And In Case I Don't See You, Little Rock

Break-Up Sweatpants

Michael & Michael Have Issues	Wed 10:30pm / 9:30c
www.comedycentral.com
Joke of the Day Stand-Up Comedy Free Online Games

Good afternoon, good evening and good night. I know you'll be heartbroken, but with the advances in technology, really, what's the difference? Just get some great sweatpants, cry it out over the weekend, and by Monday you'll be good as new. It's been real.

Postponement: Deathblow or Fresh Air for Health Care?

GEORGE: My god, I'm getting married in December, do you know that?

JERRY: Yeah, I know.

GEORGE: Well, I don't see how I'm gonna make December. I mean, I need a little more time. I mean, look at me I'm a nervous wreck. My stomach aches. My neck is killing me. I can't turn. Look. Look.

JERRY: You're turning.

GEORGE: Nah, it's not a good turn. December. December. Don't you think we should have a little more time just to get to know each other a little.

JERRY: If you need more time, you should have more time.

GEORGE: What, you think I could postpone it?

JERRY: Sure you can. Why not?

GEORGE: That's allowed? You're allowed to postpone it?

JERRY: I don't see why not.

GEORGE: So, I could do that?

JERRY: Sure, go ahead.

GEORGE: All right! All right. I'll tell you what. How about this? Got the date; March 21st, the first day of spring.

JERRY: Spring. Of course.

GEORGE: Huh? You know? Spring. Rejuvenation. Rebirth. Everything's blooming. All that crap.

JERRY: Beautiful.

GEORGE: She's not gonna like it.

JERRY: No, she's not.

I don't think I've made it any big secret that I'm a pretty avid Seinfeld fan. I was reminded of this section from the second episode of season 7, called "The Postponement," when thinking about the news that Mike Ross and his Blue Dog cohorts successfully lobbied to punt the House vote on health care reform back about a month, after the recess.

For Ross and the Blue Dogs, it was a success. Now he gets to go back to his constituents not with a result that could be praised or damned by those voter, but with a benign open ear. For the elected official, it's always better to have something open that voters feel they can put their input into than have to discuss why something that has already happened and can't be changed happened in the first place.

But that's political. What about the issue itself? Was this the deathblow? Many people think so. Others don't.

The Wall Street Journal has released numbers saying that popularity over the President's health care plan has dropped 10 percent in the last month alone, and that a whopping 41 percent of Americans don't think the legislation is headed in the right direction.

Mike Ross says that he's going to talk to his constituents, that there's more room for changes and compromises between liberals, conservatives and everyone in between, but that this shouldn't change the overall plan to reform health care. Others think that the trend will continue, popularity of the health care legislation will continue to plummet to the point that enough votes to pass the bill would be scarce, if at all in existence.

I'm not sure this is the coup of health care reform, as opponents of such legislation would hope. There's been too much time, money and political capital spent on the matter. But will it look dramatically different by month's end? That's very likely.

With three parties going at it — Liberal Democrats, Moderate Democrats, and Republicans — there are more concessions, compromises, and sausages to be made.

UPDATE: Tim Griffin's link to this post says that I'm comparing this 'whole health care thing' to that episode. Nope. Just the postponement, not the whole issue. Just a note of clarification for the four of you who read his blog.

Overexposure vs. Playing Your Hand

President Barack Obama is the most popular guy in school the world. He's got charm, smarm, snazz, tact, and smooth rhetoric that makes Morgan Freeman sound like a heavy-breathing, awkward teenager on the line with his Jr. high sweetheart.

He's good looking. I'm comfortable enough with myself (and my listening abilities) to say that. He's in shape. He hoops so regularly that ESPN ran an Outside the Lines article talking about how basketball is the new golf course, as for where the business in Washington is handled.

He has a compelling narrative. He has an 'it' factor that makes even conservative columnists like the New York Times' David Brooks acknowledge that he is the epitome of dignity in an ever dignity-less world, and that his greatest achievement as President might be the reawakening of a new age where dignity is treasured.

Politico reported that he is marketable, filed away under the biggest 'duh' ever category. Yesterday, I talked about how he, like Sarah Palin, has such a stellar character profile that it outshines hitherto considered to be blemishes on his resume, namely, a lack of a long one. Many in Obama's early corner told the now-President but then junior Senator only two years into office that he ought to wait a term or two to insure that his election would be a lock.

