Hate hate hate

Man, the GOP sure is steamed at this Arlen Specter bozo. Who does he think he is? Defecting his party just to get re-elected? What a bonehead!

Well, they'll show him, won't they? They're going to try their hardest to make sure that he doesn't get re-elected. They're going to attach the most assuredly damning political kryptonite available to ensure that Specter never sees the light of political day after 2010.

They're chaining him to George W. Bush.

Not the worst strategy in the world. Hey, it's worked for Democrats masterfully since 2006. Why not give them a taste of their own medicine, says Senate Republicans.

The Bush Hatefest continues. Personally, as I said in an earlier post, I think the GOP ought to be more progressive and forward-thinking if they hope to be politically viable. This is, while seemingly counter-intuitive in a 'This might be crazy enough to work!' sort of way, it's still harping on the past.

But you certainly can't begrudge Republicans for the move. Again, it has worked masterfully before.

At Least One Reason To Be Glad You're From Arkansas

We don't have problems like this.

Mother of God.

I hope not, anyway. Sweet sassy molassy, I pray not. The endless late-night ridicule would likely bring the state to its collective knees.

But for now, Arkansas can proudly say, "Wow, I'm really glad I'm not from Georgia.

How Do the Tables Turn So Quickly and Why?

Go back a few years. Let's say, I don't know, four of them.

We were looking on the second first 100 days of the George W. Bush's presidency. Republicans had been comfortably ensconced in Congress for a decade. The president had returned to the White House after defeating the best his opposition had to offer: John "Muscles" Kerry.

There were books — entire volumes — written about whether or not the Republican Party was vulnerable. It seemed (at the time, of course) the public affront to the war in Iraq was at its worst, and not enough to eject the President from office. And incumbents are hard to beat.

Well, it happened. The tables turned. And swiftly.

The House and Senate were handily taken by Democrats in 2006. The country, it seemed in two short years, had been thrust in a direction toward the nearest pooper, according to the voting populous.

While the GOP sweeps of 1994 had a mastermind — Newt Gingrich — who set a firm course and plan for action, the 2006 Democratic sweeps lacked the figure but kept a message: Bush is bad and anyone who agrees with him is bad as well.

Fast forward to 2008. The GOP loses again. Once-too-moderate John McCain isn't moderate enough these days to win an election, and according to opponents, would be Bush's third term, or what we in the political business call, the SuperMegaHugeandViolentandMalevolentDeathBlow. Squish.

He also happened to be running against what appears to be the most iconic president since FDR or Lincoln.

Democrats have their leader: Barack Obama. Democrats have their message: "Whatever that guy says," as an addendum to the aforementioned "Bush is bad and anyone who agrees with him is bad as well." Don't kid yourself, either. That is still a very clear and public message.

Here's a question to which I have no real answers: Why?

You can point to Bush, and that's probably the best answer. I can't think of a figure more demonized. Even Clinton — who was impeached, by the way — was regarded favorably upon his exit from the Oval Office. I wasn't around, but I'm sure the Nixon Family is hearing these familiar cries hearkening back to the good ole days when Uncle Dick was in the limelight.

Three quick points:

How long is Anti-Bushism going to last? — People are going to gripe and moan and complain about the mess the Bush Administration put the country in. But when will that not be enough. My guess? As long as Obama, who could kill stray cats in plain public view and receive a medal of honor from the public, is in office is my guess. Congress, on the other hand, will be much more subject to scrutiny. And the infighting that will occur as a result of a broad majority won't help. Think Bull-Moose.

Is the GOP doomed? — Were Democrats from until before 2006? No way. They'll be back. But the goal will have to be gaining party members, added, of course, with a heapin' helpin' of patience.

How? — If I knew that, I'd be a rich man. But I'll venture to say it isn't glorifying the good ole days or saying we need to put the good ole boys back in office. Democrats are remarkably popular. There will have to be a new direction forged. Not to worry anyone on the far right, but Republicans are going to have to cozy up to the word 'Progressive' that they once lamented.

That's really the whole point. The moniker 'progressive' was attached by liberals when the word 'liberal' was a dirty word, especially during the 2000 election. In 2009, the word 'conservative' is just as dirty: It is synonymous by many as narrow-minded and backward thinking and immoral.

Specter Leaving GOP

Well, I didn't see this coming.

Apparently his primary challenge would be greater than a general election. This puts the ever-looming 60 Senate votes in jeopardy for the Republicans, and closer within reach for Democrats.

More analysis as I have time to scrawl, but it's pretty big news, anyway.

UPDATE: Alright, I've finally got time to get some thoughts down. Unfortunately, it's been a few hours since the announcement, so there's no real meat on the bones that hasn't been gnawed already.

But here's a shot anyway:

There's your 60: But was it there all along? Most say no, but now the attention will be on the moderate Democrats who don't have a career as a Republican to fall back on, like, I don't know, Blanche Lincoln or Mark Pryor. Lincoln already put out a statement welcoming him aboard with open arms.

Punching Bag: If you think about it, Specter isn't going to do much differently as a Democrat than he was as a Republican. He'll still be irksome for the far-wings of his political party, and has the potential to be bullied from the far left like he was from the far right. Lincoln's statement said that she "is a testament to the fact that the Democratic Party embraces a variety of viewpoints..." and called it a "diverse party." Reid had similar statements. Tell that to Pelosi.

Obamania: Obama says he's "thrilled" to have Specter. But if he hasn't or isn't changing that much, was he any less thrilled yesterday? Obama has already declared that he will run unopposed, which was probably already a given and will use his super-mega-ultra-popular appeal to try and help get Specter re-elected. I look forward to seeing this theme for the next eight years I believe Obama will be in office. How far can Obama's magic spread?

