, but Obama really needs to improve upon his stage presence. Granted, he does have the least experience of any candidate, but he really shows it. He pauses too much in his speech, carries on words, stuff like that.

Hillary once again stops short of answering Wolf's question. She ends with a quotation from Barry Goldwater.

"Who's most likely to end the war in Iraq? Who's most likely to lead the way in health care?" - Edwards telling how the main role of President is not to be a legislator, but to be a leader.

As the night went on, I became distracted by other things around the house and my bloggings became less and less common. I hope to recap my efforts later on, but now its push-ups and dessert.

Ahoy,
BTB

Everybody's Rockin'

There has been some rough chatter on Iraq lately, what with the new authorization bill coming up. As John Kerry puts it, "I’m voting no on this bill. I’m tired of the false choices of Republicans and all the recycled spin of old battles and the political calculations that do nothing for our troops who bear the real costs of this war. Bottom line: we support the troops by getting the policy right, and this bill doesn’t do that." Giuliani, who doesn't vote, put it to another non-voter, saying that John Edwards (like many other Dems) is in denial. But certainly the most prescient attack came at the hands of Ron Paul, who held a press conference to educate Mr. Mayor himself on 9/11 policy. Paul suggested that Giuli read the following books:
“Blowback” by Chalmers Johnston, “Dying to Win” by Robert A. Pape, “Imperial Hubris” by Michael Sheuer (former head of the C.I.A.’s Osama bin Laden Unit), and of course The 9/11 Commission Report.
Best of all is that he called out Rudy for claiming not to have heard of Paul's assessments. As I mentioned earlier this week, that's a bunch of hooey. Witness the following youtube video from the Domenation series for some more background.



"I don't think he's qualified to be president," Paul said of Giuliani. "If he was to read the book and report back to me and say, 'I've changed my mind,' I would reconsider."

Back on the Trail

Welcome back to Quabbin Qountry. Before we begin, I would like to thank the Toshiba Corporation. They sent me an AC adapter, still under warranty, to replace my broken one in under 24 hours. Literally, I placed the call Wednesday at 3pm and had a box on my porch, even way the hell out at the qabin, when I arrived home from track practice on Thursday. My joy was immeasurable. I missed the internet, and I missed the blog. Without further ado, back to the show.

Paul Krugman made a good point in yesterday's Times that maybe Bush isn't so bad relative to the rest of his party-goers. The scene from last week's debate where almost all of the gang of ten would-be nominees were falling all over themselves to be the one to say that they would inflict the most torture on terrorist bad guys was chilling, indeed. It wasn't just what the candidates had to say that was disturbing, it was the audience's reaction. It was the kind of feeding frenzy where the more blood the speaker could invoke, the hungrier the audience grew as they loudly growled with lusty approval over lines like the following
Giuliani: "And I would -- well, I'd say every method they could think of"
Romney: "Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo."
Hunter: "One sentence: Get the information. Have it back within an hour, and let's act on it."
At least Duncan had the respect to close his statement by saying "and I will take full responsibility" for the backlash of any torturous activity. Does that mean he would do a retaliatory self-waterboarding? Probably not, but if we take him at his word he would at least admit to it and say that he believed in it, and let history judge him as such.

There was one bright spot to the whole torture exchange, when Brit Hume gave John McCain the last word, having been the only one to go against the hard party line. He responded with this: "Yes, and the interesting thing about that aspect is that during the debate, when we had the detainee treatment act, there was a sharp division between those who had served in the military and those who hadn't." Virtually every senior officer, retired or active- duty, starting with Colin Powell, General Vessey and everyone else, agreed with my position that we should not torture people. . .So yes, literally every retired military person and active duty military person who has actually been in battle and served for extended times in the military supported my position, and I'm glad of it." I am glad, too.

Here are a few thoughts on some of the candidates. The Fix gave it's grades, but here we go from the 3Q perspective.

Tommy Thompson: Let's start with the former Wisconsin governor by treating like a cube of sharp, yellow cheddar - Stick a fork in him. This man was frightening to watch, purely from a physical standpoint. He has no discernible neck. It didn't help that he sounded vague and desperate every time he opened his mouth.

Sam Brownback: The highlight of his day for me was watching him pretend to be compassionate when asked about a rape victim being forced to carry the child of the ruthless criminal who violated her. He gives a half grimace and a reassuring nod as he begins by saying, "hat would be a very difficult situation, and it is a very difficult situation," before proceeding to completely ignore the situation and saying "will that (abortion) make the woman in a better situation if that's what takes place? And I don't think so." Of course not. Of course this woman's life will be better if she gives birth to God's rape child. I'm sorry, Sam, but your so-called "pro-life, whole-life" motto is thoroughly de-bunked every time you say "I will do it. I'll move aggressively forward on it" in reference to "deliberately and methodically" attacking other countries. Aren't confused, poor Africans God's children just as much as the rapist's bastard child? What a crock.