It was never anything but a lock, save for a few brief moments about six weeks before the election, but those tumbled as did the economy.

I could keep going on and on, but it would be redundant and would border on flirtatious. He's popular and he knows it.

But then that wily codger John Multimedia Brummett went and got me thinking about overexposure. In his renowned phone-it-in arrows column, he gave Obama a downward arrow for overexposure. "He’s overexposed and shouldn’t do any more health care specials on ABC unless he can produce better answers than he offered the other night...It is to say he should stay off television if all he can do is regurgitate banal talking points," said Brummett.

While I'm sure the two sorted it out that Sunday evening, with Obama being a fan of Brummett's and Brummett being a fan of his, this struck a chord with me; I had been having a meal with an avid, blindly and staunchly conservative, and she said the exact same thing. I had chalked it up to bias. But I think it's a strategy.

It's a balancing act for the President. Obama can be seen on television, the internet, and every medium in between (yes, Blake, TwiTTeR!!!) every day. Politico 44 stalks reports his every move. Barry (yeah, I feel like I'm on a first name basis with the guy) is like the picture of a loved one you keep on the dashboard of your car: Maybe not your primary focus, but always in sight, smiling at you.

But there's personable and then there's overanxious. Last week, Politico ran an article about the Politics of Personal Perfection, referring of course to how Obama seemingly being just so perfect in every way may actually be a detriment, as people might prefer a "real" or "flawed" person just like them. So President Obama is trying to be unflappable to his political opponents, yet would do well to seem more flawed, to connect with the common man.

Personally, I think the 'Everyman' narrative is a little worn out. Nobody craves the 'Everyman' or 'Everywoman' when they watch TV or a movie. They look for perfection. They look for Cameron Diaz. They look for Brad Pitt. They look for Obama. While worn, I think it still holds water.

Obama can see his assets as well as anyone. He sees that his weaknesses are also overshadowed by his strengths. His strength now becomes a pseudo-weakness. As his policy ratings continue to decline, his personal popularity might become more than just the luster on the ride, it could end up being the motor.

I think he'll do it, step out of the spotlight a bit and give his persona a breather. That'd be the smart move, and he's proven he's got a vast repertoire of smart moves. But that isn't to say that he'll be offstage, either. Again, it's Obama's hand to play.

Lincoln's a Cool Customer on Health Care

Sen. Blanche Lincoln and I have done our fair share of conversating over the past few months. From card check to energy reform and in between, the Senator has always been good to call me back for an interview, and we've had many.

The headliner as of late, as you already well know, is what are we going to do about health care. Lincoln sits on the ever-powerful Senate finance committee that will be responsible for footing the bill, a bill that many are estimating is mighty steep, at over $1 trillion.

That's no chump change for anyone.

Lincoln has stated that she has no definitive stance on the issue, only the vague, tepid response that she is for "whatever it is that works," fulfilling all of the goals for all of the problems that there are or may be in the health care arena. That's a rather tall order.

So you can understand how ambitious it must be for her to say that she expects a health care bill next week, as everyone returns from the July 4th recess. To go from having no preference whatsoever, as she stated to me several times is her position, on a specific position — be it a public option, co-op, or any other option — to having some meat on the table will surely be something.

Actually, what it shows is that beneath the tame surface, there is a frenzy of activity in the legislative waters on health care. But with all of her weight being shifted equally, we have no idea how she'll land.

My guess — again, guess, mind you — is that we'll be presented with something remarkably similar if not identical to the public option proposed by President Obama, only reworded to fix the well-publicized collective aversion to the socialist-sounding moniker of "public option." I think Obama, a former Senator, will be able to make sure his goal is taken care of with a small, 100-person room full of his former colleagues, which as of yesterday, also happens to be a supermajority.

Cap-and-trade, a divisive bill that split the Democratic party down a rural fence, passed in the House, in no small part due to Obama's backing. It will die in the Senate, but the message is still clear.

Like Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe during the past legislative session, I think President Obama could be riding his popularity to the bank, nearly sweeping all of his legislative agenda points, any one of which would have been remarkable, but all of them? That's big time.

Fmr. President Bush Punches, Body Slams Obama Look-a-Like Repeatedly, Forces Him to Say 'Uncle'

That's what we call a misleading headline. That, in fact, never happened. Last night President George W. Bush spoke in Erie, Penn. last night, and after saying repeatedly that he was not going to criticize his successor, President Obama, the headline "Bush takes swipe at Obama policies" is what ran.