Conservative Backlash: Some moderate Republicans are focusing on the defection as a lightening rod for change within the party. Those on the far-right don't have much to say about it. Former US Atty. Tim Griffin was quoted as saying Specter is "going home." He's right. But he didn't offer too much about why his home is better than Specter. I wonder if he'll say so as a Senate candidate. Some are wondering whether or not he'll run at all.

End Game?: For the time being, this will only affect the next year and a half. He still faces a 2010 re-election campaign against an opponent he admitted through his actions that he couldn't beat in a primary. He fled the party by which he did not want to be judged to be judged by it and another party of which he has been a vocal opponent for several decades in a later election. I just imagine the Democrat who has voted against Specter for those many decades struggling to check by his name. And, it could be that maybe Pennsylvania in general, not just the GOP, is tired of ole Arlen. This could all be null and void in November 2010.

Whether You Like It or Not, Status Quo in 2010

Incumbency. That word alone spells comfort for most of the congressional delegates and angst for their challengers.

It's not hard to quantify. In congressional elections, there have only been three or four elections since the mid-50's in which incumbent victories didn't rank in the 90th percentile. The Senate doesn't fare as well, perhaps due to its intended insulated nature, but still averages in the 70 percent and upward range.

It's also not hard to realize why. Part of the job a politician does while in office is the same any candidate has to do while petitioning. Go out, raise money, shake hands, kiss babies, guffaw/flatter, speak softly, but amicably. All that jazz. While a contender has to make time to do these things, the incumbent schedules it while on the clock, so to speak.

Name recognition also helps a great deal. I once spoke with a former state representative from Missouri who was elected to the Missouri House years ago at the ripe age of 23 with no real experience or qualifications outside of being a bright and industrious fellow. His name also happened to be John Hancock, he readily admitted.

Incumbents are not all-powerful. They still have to get re-elected, and have to maintain their credentials.

But when someone asks me, like last week, who the most vulnerable candidate up for re-election in 2010 is, I feel like they need to know all of those things I just said. It all goes double for Arkansan incumbents.

They say Blanche Lincoln is vulnerable. While she has certainly tepid polling numbers for a two-term Senator, that may be a rush to judgment. Sanders concurs. For Republicans, the roster lining up to challenge the incumbent is not promising. They're going to need an all-star deal breaker. The only Arkansas GOP member who fits that description is — bingo — Mike Huckabee, who has already cast off and set sail away from Arkansas and towards everywhere but.

There are deep flag posts in the 1st, 3rd and 4th districts. Quoth Dr. Hal Bass, Prof. of Political Science at Ouachita Baptist, "It would be extraordinarily difficult for a Democrat to win in (Boozman's) 3rd district. Conversely, it would be nearly impossible for a Republican to win in (Berry's) 1st or (Ross') 4th."

Naturally that left my congressman, Vic Snyder, as being the "most vulnerable" Congressman. He should be, anyway. His district is much more diverse than the others, split almost perfectly down the middle with a liberal center surrounded by a conservative perimeter. There is more opposition in his district than any of the other three.

I mark "most vulnerable" as such because it is such a laughably bad description of Snyder: He is going to be there as long as he wants to, which means, as per my conversation with him on Friday, includes a 2010 run (He says yes, he's definitely running). In fact, Snyder — the former Marine, Doctor, Lawyer, Conservative acting Liberal, and Friendly Neighbor — may be the most consummate politician of the bunch. He has to balance himself politically between the conflicting political tempers of his evenly-split constituency.

And he's been in office since the late 90's. That should tell you something.

So if you're super pumped about your home-towners, and the job they're doing in Washington, you're sitting pretty. If not, get comfortable because it doesn't look like the scenery is going to change much.

Unless, of course, someone pulls out. I'm not saying I've heard anything substantial, but I've heard some might be considering hanging it up.

Plus, as the old sports adage goes, that's why they play the game. Something could happen.

(Cue the Disney Inspirational-Triumph-Miracle Music)

Caption Contest! If You Mess This Up For Me Joe...

Another edition of the weekly caption contest! Last week's winner was Steve Lattimer who produced both the best and the worst caption. He won a shameful, long hard look in the mirror.

Give this picture your best shot. No points for anonymity, either, losers. Here's some low-set bars for you to get over.

President Obama sneaks up behind VP Biden to make sure he's not attempting to do sudoku again.

Obama:If you mess this up for me Joe, so help me God...
Biden: I know, I know...You'll feed me to Bo.
Obama: Damn right.

Biden: Holy Crap, that drawing DOES look like Pelosi!
Obama: Yeah, I drew it while she was in my office! Can you believe it?!
Biden & Obama: Teehee! Teehee!

Please do better than this. Go do that voodoo that you do so well.

Professional Gawkers and Stalkers

I read Politico daily. I don't frequent Perez Hilton's blog.

There are numerous reasons for this disparity, aside from a preference to the subject matter, but the primary one is this: One reports news and the other peddles gossip.

I don't think I need to say which is which.

So when I see a superior news outlet mimicking something reserved for feeding the base desires of people who have nothing better to do than not bathe and stalk the every waking move of celebrities, I'm not thrilled about it.

Politico features this new page on their site 'Politico 44,' monitoring the every waking move of the 44th President, Barack Obama. This 'living diary of the Obama presidency' features a section of speed-read headlines, any story that happens to mention Obama, and quick blurbs about who is buzzing around the White House (the latest was Usher; Lil John was nowhere to be found).

They even have an hour by hour calendar listing what Obama and his cabinet are up to. 9:15 AM — Obama receives his daily briefing. Biden is also in attendance. 9:30 AM — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifies before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations. 1:05 PM Obama meets with representatives of the credit card industry.