Mike Huckabee: Huckabee scored the most points of any of the middle-tier candidates, if only because he appears articulate and can handle the conservative banner better than any of the front-runners. There have been numerous articles saying the same thing and wondering why he hasn't taken off, and why he has raised so little money. So it seems likely that he will be the candidate that could have been, but at least he got off the most memorable zinger of the night when he said, "We've had Congress that's spent money like Edwards at a beauty shop." Hey-o! Even better, he mentioned it in reference to incurring a "fair tax" that would potentially get a lot of the IRS BS out of the way. He also seemed very even-keeled when he stood up for his tax increases to build roads and protect schools. Let's hope for the Red-State-blooded Americans out there that he will pick up some momentum. Plus, he lost a hundred pounds and ran a marathon. Props to that.

Tom Tancredo, Jim Gilmore: Meh. Not really worth a recap.

Ron Paul: Paul certainly did himself a disservice to goal of achieving the Republican nomination down at USC, but at least he went down guns blazin'. Even though he is a Libertarian, he didn't flout the notion that tax cuts alone will save our economy. He continually referred to fiscal discipline being a two-way street of reducing spending before we reduce our income. Certainly not cutting taxes while starting a war. He called out 9/11 a few times, initially saying, "we were spending $40 billion on security prior to 9/11, and they had all the information they needed there to deal with the threat." Damn. He proceeded to get himself into some trouble when he took the path of honesty and humility, admitting that American foreign policy necessarily impacts the views of hostile forces in the Middle East, a bad idea in the face of 9/11 bulldog/opportunist Rudy Giuliani, who then called him out by saying "I don't think I've heard that before." Really, Rudy? You've never heard that explanation before? What a sham. Don't bring that false exasperation to Quabbin Qountry any time soon. It belongs in one place and one place only - the Vlad Squad bench. Keep it real. I digress.

At any rate, Mr. Paul stood up to Rudy, but the damage was done. The crusty old Southerners in the audience were eating up Giuli's rabid terrorist-bating, and Ronnie was done. But not for me, as his best line was yet to come. After the debate's torture debacle (Paul was not questioned) he went out of his way to say, "but you know, I think it's interesting talking about torture here in that it's become enhanced interrogation technique. It sounds like Newspeak." Word. Second only to my horror at the crowd's reaction was my incredulous wonder at why the candidates were pussyfooting around the word torture in their defenses of it, calling it enhanced techniques and never readily admit to the direct question about waterboarding. Paul knew, though, and he dropped it like it was hot.

After that I couldn't really go on, and I ended up flipping more and more frequently to AMC where they were showing The Karate Kid. In other words, I got tired of watching the real Cobra Kai, and opted instead for the fictionalized version, where at the end even Johnny shows some mercy. Much the same today, I lack the strength to summarize the Big 3 other than to say that they were seemingly the strongest candidates. McCain kicked Romney's ass in the tete-a-tete and was honorable on torture, but was far from a sure winner. Giuli creeped me out with the red meat routine, and Romney is articulate but too easily damaged with the flip-flop attack. But hey, only EIGHT MORE MONTHS 'til New Hampshire!!! Time is a-wastin'!

. . .

The Sunshine Boy, unfazed by Huckabee's zinger, wrote a pre-emptive op-ed in the Huffington Post today, calling on Americans to take seriously their task on Memorial Day to remember the great sacrifices of American soldiers not by slapping a "Support Our Troops" magnet on their car, but by making a real effort to get the troops sent home from the current debacle in Iraq. I applaud him for the gesture. It is my belief that too often these days, in a world of instant leisure and long work days for so many, we have forgotten the purpose of national holidays. We see them as a free day to go to the beach or to be able to drink three nights in a row instead of actually pondering the meaning of the event. I think it is important for politicians to sincerely advocate their true celebration, and better yet to lead by example. Full disclosure: I will probably use it as an opportunity to drink three days in a row, but will accept any and all thoughts of good will to do the right thing. We're in this together, after all.


Sipping a Smuttynose from the banks of the Sawmill River,
BTB

Hiatus

Loyal Readers,

A brief note on the status of Quabbin Qountry: my computer's power cord is on the blink at the moment, and has been for a couple of days. I have a few posts nearly finished, and once I get everything fixed I will be back in business. Check back in a few days, and stay Qountry!


Ahoy,
BTB