While mine would be a wild exaggeration, and the Washington Times would be a mild one inferred from the policies and principles of a man who overtly is of a different political persuasions than the person who has his job now, I think you get my point.

On the front end, let me admit that defending George W. Bush is like repairing a dishwasher while it's running; next to impossible. While Democrats joyously revile him as an anthropomorphized plague, Republicans and conservatives often squirm at a man who expanded government at a rate of 3 percent per year. His low polling numbers are a combination of that, as well as the scorn of independents who see his slow-talkin' ways and think "yokel."

I don't plan on defending his presidency or even he himself. But in this instance, on Wednesday, June 17, 2009, in Pennsylvania, Bush is getting a raw deal.

The Times purports that Bush took two stances — one, defending his administration, specifically with regard to terrorism, and two, his endorsement of the private sector — and posed them as a direct affront to President Obama.

The latter point is odd to me: President Obama himself has said that the private sector is well and good, he just wants to be able to compete with it to "keep it honest." When someone endorses that private sector, how is that necessarily swiping at Obama. Let's not turn our 44th into a socialist just yet.

But I'm not naive, either. Quotes like "You can spend your money better than the government can spend your money," said by Bush, aren't pointed blindly. But it's a bold assertion to say that he's lampooning Obama directly. Sure, he may be taking a swipe at Democrats, the leader (and face and lifeblood and perhaps only hope) of which is Obama, but what would you expect a Republican to do?

Simply because Bush is not going to criticize his successor does not mean that he is going to give everything Obama and Democrats do a ringing, bright-eyed, cheery endorsement. The man's still a Republican. He's not dead.

Which leads me to the former: Why on earth wouldn't a former president defend his administration?

It's in stark contrast to the one currently in office. "Change" has certainly come, nominally and otherwise. President Obama is not going to do things the way President Bush did this, in many instances, thankfully. One is a Republican, one is a Democrat. You could go point for point, but I don't think a conservative is going to stand for Bush being compared to Obama, or a liberal standing for Obama being compared to Bush.

I don't know what to make of it. I hate cliches like "liberal media," mainly because I work in a very objective, no-nonsense newsroom (opinion columnists aside; while we're awkwardly comparing Obama and Bush, we could be having the same conversation about Brummett and Sanders). Also, I'm pretty sure the Times is known for being more conservative than liberal, which would make "liberal media" an odd pickle in that case. It just seems to pit Bush in a no-win situation. He either agrees with the populace, who is gaga for Obama, and throws his own administration under the bus, or he sticks up for his tenure, making it look like a slap in Obama's face.

President Bush can be blamed for a lot of things. I don't think this is one of them. Especially after his repeated statement: I'm not going to criticize the current administration. I'm sure this will be criticized as apologetic toward Bush's Administration. It's not. Just this one evening's speech, and the coverage therein.

Caption Contest! Everybody Who Wanna Marry a President say YEAAHHHH!

Ah, the First Couple. Elegant. Radiant. The perfect pair.

But this picture is pretty funny. Ball rolling:

MO: Come on! Y-M-C-...
BO: This is so stupid...
MO: Barry...
BO: (sighs) Aaaa.
-------
BO: See, kids? This is why you never make a bet with your wife. Or get married in general.
-------
MO: And I told Barry I wanted a diamond THIS BIG!
BO: She's right. And your parents are paying for it (winks).
-------
BO: You? (looking at kid in first row) No, I doubt you'll be President. You'd make a good...Uh...Parks and Recreation...daytime youth event coordinator. Yeah. Yeah. You do that.
MO: YAYYY! PARKS AND RECREATION DAYTIME YOUTH EVENT COORDINATOR! YAYYY!

Weak sauce, I know, but they're just SO GOOD LOOKING I CAN'T MAKE FUN OF THEM.

No one won last week's CapCon, as there was no CapCon last week. Suckaaas.

Is Pres. Obama Setting Democrats Up To Fail?

President Obama is sitting pretty.

He is very powerful right now. He is the Executive Branch, he has a commanding control of the Legislative Branch — so much so that when he doesn't like the direction a bill, he merely gives the word, and it's automatically done (cough, health care, cough)— and he's about to insert his first of who knows how many Supreme Court Justices to a lifelong assignment (the average for SCOTUS/Prez is 1.7, but this is early in Obama's Administration and the bench could likely have two more vacancies by the end of Obama's tenure).