I'm a little mixed up about all this. I don't know if this is a sign of the times, a sign of the Presidency itself, or perhaps some mix of both. I believe the answer might be C.

The current times are an age of technological advancements that are largely outgrowing the subjects it records. There's a camera. Everywhere. On campaign trails, every gaff of miscue is meticulously proliferated to numerous other websites, newspapers or any other media outlet available. For those in office, the same rule applies: Every mistake will be well-documented.

And who's to say that's necessarily wrong? Transparency, after all, seems to be the chief goal of the new media circus and of this current administration. I don't think the previous administration was ready for what developed right under their nose. Camera's being in the face of George W. Bush, if they stay long enough, will most certainly yield some sort of hilariously quotable fruit, like “Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.”

A lot of it, however, I dare say, comes from the seemingly unending appeal of our President. His numbers are remarkably honeymoon-esque for someone who has been in office nearly 100 days. Referring back to the site, Politico and others refer to it aptly as the '100 Day Sprint,' and Obama, for better or worse depending on your political preferences, has gone a considerable distance in that sprint.

The minute by minute living diary of Obama is there because people want to know what Barack Obama is doing every minute, just like there are some people who want to know what Lindsay Lohan or George Clooney are doing every minute. Such appeal has not been attached to an politician since Reagan, who was a celebrity in his own right, and without the convenience of new media and round-the-clock news.

I'm curious to see if there will be a Politico 45. I doubt it. By then, it will be a terrible rerun or spin-off. And those typically do terribly, with the fine exception of Frasier (from Cheers) and Laverne and Shirley (from Happy Days).

But speaking again of Politico 44, I have to admit I prefer The Onion's living diary of the President's first 100 days.

Local Fisticuffs

"Man 1: Hey you, let's fight.
Man 2: Them's fightin' words!"
-The Simpsons

Roby Brock's article about the ever-daunting task of picking which unlucky soul will have to run against Gov. Mike Beebe in 2010 was enlightening. The writ outlining the fact that if the Republican Party of Arkansas wants to remain intact legally, they will have to put one of their lambs to slaughter was particularly interesting.

Basically, it means the mob will have their bloodbath.

But GOP head honcho Doyle Webb's musings about how people are "ready" and "willing" to be forced to step up to the plank- I mean plate was interesting as well. And maybe I'm reading to closely between lines that aren't really drawn, but his one-liner about the potential for the state's three congressional Democrats to draw opponents was particularly interesting.

I mean, isn't there enough blood being shed already?

You can ask my friend John Brummett about the ineptitude of the state's GOP. Take it with a grain of salt named David Sanders and you'll likely find the truth in the middle, but the truth is that the party can't swing much in Arkansas.

I hesitate to say 'of no fault of their own' but will stop short of saying quite that. I'm sure there is plenty that the party or former party leaders (cough, Huckabee, cough) could have done to help steady the ship, but the fact that Democrats have long managed and maintained this circus isn't really news so much as an understood axiom of Arkansas Politics: In any other region, they'd be Republicans, but in Arkansas, the Arkansas Democrat roams unfettered by national politics.

The only actual candidate who has voiced his candidacy for a delegate office, Senate-hopeful Kim Hendren, was a Democrat for years, and is now an ardent Republican. Like Brummett said: Same book, different cover. That applies to more than just a Kim Hendren.

The candidates will come. They have to. But what can they possibly do to win?

Nobody will likely touch Marion Berry. He's got the farmers in his corner and is a founding Blue Dog. There's some sect of more liberal Democrats running ads against Berry, but anyone in their right mind can see that's just foolhardy. Mike Ross is a young buck, comparatively, but still a powerful incumbent, but other than that I don't know much about him. He's got a funny haircut. I see him being the most "vulnerable," to use that word loosely, only because I know the others are pretty much bulletproof.

Vic Snyder has everything a politician could want on a resume: Veteran, doctor, lawyer, state legislator, experienced national legislator. He usually garners tepid poll numbers (likely due to the conservative rural perimeter surrounding Pulaski County), but always comes through and wins by the most vast of margins. The only struggle he'll have concerning re-election is whether or not the new triplets will affect his intentions of staying in office, as some often unfoundedly speculate. I haven't heard any intentions of a retirement from the good doctor.

I guess we should look at John Boozman, to keep things fair, but he is a Republican in friendly, friendly NWA waters. As political analyst Bill Vickery said, "He is undefeatable in that district."

There are two tactics opposition can take: Strike weaknesses or put forth a more popular candidate. The former seems nearly impossible as the resume's of these candidates are all quite lofty.

In the early 90's, Arkansas Men's basketball was visited by and were subsequently thumped by the University of Las Vegas. UNLV's biggest and baddest player, Larry Johnson, after nearly shattering the rim and flexing in Todd Day's face, sauntered over to Coach Nolan Richardson and said not-so-politely, "Coach. You need to get you some men."

The same is true for the Arkansas GOP, although gender isn't a prerequisite: They need to get some playmakers. The message is similar to the Democrats. Their members are strong. They need to get stronger people. And fast.

Newt Again? What is this? 1993?

1993 was a pretty good year. I was in Ms. Abbott — now Mrs. Harmon's — classroom in Benton, Arkansas, and life was good. The film's of the year were phenomenal: Philadelphia. The Fugitive. Rookie of the Year. Groundhog Day. Last Action Hero. I also think that's the year I got a Sega Genesis. Like I said, the times were enviable.

'93 was also a good year for a Representative with an amphibian moniker.

I say 1993 had to have been a good year for Newt Gingrich because of what it produced: 1994. Contract with America. Sweeping Republican pwnage. Not to pat him on the back too much, not much of that era still stands today, but the early to mid-nineties was Newt's obvious prime.

