I watched Monday night’s debate in New Hampshire with rapt attention. Or as much rapt attention that can be mustered while watching a debate between a group of people who collectively make me want to stick (sharp object) into my (body orifice). The ‘attention’ quickly vanished by the second hour during which I found myself submerged in boredom and the same old rhetoric. We get it, you cannot stand the current administration or Democrats or, quite frankly, anyone that thinks differently than you and that’s why you’re running. Instead of feeling an overwhelming sense of things moving forward for 2012, I felt like these were seven people who are really good at saying what they’d like to do but when push comes to shove, nothing will come about. Then again, this cynicism is a manifestation of ten years of working in politics. It’s easy to make campaign promises until you get to the actual job at hand. I feel that this particular group of Republicans seeking the nomination to become the President of the United States are wholly lacking. Each is good at making a show and spectacle of themselves or others but I don’t feel leadership from them. Of course that can be debated based on party affiliation and other things but for now, let’s just say that so much was left to be desired after Monday night’s debate. And several things, well, those things should never be said outside of the comfort of ones home. Leave your bigotry at the door.
Top Debate Moments:
10. Education: I work in the education policy and politics field, as such I spend a lot of time wondering what a future candidate would do about the sad state of education in this country and educators who have spent the last year being beaten down. Nothing. Not a mention of an instrumental part of the future of this country. Interesting.
9. This or That?: John King wanted for us to get to know the candidates better. I suppose hearing about something other than policy talking points might make a candidate more likable. Learning that Tim Pawlenty likes Coke instead of Pepsi, did nothing to make me think of him as approachable. Coke or not the man was a snooze-fest.
8. Tim Pawlenty: Prior to the debate, I thought that T PAW had it in the bag. I am also one of those assholes who thought that Barack Obama would never win against a Clinton. DO NOT ASK ME TO HANDICAP A POLITICAL RACE. That said, he showed up and that’s about as exciting and enigmatic it got with the person who everyone is trying to like. It’s hard to like a candidate who makes watching paint dry seem entertaining. Not only was he lacking charisma (and let’s face it, looks) but when it came down to John King asking about a specific statement he made about one of his opponents he hemmed and hawed instead of saying “Yeah, I said it”. We all know how you feel about Mitt’s health care plan ‘fess up.
7. Foreign Policy: Foreign policy was saved for the last fifteen minutes of the debate. Interesting given the current predicament the country is in with regard to Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia and Yemen. Minus 10 points to CNN for perpetuating American ignorance on foreign affairs.
6. Michelle Bachmann: She’s running for President and she wasn’t terribly crazy during the debate. She even fell in line when the subject of same sex marriage. She hates the gays just as much as everyone else on that stage. Yay!
5. Obamneycare: Quote from John King after asking Tim Pawlenty about his “Obamneycare” remark; “If it was Obamneycare when in the comfort of a Sunday who why isn’t it Obamneycare when he’s [Mitt Romney] standing right next to you?” Take that, Governor! I love how what will continue to be a source of contention for Republicans will be what Mitt Romney did with health care in his state of Massachusetts and how it compares to what President Obama did with health care. Both implemented a similar system which some believe to be towards “socialized medicine” or a “single-payer system” both of which deserve more of a discussion than a paragraph. The point is that Mitt Romney is going to get screwed on this as health care costs and the Affordable Health Care Act have a direct tie to jobs and the economy and whether or not people can afford health care in general. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the coming months but right now Mitt Romney is King of Backtracking.
4. Right to Work: I found the subject of Right to Work compelling as a lead into a conversation on state’s rights as well as seeing just how staunchly anti-labor these candidates are. Also interesting because – in full disclosure – I have spent the last three months working on the Right to Work as it pertains to New Hampshire and trying to prevent a veto override. This will be something that they will have to campaign on in New Hampshire as they will be asked about it so why not make it a national issue of how terrible the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is and while we’re at it let’s get rid of collective bargaining and any sort of wage related fairness for public employees. I can totally picture Newt Gingrich being all, “Fuck a living wage! Inflation is in your imagination.” That all of the candidates agreed on getting rid of the NLRB made me spend the rest of the evening thinking of the state of labor in this country.
3. Jobs: A topic that should have been up there with foreign policy and yet it remains but a distant memory. Something about “trickle down” and something about how they all want to be just like Reagan when they grow up. But what people are dying for now is some sort of plan from someone that leads the country back to prosperity and to have an unemployment rate of 5% again. That’s what is leading to voter angst towards the current administration and that is what will drive the 2012 election. All anyone anywhere cares about are the jobs. Where are they and how are we going to get them back.