But let's not kid ourselves. Obama has done very well for himself without having a ton of credentials. Had he not run for President, he'd be running for re-election in the Senate for 2010 for his second term. Not the second time, but his second term. Prior to that, he was an Illinois state senator and a professor of law.

His first foray into the national spotlight was a speech at the DNC convention in 2004. What got people on the Obama boat was his soaring rhetoric, his telling narrative and those big pearly whites of his. In a word, his appeal. Couple that with an acerbic sentiment toward the Washington status quo, worded by a singular word "CHANGE," which was so breif it literally fit any profile of anybody who wasn't happy with the government, which is usally everybody.

Obama has got it, that appeal. Everyone loves him. He's as much of a celebrity if not more so than Sarah Palin, only he has credibility whereas her largest splash in the media is getting into verbal fisticuffs with late night talk show hosts. Obama was a guest on similar shows, not the punch line.

Obama uses this appeal to get what he wants done, namely a very progressive agenda that would have been difficult for anybody to get accomplished, even with a Senate and House in their pocket. This is a center-right country after all, and I haven't really heard many arguments to the contrary, rather that it's remarkable Obama has functioned, worked and succeeded in those parameters. He's got the look.

But is that look, that appeal going to be a stumbling block for future Democrats?

You can see it now. Obama is pulling his weight for those with less than fortunate appeals. Let's take Harry Reid, the Senate leader. Tepid, awful, lousy polling numbers for this guy, and Obama is going to make sure he gets re-elected in 2010. $789 billion in taxpayer money for stuff like butterfly atriums in Florida? Obama flashes the pearly whites, and there she is, passed and ready to be doled out.

Obama can do these things because he's Obama. Will anyone else other than Obama be able to do these things?

Obama's polling numbers are at a positive mid-to-high 60's range. The direction of the country, the approval of Congress, and certain issues that the government is pioneering, like the economy, foreign policy and health care, are all sinking quickly.

The mystique of Obama will, in my guess, carry him through 2012. He will be remembered not only as a great accomplishment but for his various accomplishments. His rhetoric is certainly worthy of stature. But as the Republicans have a dearth of leadership, could it not be said that there is a similar dearth with the exception of Obama and his Administration?

The aforementioned Reid is more popular than Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has unenviable polling numbers as well. Most think she's been less-than-honest about her dealings with the CIA. Hillary Clinton has swing, but by 2016, when she'd be able to run for President, she'd be as old as John McCain was when he ran, which was his primary campaign fault. Not that she couldn't lead Democrats without being President. I may just still be in that mode where I see Hillary running for the top office with reckless abandon. Those were the days. Now she's just globetrotting the world, and from what I hear, doing a good job.

I'm curious to see the Democratic roster. If they get a handful of names, they'll have a handful lot more the Republicans. But I'll be more curious to see if they can keep up the far-leftward approach that Obama has been taking.

Obama can get away with it. I haven't seen anyone else in politics be able to pull it off. After eight years of it, do you think people will still find it meritorious when broached by someone who is inherently less likable than Obama?

Yep. Still Funny.

I thought he was retiring it after his Tony-nominated performance, but Will Ferrell brought back his George W. Bush imitation while plugging his new film Land of the Lost on SNL.

Yep. It's still funny, even though it's an old formula.

Yep. It still works to make fun of Bush. I've often wondered on this site how long people will ridicule and mock and generally hate Bush. My friend reminded me that people hated Nixon until he died.

On this episode, Ferrell also un-retired his imitable Harry Caray impersonation, now referring to it as the Ghost of Harry Caray, since the bespectacled Caray passed away over 11 years ago.

That was funny too. It seems that as long as Ferrell's around, mocking Bush will still be a premium.

You Can't Talk to Me Like That! This is a Members Only Jacket!

When isolated in relative obscurity, one does crazy things. The same is true for the Republican Party currently.

Due to a woeful dearth of qualified and exciting candidates, the GOP is taking the same old faces on a listening tour, aimed at revamping the Right, making it more attractive, all while simultaneously stimulating and staying loyal to the base.

'Listening Tour' has all of the appeal of a trip to the save-a-lot proctologist. Ugh.

One of those old faces, trying to stay even more relevant, is saying that these guys are silly, but then says the almost exact thing that they're saying.

This infighting will continue, I predict, until there's one person in the middle of these sentiments who appeals to not only both sides, but to those who aren't completely sold on the Democratic ticket, and of course, after the Obama dust has settled.