Hence, it should come as no surprise to see Newt's face everywhere these days. '09 looks remarkably similar to the conditions which wrought the '94 mid-term landslide, with a few important distinctions.

1993: House, Senate, Executive; all Democrats.

2009: Ditto.

Newt is on the forefront of similar circumstances and naturally, would enjoy a similar result. He'd love the same sort of congressional revolt toward the Right. The GOP would love the same sort of congressional revolt toward the Right. Republicans are in a pretty low state. Talk shows are being widely purported as their best and brightest at this point. Es no bueno for those guys.

I get the thought process: If it ain't broke don't fix it. Newt did wonders then, why not now?

Because that was 16 years ago.

Come on, guys. That's Newt Gingrich. If the party is trying to gain a new appeal in the nation and actually move in that more appealing direction, why oh why would it turn toward antiquity? The values that permeated that time which was ripe for a new approach to new problems are not the same that the GOP needs to utilize in order to get themselves out of this existential funk.

You can't make any progress (the kind of progress Republicans can get behind) with regressive tactics, not in this case anyway. Now there's word that the RNC has raised more money than the DNC this past month. That's a better start.

While I would definitely agree that Congress, not the White House, as Obama will likely be insurmountable, ought to be the focus of the RNC, and Newt proved he knows Congress, innovation ought to also be a focus. Maybe the two are connected, as this article talking about the likelihood of Newt in '12 running for the Executive. Said one GOP strategist, "He's always been the idea man."

But come on, the guy's name is 'Newt.'

John Kerry Violently Harpoons Media Industry by Voicing Support

Let's face it. Among all of the potential swimming in the sea of new media, conventional media and its industry is in a bad way.

Hometown papers left and right a folding up, even the big ones in Seattle, Detroit, and elsewhere. There's talks of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the Boston Globe shutting their doors. If anybody could use a bailout (not that I'm advocating, as I have clearly remonstrated), it's the newspaper industry. Any charitable donors out there?

But...let's not get ahead of ourselves. It's a nearly proven fact that everything John Kerry touches immediately dissolves if not erupting into flames. Print Media will be fine, Mr. Kerry, move along, nothing to see here.

This reads nothing but calamity. Hilarious calamity.

Health Care? Immigration? Global Warming? Pirates? Yahtzee!

Federal Legislators are back in the District following their two-week recess. After swapping photos from their respective Spring Break tiki bar excursions, reading emails, and barking orders to the aides and pages who were admittedly lax while their boss was away (Casual/Hawaiian-Shirt Friday: All day, every day during the recess), the largely Democratic Congress will get back to work cramming legislation at an ambitious pace.

The Obama Administration was adamantly vocal about their extending of the proverbial olive branch to the curmudgeonly, backward, and scaly Republicans still sulking about Capitol Hill, saying he wanted them to come along and get in on the conversation of legislation for which they could not and would not endorse as even marginal Republicans.

While dealing with the economic meltdown which at it's most fevered pitch ran like an episode of 24 on the various news networks, conservative and liberal alike, with the former bemoaning the current state of affairs like Nero sawing on his fiddle as Rome burned to the ground and the latter bemoaning the pitiful and so-called "check and balance" from the Right and has charged them obstruction of justice, going the way of Fox News during the Bush Administration.

Obama pushed a bevy of pieces of liberal legislation while dealing with the economy. Stem cell research, expanding the government by eight percent with a projection of nine percent next year, and has reached his hands further into the business sector than any preceding President, save perhaps FDR, but hey, it's only been 90 days. Now, with Congress coming back into swing and the economy (finally) becoming a little bit of a tired subject in the media, what will be Congress' next move?

We know it won't be card check. As Sen. Pryor's spokesman told me last week, "This thing is dead."

The Wall Street Hoover Blanket says that it's a two way tie between health care or climate change. Apparently, there's a growing roster of Democrats who believe health care has a better shot at actually making it through the sausage factory, whereas the most ardent Democrats believe that global warming is right around the corner and shouldn't wait on the political process.

Obama made some news last week by talking immigration. This might have a good chance at being dealt with if health care and climate change butt too many skulls. People might get tired of that argument and move on to this issue which The Hill called "one of the most politically charged issues in Congress."

Pirates have also vowed revenge. Something must be done. Perhaps a subcommittee with Michael Bay, Bruce Willis and Chris Tucker could be formed to thwart their efforts. Or perhaps they could all be substituted by Will Smith. Who knows.

Anyway, the subject, to me anyway, isn't as important as the political bludgeoning which is going to be on display. As bad as the political slugging was with regard to the mobilization of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, I'm predicting that the upcoming bouts will be much less one-sided than the stimulus plow-fest that garnered only three (3) Republican delegates' support.

Obama's popularity is still potent, but that pixie dust won't rub off on Congress. As seemingly futile as the Tea Party Protests were, they were only the first step by the far-right moving inward. More and more people, per tradition, will begin to raise skeptical brows to the competency of Congress, even if it is of Obama's party. Congress has been, is and will likely always be collectively unpopular. It's just the way it goes.

It's that whole ebb and flow thing again. The Right will be back, if not of its own volition and innovation, than of the implosion of its rival. In the meantime, more fireworks as the sausage is rendered.

Caption Contest! I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggonit People Like Me

It's yet another rabble-rousing Friday with yet another Caption Contest.

Last week's winner was anonymous. I donated five dollars in his or her name to a local charity. Congratulations! Unless this guy/gal hates Catholics. In which case, he/she doesn't need to win anyway. Shame on you.

Al Franken, comedian, will now have his name followed by D-Minn. in most places now. Public Strategies polls Minney-soda with 63 percent wanting the other guy whose name has already escaped me (Coleman? Callahan? Cartwheel?) to give it up already and get to representing. I'll get it started.

"HUG ME!"