2. The 10th Amendment: The 10th Amendment states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” It’s the basis for states right as delegated by the constitution which Conservatives and Republicans (which are not interchangeable) like to adhere to. “Why is the federal government sticking its nose in the business of the states?” is the question asked by many on the right who feel that the federal government should be serving the states but not necessarily legislating for them. Which. Fine. Ok. Of course there is always an exception to the rule. So while each of these candidates said that the federal government shouldn’t be telling the states what to do they would like for the federal government to tell the states how people should get married and what women should do with their bodies. On social issues it’s ok for the federal government to butt in. First it was that it isn’t the role of a President to go into states and interfere with their state law BUT a President should have a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Why you ask? Because according to Rick Santorum, the best way to raise children is with one mother and one father. This went on for several minutes just so each candidate could say yup, I’m a bigot! Just like the rest of ‘em! It was a sad moment in the debate but not the saddest…
1. Muslims in the administration: None of the candidates would hire a person of the Muslim faith to be in their administration because we don’t know what kind of Muslim this individual could be. I mean, look at all the evil Muslims out there waiting to get us? WHAT IF I HIRE THAT MUSLIM? And then Newt Gingrich is all, “We didn’t hire Communists so we can do the same thing for Muslims.” And then I was all, “Remember what we did with the Japanese during World War II? We could totally turn Texas into a giant interment camp! YES! That makes sense!*” Let us go back to our 1940’s sensibilities. This was the saddest part of the debate that there are people so close-minded willing to run a country. They say that they want to make the country great again and yet, one of the things that has made this country what it is, is its diversity. In a 10 minute interval, these seven ‘candidates’ took us back by about 100 years. With that one question, I felt like anything that could be the ‘future’ of the country is for naught. You can’t hope to move forward while looking back.
So, did you watch the debate? What did you think?
*I did not really say that. I feel like I need to clarify that there’s some serious sarcasm going on here
The State of Bipartisanship
“Because you cannot charge up those stairs into darkness and danger unless you know that there’s someone behind you, watching your back” – President Barack Obama
I am a total sucker for pomp and circumstance. I love the revelry and enjoy moments of tradition however small. So it is less than surprising that the State of the Union is one my favorite nights of the year. No matter who the President is I still watch with rapt attention not just to watch the address but to watch the reaction of the 535 members of congress in the audience. It’s crazy, I know, to not be among the over 90% of Americans with an unfavorable view of congress right now. That isn’t to say that I think they’re perfect and doing everything right but there’s still that soft spot that has been there since I was 12. The one that cannot help but love congress. So there’s my confession for the day: Congress can be awful but if you find the good ones then you can be swayed.
As I’ve gotten older I realize that I pay more and better attention to the actual address, both the written words and the delivery as I gauge how all of what is said will translate to actual legislation. While I still like congress I am not naive enough to think that bills will be sent to the White House and bipartisan compromises will be made and John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi will hold hands as the ride into the sunset. I am also aware that this is an election year and can I say one thing about that? To all of those angry that the President of the United States is giving a speech that might have notes of what he would like to accomplish into the next year. Can I just say – and pardon my language – NO SHIT. He’s the President and he’s allowed to give speeches and yes some of it might be pandering but I have never read or watched a State of the Union address that wasn’t essentially a campaign speech. For as President of the United States you get to be the Campaigner in Chief. That’s just how it works.
Moving onto the speech itself: It was spectacular. Some might scream BIAS! as I have been less than secretive as to who I will be voting for in November but I can still step back enough and allow for critical thinking. That said it was an address that wasn’t just meaningful in the words that he said but how he said them. He was forceful. He pushed at congress and yes, he scolded. But can you say that they don’t deserve it? He acknowledged the giant rift between both sides of the aisle right now and that for us to move forward as a country we – or, they, the House and the Senate – need to get over their differences and keep it moving. As I tweeted yesterday it was very much “Lead. Follow. Or get out the way”. And that is how I like my President. Presidential. Leading. Keeping us moving despite 535 roadblocks who are more interested in fighting with each other than fighting for the American people.
Despite my congress love I can still be disappointed. I watch C-SPAN and the pointing of fingers and referring to “My friend, the distinguished gentleman from X…” before giving a profound speech that amounts to a giant middle finger. I watch as members speak over each other, heckle and boo and I am dismayed. I’m bothered and saddened that this is the state of our union. As the President mentioned last night we did not receive a credit downgrade because of our finances but because congress was more interested in arguing with each other to the point that they would allow us to default on our loans. The House and Senate have argued us into oblivion and while it’s funny in an “Oh my God, there they go again *rolls eyes*” way it is also disturbing and treacherous. The word ‘compromise’ is not part of their vernacular. But ‘pissing match’ is (well, that’s two words but you get what I’m saying) and right now I don’t know what it will take or how low this country has to go before we are back on solid ground with representatives who care about those they represent as much as they care about their own politics, ambitions and proving the person across the aisle wrong.
I will address the finer points and policy over the next few days – particularly his quest to end asinine policy of ‘teaching to the test’ but I did want to give a few thoughts and hear what you all liked or didn’t like about the speech. Have at it.
Watch: The full State of the Union address
Watch: Mitch Daniels deliver the Republican response