This 'principle' jargon has got to go. No undecided voter cares about them, much less can define them as ardently as those on the Right are doing. "We've got to get back to our principles!" they all clamor to themselves.

What they need is some people who can speak with authority, with credibility, something the party (state and national, for those local people tuning in) lacks.

My quaffed friend David J. Sanders tweeted today (and I reviewed and edited) his column for tomorrow. In it, he claims that the GOP ought to be a little more Clintonian in its dealings, who in his own dealings, was more like Reagan. In Reagan Sanders does trust, and he notices the proven success rate of those who mirror his candor, believability and credibility, including that of our current President, who ran as someone who was remarkably underqualified but mounted a strong campaign of hope.

Sanders puts a lot on that word 'Hope' and 'unbridled optimism.' Regan, Clinton, Bush (at first) and Obama had it and won. I think Hope is a little soft. How about not just 'hope,' but how about something people can repeat on something other than a comedy night show.' Or something with a little bit of confidence. I see none right now that isn't immediately shut down. You see sparks here from the Huckabees, the Jindals, the roster of no-names in Congress. But you don't see the same steady stream of gems like you got with Obama, Bush, Clinton and Reagan.

If it's really rock bottom for the GOP, it's because those people don't exist. I think they do. They just don't know it yet.

Obama the Jester

Perhaps you can thank the lull in news over the weekend, other than a rainy Mother's Day in Arkansas, but I heard a lot of noise about this White House Correspondents Association dinner, which is hailed by some as one of the most boring evenings of the entire year for Washington's elite in politics and media. While this may be the case it is also one of the most anticipated; You never know when a Stephen Colbert will come out and do some royal ripping.

Not necessarily in the Arkansas blogosphere, but the national media and the twittersphere was abuzz.

Basically, I saw a remarkably uninteresting trend: Democrats hailed the laughable Obama as someone who is so calm, so cool, and so collected that he can give and take jabs. Conservatives deemed some of his jabs as "inappropriate." The same for the headliner Wanda Sykes, of whom I am not particularly a regular fan.

But the point is this: Obama did kill. He did better than most expected even he would be able to pull off, given the restraints of decorum necessary of the office. Many lampooned him for going onto Leno's Tonight Show — myself included — so I imagined the hubbub when it would be Mr. Obama performing the monologue.

I have since softened on the Leno business, no harm really, so I suppose no foul. But in that case, he was there as the president. In this case, is was Barack the Comedian. Judging him as anything other than that is, in my humble opinion, missing the point completely.

This goes on for both sides. Conservatives ought not chalk this speech up along with his various addresses to Congress, or speeches on the stimulus, or his town hall meetings. Liberals ought not attach this as some sort of highfalutin virtue of the President. I know plenty of funny people who can't and shouldn't be president.

Looking at it as a comedy performance, you have to give Obama, and sure, Wanda Sykes, a hand.

First, Sykes, as she went first, and it has also been said she had the most inappropriate line of the two. As I said before, I'm not the biggest Wanda Sykes fan. She tends to be one of those loud types who loudly points out racial stereotypes while loudly being loud. Loud doesn't often mean funny. But in this performance she was even keel and thoughtful, making fun of the Obamas — a high point being that she asked the President if he is now unfoulable in basketball as Commander in Chief — to making fun of Rush Limbaugh (and by "making fun of" I mean "wishing death upon" and "insinuating he was the 20th hijacker in the 9-11 attacks " the popular conservative target), and Sarah Palin.

The Palin line was the biggest brow lifter of the evening, saying she "pulled out" of the evening, and then making the inevitable line about abstinence-only education, alluding not-so-subtly to the mother of Palin's granddaughter.

It's a-okay. Palin's life is under constant scrutiny, and her positions will be scrutinized with regard to her real life, more "appropriately" by fellow politicians, but more realistically by everyday people like Sykes. And as for the Rush Limabugh being the 20th hijacker but too high on Oxycontin to get there...Probably (and by probably I mean definitely) in bad taste (Obama wisely didn't laugh at that joke) but still acceptable by comedic standards.

Far worse has been said about far better people. Freedom of speech, man. Funny or offensive, she's just doing her job.