"He's got the Whoooooole World in His Hands, He's got the Whole-Wide-World, In His Hands! Everybody!"

"I've played worse joints than this so-called Senate."

Pretty weak sauce attempts by yours truly, but this one's pretty open. Have at it.

Because Nothing Says 'Take Me Seriously' Like Knickerbockers

Well, this pretty much sums up my thoughts about the so-called tea parties.

It's not that it's bad to protest. It's a necessary part of politicking. The people must be heard above the noise of the political engine churning on Capitol Hill.

It's not that this isn't even a worthy cause. The Federal Government is expanding mighty quickly, and just maybe these people have a point.

While this is a way to get one's voice heard, an important first step, it fails at the more important second step: Getting a response other than a furrowed brow and confused glance from legislators, conservative and liberal alike.

Where were these people the last eight years? In an interview I had with Rep. John Boozman, he admitted to vast government expansion at the rate of 3 per cent average annually.

“We were certainly guilty of that,” he said. “We increased the government at about a rate of 3 percent per year, which was too much, but the new administration has increased it by 8 percent so far and is projecting to add 9 percent on top of that in 2010.

“I don’t think that’s what Arkansans want or need right now.”

Well, sure, but tell that to the brilliant people who are masterfully photoshopping Obama's face over Hitler's body. I wonder how they voted in 2004 and 2008.

Here's a pro-business, anti-tax conservative's take. Don't let those big numbers fool you.

Now, I wouldn't go as far as to call this a collection of right-wingnut crazies, like Krugman or Brummett might. But the message is getting lost in the noise; Not only the noise of people who aren't genuine or informed in their stance, but people who are knowingly disingenuous, ill-informed, and willfully so. I guess that goes for every gathering. The idiots often steal the spotlight.

Clear out that mess, lose the costumes, then maybe it'll make some noise worth hearing. That hasn't proven to be the case just yet, no matter how valid the argument for the gathering.

Kicking a Dog When It's Down

Seems to be a lot of that going around lately.

Not that it's necessarily bad. Not that it's necessarily undeserved. Not that it's untrue, either.

But for a Republican to read the New York Times or Politico today, words like "crazy," "idea-bankrupt," and "powerless" are jumping off the page and piercing into their hearts like a dagger.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Krugman takes a bearded look at these Tea Parties that are sprouting up around the country, indeed, here in Little Rock, laughingly. Finally, an idea that Republicans are unifying behind that seems to get a couple of people at least half-interested and thud: America's Hometown newspaper writes this is the desperate act of a semi-brain dead political party.

Politico unbiasedly observed that the No. 2 man for the GOP in the House is trying desperately to assert the competency of the Republican Party by offering no ideas. Crazy like a fox, perhaps, but maybe just crazy period.

Politico's poll is also telling. Of all of the people in the Republican Party offered, one is a radio host (Limbaugh), one who has amounted to little more than an obscure governor/gimmick (Palin) and a no-name who reminds many of John Kerry (Romney).

The Republican Party is in a bit of a bad way. Luckily, the contest is politics, where those who are in power absolutely lose power each and every time. This isn't the Republican's Decade. Wait til next time.

The Essence of Twitter (slaps forehead)

Let me first and foremost make a technological confession: I don't much care for Twitter.

It's nothing personal, to Twitter itself or to those who tweet religiously. To each their own. Me and some of my friends are just of the persuasion that at any moment, given the right amount of infuriating circumstance, we could happily liquidate all of our assets and invest in fishing lures and go live on a mountain somewhere. It's really nothing personal.

I've never had news broken to me on Twitter. A colleague and I were discussing the value of Twitter when it broke the story that a plane landed in the Hudson River. We both agreed that the popularity of the social networking device was a bit shameful; It's not like somebody wasn't going to report on a plane crash until — oh crap! — Twitter was on the scene!

But I think Twitter is useful, outside of its best use, that is, of transmitting hilarious headlines from the Onion, or the Ghost of Roy Hobbs.

Twitter is the new blog.

I referenced this briefly in my discussion about the Central Arkansas Champions of New Media. Huzah. Consider what blogs were meant to be when blogs were first created; Simple, quick ways to document a weblog of events or journals on the internet with little to no actual tech expertise.

Now look at what blogs have become. Blogging technology is snazzier. It looks more professional. And it's just as easy. If the news source that feeds the blog is credible, be it the person or business that runs the blog, then boom — It's become a new website and new media outlet. People can use these templates as platforms to get their voices heard and make themselves viable public entities, and spend a lot of time making sure it's well-done and thoughtful.

While wonderful in some respects, it kind of distorts the essence of what it used to be to have a blog.

Now comes Twitter, which limits its phraseology to 140 characters. Barely enough for a headline. Hardly enough for a headline and link to whatever the subsequent story may be. It is, in its most base and analytical sense, necessarily easy. The only thought that must be mustered is to confine one's thought to a mere 140 characters.

But it moves news. The Arkansas News Bureau uses it. The Arkansas Project uses it. Blake's Think Tank uses it. I use it. Lance Turner uses it splendidly. Jessica Dean and Choose Your News uses it. CNN. The Onion. The Ghost. All of these credible news sources are using twitter.

It moves news and it generates conversation and puts people's thoughts out there like the regular blogosphere was supposed to, and still does.

Now if they could just get rid of that danged over-tweeted whale. I've never been so infuriated at an aquatic mammal.

Caption Contest! Bawney Fwank is HILAWIOUS

I like this one, because it's just so dang open to interpretation. Give me your best captions for whatever it is that Barney Frank could have said that would make this many people laugh openly. I'll get the ball rolling:

Frank: I don't know where my pants went either.
Everyone else: Isn't he just ADORABLE?!

or this

Pelosi: Oh God, We are so screwed.

or how about this

Frank: And I told Dodd, I'd slap him right in the face with this hand if he ever let anything like that AIG bonus thing get in legislation again.
Dodd (just over Frank's right shoulder, laughing): Oh my God, he TOTALLY did!

Please do better than me. Schwag for the victor.

Conversation on Arkansas New Media

In the wake of the Washington Post listing the best blogs in the state as The Arkansas Times, The Arkansas Project, and The Arkansas Blake's Artificially Intelligent Panzer, I think some conversation could be started about the role of blogs with regard to conventional media, like newspapers.

I think Arkansas has a rich pool of bloggers that are, in most respects, remarkably credible and good at generating the kind of conversation that newspapers used to — and still can; Conversations that bind communities, offer insight and analysis, and can, perhaps in some regard, be the voice that media has always been.

I think the two — conventional and new media — ought to work together, feeding each other. They are not incompatible. And I think Arkansas might be a good microcosm of how things may ought to be in the future.

I can think of eight blogs off the top of my head right now that I deem to be credible. 'Credible' is a license often reserved for that type of conventional media. From authority, comes credibility. But these guys speak with that authority necessary to delivering news and analysis, often times deriving their information from regular old news types.

The Arkansas Times blog is imitable, as well as remarkably simple. Max links press releases that the Times gets. He links articles that are worth mentioning. He provides a little commentary, but never that much. I think it's what the bread-and-butter of blogging used to be as a concept; Easy, quick, and point-blank information.

Since its creation, blogs have become more legitimate platforms (looking at Pew Reserach web trends, trust me, they're legit) upon which people can build themselves up, therefore reducing the ability to make quick and easy blog posts due to the need to articulate well thought-out articles. Twitter, for the record, may have become what blogs were supposed to be — short and sweet bits o' info. And with only 140 characters, good twittererers had ought be sweet, because they have to be short.

Kinkade's Arkansas Project, while he will say he is not nor intends to be a journalist or be held to that standard, does a better job than most at putting news out there for people to see. Of course, this is layered with humor (or flailing attempts thereof — ZOINKS!), but the information is still there. You also know it's reliable. He's been around the block enough to know what's worthwhile and what's utter bull. The fact that he puts up cheesecake photos on the side, while unconventional in news media, is moot; He's got sources and information, and he's letting you in on it.

Blakes' Think Tank has a much more Man of Our Town appeal, yet maintains the authority of a viable news source. Blake "Don't Make Fun of My Flower Shoes" Rutherford was born and raised here. He's worked here in several different capacities, both professionally and otherwise. For someone who many might think is just popular due to his last name, he has certainly gone above and beyond to offer insight, commentary, and just plain old news that is redeemable on every level.

Specifically regarding the Tyler Denton for Lt. Governor story line. Broken on the Think Tank, it generated the same type of conversation and speculation that many people at one time might have looked for in the political section of the local paper. Whether or not the story pans out in reality isn't really the point; It got people talking, which is what papers have been doing for years.

Not that the Post mentioned them, but I think some honorable mentions ought to go around. Arkansas Business' Lance Turner's blog is really good, often dealing with the primary concern that many are heeding regarding new media: How the heck are we going to make money off of this? Jason Tolbert is unique, with his ever transparent, in-your-face flip cam, and has given the blogosphere a little more edge in legislative halls, I think (you sure as crap won't find Kinkade there).

Speaking of the Legislature, some props have to go to Under the Dome, Rep. Steve Harrelson's blog from the House. It's an obvious form of sincerity in trying to be as open and representative to his constituency. Robbie Wills' blog, while a little more theatrical, can be thought of in that same vein, although it's an obvious second fiddle to Under the Dome.

I'd like to say, without patting myself on the back, that I've done alright with Unfamous First Words, speaking from the Bureau's perspective in a bit of a more youthful (maybe irreverent?) voice than most have been used to, while still qualified to speak with credibility and authority. Brummett's blog also has that, but you won't see his tone changing between his column and his blog. Sometimes, they're even the same text.

Is Print Media Dead? I wouldn't think of it like that. Think of it more like Jurassic Park, where the prevailing theory was dinosaurs evolved into birds. Print Media might not be dead, but it could be said that it is evolving into a digital age. We'll monetize it, sure, somebody has to. But in the meantime, it's a special time to see the dinosaurs walking with the birds.

American Epidemic: PIRATES

Forget the economy. Health care reform is negligible. We've got bigger fish to fry.

Who in the Wide World of Sports would have thought Pirates would be a problem for the Obama administration to face?

Handling a kajillion dollar deficit, facing the worst economic climate since the Depression, and overcoming partisan polarity that is simply unprecedented isn't enough for Obama to inherit, sayeth the Gods. Let's throw pirates in there too.

(Slaps forehead.)

Dry Rub or Wet, It's Still Pork

An interesting article from the Hill got me going about about pork and earmarks.

According to said article, Congressmen and women are going about their duty of transparency to their constituency in a variety of different manners. Some are flaunting their appropriations like a man who caught a fish "THIS" big (extends arms outwards), an overt gesture that they are, in fact, bringing home the bacon.

Others, the Hill reports, are heeding the harsh winds of a populist storm that frowns upon the vague notion of greed and have taken to nestling the required posting of earmark information in clandestine locations that are difficult to find even for the most tech-savvy navigator of the interwebs.

Arkansas' delegates pan out pretty well, in the middle of the road: They're not mounting their trophy earmarks above the fireplace in the living room, but they're not tucking them away in the digital folder next to Congressional Intern applications where no one is going to be sneaking peeks. All of the Congressmen have PDF file links where one would call them "reasonably accessible," although the sites could stand a little new age face lift altogether. No harm, no foul.

The problem can be described in two avenues: One in that everyone hates Congress (They were the only group to poll worse than George W. Bush, after all), the other in that everyone usually likes their own Congressional delegates.

While sticking to our folks in D.C., it should be stated that state congressional members often do their fair share of pigging out, sometimes even retroactively. Rep. Keith Ingram, D-West Memphis, voted for a cigarette tax hike that would devastate local business and then turned around and had that tax exempted for his constituency only. That's a canny mastery of bringing home the bacon; my compliments to the chef.

The point of sending a native of your state for a two year term to Washington is so that they will represent your interests to the best of their ability. This often means that constituents want their delegates to represent them into a new manufacturing plant, smoother roads, or government subsidies for, say, a brand-spanking new, 36-hole Frisbee golf course like in Austin, Texas.

Which is great for their constituents. But everyone else — especially those in need of a little more that spring outings with a recreational discus — eyebrows are raised, fingers are pointed, and tempers flare.

All of this is in line with the 1,073 page stimulus bill that can best be described as a Memphis Meat Locker; laden with pork in all different quantities, styles, and flavors. I wrote about such projects awhile ago, some of which could be deemed by many to be, ahem, unnecessary. The idea for most was to conserve money, as it was tight, and to them, the idea of throwing money towards the study of why pork poop stinks seemed an affront to those thrifty and chemoreceptive senses.

And you have to think that this look at the handling of earmarks might have to do with the attention it received in 2008 and in the developmental stages of the 2009 stimulus, juxtaposed with the result: Nearly 9,000 earmarks, by some counts, worth an estimated $7.7 billion.

Are earmarks good or bad? They're probably necessary in many cases. Necessary to get re-elected, anyway. But the amount of spending made by some of these folks on some of the things they're spending their Federal funds is bound to ruffle a few more feathers.

Whether or not it will ruffle enough to outrage remains to be seen. Let's hope it's not as bad as the outrage against that insurance company AIG. Two words: Piano wire.

Yikes.

Overlord Give Newsing Media Make Glorious America? Hail the Overlord!

As reported by several in the field, I spoke on a panel at the Society of Professional Journalists this weekend to discuss new-fangled media and what to do about it with old-fangless media strategies.

It went well. There were was an encouraging amount of interaction between the panel, admittedly old-school journalists, Journalism Professors, and students.

I say it went well, although the question persists, but no one walking into that room thought anything would be resolved. One question, from our moderator, the Demozette's John "Supa" Krupa, unnerved me a little bit. I hadn't thought about it until I saw the question in writing before the gig was set to launch.

"Do you think the government should subsidize or 'bail out' newspapers?"

I think I wrapped up that question quickly and then yielded my time to Conan "Cannon Galaxy" Gallaty and this other guy. But I began to wonder later that day if people had actually been mulling this idea around.

The answer to this has to be no. The answer to this has to be H-E-double hockey sticks no.

I spoke briefly and most boringly about taking steps backward philosophically to figure out what it truly means to be a distributor of information and what it means to be a journalist.

I have always thought, even before landing bass-aackward into this job, that one of the most important roles a newspaper (and even the news without the paper-attachment) could play was that of the foil to government. It is, in my humble opinion, a necessary check and balance.

This is an often quoted, and probably ill-referenced example, but Watergate worked through a newspaper. Woodward and Bernstein brought down a now obviously corrupt executive branch. That's a clear example. But delivering information does more than just topple the oppressive. It serves as a political conduit. Politicians and constituents alike gauge on another, often, by what they read about one another in the paper.

And a paper will never write anything that impugns its owner. Ever.

Whether or not the news comes on gray paper with smudgy ink isn't the issue for me. Like Michael Kinsley said in the Washington Post, it's all going to be alright. People will figure out how to monetize the news.

That being said, the news businesses, including our own, will need to innovate these ways to monetize quickly, or be lost along the wayside. But government ownership — and that's what it would be, ownership; not Stephens Media or Gannett, but United States Media or Government — would pose such a tremendous conflict of interest that it would border on making this blessed service news provides and turning into propaganda.

Anyway, I read the press releases from government officials. They're lousily written.

Guest Post: Icehouse says Increase the Peace

UFW wouldn't have been possible without GRH.

The Ghost of Roy Hobbs is a haven of sports knowledge and analysis from those who are in the know. For those of you who come to my humble site and don't immediately go to the Ghost, or vice versa, are definitely missing out.

I found this piece by my dear friend to be particularly compelling, and duly republished it here. One of the regular staples at GRH — the Book Club — discusses sports films or films with particular interests regarding events, such as this post, juxtaposing the film Boyz in the Hood to the sentiments surrounding the Michigan State Spartans playing in the NCAA Championship.

Understand that it was supposed to be read prior to the game, but its words still have great merit.

Read, and enjoy.

-Zack
Ok, ok, ok. I know it’s not a “Sports Movie.” Hear me out.

Sports plays a large factor in the movie, and plays a pivotal role in the development of one of the central characters. Plus, it kind of connects to a lot of current things, so, shut up and listen.

Boyz N The Hood is the coming to age story of Tre Styles, Ricky Baker, and Doughboy Baker, following them from childhood up to the cusp of adulthood, in the poverty-ridden environment of south-central Los Angeles. The three take essentially the three different paths available to those of this plight.

Tre, raised until the age of eleven by his mother (who earns a master’s degree and becomes a denizen of a higher social status), is taken in by his father, Furious. His life is maintained by a strict code of ethics set forth from his father, with words of wisdom like, “any fool can make a baby, but it takes a man to be a father.” Tre has a job, excels in school, and is ambitious and driven enough to make college a reality.

Doughboy, played aptly by Ice Cube (the dude that makes family movies?!), is the opposite. In and out of prison, his life is consumed by drugs, alcohol, and the perpetual and cyclical violence which he himself perpetuates, and succumbs to, postscript.

Tre’s best friend and Doughboy’s half-brother is Ricky Baker. This is where the movie intersects with our interests. Ricky has been sports-obsessed since a young age and is now an All-American Running Back for Crenshaw High School, is highly touted and recruited to play the position at USC. Ricky is not without his setbacks. Like of many of the same young men in his situation, he is already a father, and does not excel in school. When the recruiter comes to talk to Ricky, he is obviously put off by the young son, and sends Ricky into a spiral of self-doubt when he mentions that Ricky must score at least a seven hundred on the SAT to be eligible to play at Southern Cal.

Tre is the exception whose eyes we see the movie through. He has two supportive parents and seemingly only has the weakness of female attention. Doughboy and Ricky, on the other hand have the same mother, but we know nothing else of their fathers. Crime is the only avenue that Doughboy seems destined for, and football is the only outlet – and way out – for Ricky. This seems to be a prevailing notion, for when the USC recruiter comes to visit Ricky, one of Doughboy’s associates asks for a scholarship, saying, “I want to go to college, too.”

I won’t spoil the end for those of you that would like to know where it goes, but needless to say, it’s not a feel-good movie.

What got me on this line of thinking is a game that tips off here in a little less than an hour. How many times in the last weekend have you read something about how great it would be for the state of Michigan if Michigan State were to win tonight? Seriously, how many? It’s all anybody can talk about, really. I’m not trying to take anything away from the accomplishments of the Spartans, they’ve done very well, and been pretty fun to watch. OMFG! FUNK!

What I don’t want is for sports to be the only thing that these people have to cheer about. I don’t want people in Detroit, Flint, or any other impoverished Michigan community thinking that sports is the only thing that can heal a community that has been ailing for decades.

Maybe I’m reading to much into it, maybe I’m just being a jerk, but it seems to me like it’s just a scrap of happiness being thrown their way, while the real pervasive problems of their society go largely ignored.

Put it another way. In the words of Doughboy, “Just goes on and on, you know? Either they don’t know, don’t show, or don’t care about what’s going on in the hood.”

Hate To Say I Told You So

Now where did I read that Sen. Blanche Lincoln was a 'definite no on card check' again? I have the worst memory about these things.

Ah, right. I didn't read it, I wrote it.

Anyway, I'm not gong to pat myself on the back anymore. Like Pop always said, you ought not be congratulated on something you should be doing anyway.

Plus, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE thought she'd ever go for it in the first place.

The next big point is where do we go from here? People have hyped this matter up for months, so naturally, there has to be somewhere for this pressure to vent. A trilogy of sequels to the Card Check saga awaits.

Labor — Lordy, what to do when the romance been gone? Labor felt a large kick to the bread basket on this one. Losing GOP-affiliate Arlen Specter is one thing, but this Lincoln is a Democrat. For labor forces, she was supposed to be a powerful ace in the hole. Heat from the business community in her right-to-work state was apparently too much to sway what many suspect is her naturally leftward inclinations.

Speaking with Alan Hughes, President of the Arkansas AFL-CIO, today, he said that from what he understood, Lincoln left a door open — wiggle room, if you will — to some sort of compromise, one in which his office has not heard in any detail but Sen. Pryor made headlines about.

Hughes says that while right now they would have to say no to a compromise, they haven't heard anything about it from the business community. Hughes also countered that they've offered no compromise, and wait on the business community to offer one first. I wouldn't look for one soon though. 'Compromise' is often code for 'we lost, but let's see how much we can squeeze out so it's not a complete and total loss.'

"This issue isn't going away," as Hughes put it.

Business — Chalk it up on the Big Board, so says the business community. From the beginning of the EFCA discussion, it seemed like big business has had this contest to lose for some time, being from a right-to-work state, while the Democratic delegation made it somewhat entertaining.

Chamber Prez. Randy Zook says that from here on out, the organization of businesses hopes to keep on keepin' on, educating people about what he and the chamber refer to as flaws in lousy legislation. Asked if this "education" involves focusing on Pryor to follow in Lincoln's footsteps, Zook agreed, but said they're not pressuring anyone, just educating.

He did leave us with a nice tagline for the trailers, though. "It will get the fate the bill deserves," while I thought I heard the faint drone of chainsaws and heavy and dangerous machinery in the background. Also some thunder rolled. And a horse neighed.

The Contenders — The most interesting story after the fact may be the card played by the candidates who might've been counting on Lincoln to fade to the left on this issue, giving them more ammo with which to assail her in her upcoming re-election campaign.

Several names have popped up. We were able to get a hold of two of those names regarding Lincoln's decision, and they seemed to be driving toward the same hoop.

"I’m glad that she is coming my way on this issue. I’m disappointed that it took years for her to get there,” said Tim Griffin, the former U.S. Attorney who has been the most active, if not vocal candidate among the ambiguity. Doyle Webb, state GOP head honcho and rumored candidacy-muser, said the something similar.

Look for the Republican strategy to be thus: "Why'd it take you so long to come out and say it? GOTCHA!"

It's kind of weak if you ask me, but it's the only hand they have at this point (Huh?! What?! Only a year and a half until Nov. 2010?! My how the time flies! [slaps forehead]). Delaying the inevitable decision was a pretty savvy move on her part, as according to phone conversations with her, she's much more concerned with other things, like health care reform.

But as Alan Hughes so accurately put it, "Huh, I believe it's on her radar." Politicians — as well they should be — are sensitive to the whims of their constituency.

The Republican contender, whoever that may be, is going to have a little more clout with the reports showing Lincoln's tepid-at-best approval ratings. That will be the big action from here on out.

But to quote Hughes again, this issue isn't going away.