The President did well also. The opening line about giving up the notes and speaking of the cuff while a creaky teleprompter system raises up was genuinely funny. The most awkward moment was when he began speaking in what I believe was supposed to be urban slang to his fellow African-American, GOP head Michael Steele ("He's in the HEEZY!" said the President, as I recalled that that was a not-that-funny but popular mode of communication five years ago, and thusly, groaned).

He gave his share of floppers, though. The whole bit about Joe Biden being like Bo the dog was booably predictable.

His Cheney line about writing his memoirs titled avaunt gardly How to Shoot Friends and Interrogate People made me laugh simply because it was very blunt, very straightforward, and very unexpected. When telling a joke, you're setting the audience up for a twist. Sometimes that twist is best utilized as a lack thereof.

As a comedian, Obama excelled. But again, this really doesn't have a lot to do with his politics. I wouldn't think that he could do it full time, but once a year? Sure. I'm just wondering who wrote the thing.

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.

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.

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.

Caption Contest! Obama Slamma Jamma

Taking a bit from our content partner in the Wide, Wide World of Sports, The Ghost of Roy Hobbs, of which I am a contributing member, here's the Caption Contest! In the comment section, give your best caption for the picture provided.

Anonymity is acceptable, but a prize will be awarded to the best caption. Here are a couple of examples:

Hansbrough: I VOTE GOP ALL THE WAY!
Obama: I know you do (followed by an under-the-legs-360°-slammajamma-swish).

No. 40: I can't guard this guy. He's too pretty.

Kids on the Bench in Background: I can't say this isn't the first time I've been benched for a guy in his late 40's.

Hansbrough: SMELL THIS!

Hopefully, you can do better than this. Legislators, let your hair down and give a caption. Keep it clean and keep it classy.

Pro-Union, Anti-Card Check? Possible, I think

My thoughts on Card Check were refreshed by this article from The Hill, a DC-based news service, that said former West Wing stars Martin Sheen, Bradley Whitford and Richard Schiff had more to say on the matter than the actual politicians at a Labor Rally in Washington today.

I say they had something to say on the matter of Card Check, but in reality, from the report, they said nothing about EFCA, but a great deal about the benefit of Unions in general, a most agreeable point.

I was on the horn with Alan Hughes, President of the Arkansas AFL-CIO regarding another article. With Democratic Senators finicky about how to handle the Employee Free Choice Act in a right-to-work state, who better to talk to than the chief delegate of Labor and get his take?

Needless to say, he was agitated.

Asked what he thought about Sen. Lincoln saying the matter was 'not on her radar,' Hughes laughed. "Huh, I believe that it is definitely on her radar," Hughes said. He then went on to run on the point that the NBC West Wingers would make a few weeks later.

"How can you be for Unions and be against Card Check?" Hughes clamored. "You can't."

Nobody thinks Unions are bad. In fact, they're necessary to balance the power of the employer and the power of the employee.

Notice the key word there is 'balance.'

My best good buddy John Brummett has reluctantly been all over Card Check. He says that Unions are getting ready to compromise and 'make some sausage.' I'm reminded of what he said about the biggest spur in the EFCA argument, the secret ballot:

You can be pro-union without wanting unions to reap an inappropriate advantage, just as you can root for the Razorbacks without wanting the officials to give them the game with unfair calls.

Like I said. Balance.

I'm all for watching people's backs against the big, oppressive businesses. But who watches the business' back? Those are made up of people, after all. Can't have one group dominating the other.

It's that whole 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?' bit again.

UPDATE: I was right. The Artificially Intelligent Panzer has been so totally super-psyched about it ALL DAY.

W: Memoirs, Baseballs, and Whatnot

A couple of weeks ago, I had the great pleasure of watching Will Ferrell's one-man Broadway show, You're Welcome, America: A Final Night with George W. Bush.

It was absolutely wonderful.

Delightfully and unexpectedly raunchy, Ferrell retired his beloved caricature by unloading every bad thought or misstep that one who hated Bush as sincerely as Ferrell does (he has stated publicly that, despite a tradition as such, he would not want to ever meet the person he so famously portrayed on SNL) could ever conjure, guns-blazing. It may be the last we see of the truly hilarious depiction of No. 43.

For awhile, it should be the last we see of any depiction, real or imagined, of George W. Bush.

In the UFW archives, I've rehashed my optimist's guide to the Bush Legacy. It's not pretty, un-spectacularly amounting to a "nowhere-to-go-but-up" scenario. I stand by it. The bar is set pretty low, anyway.

But now I hear about his 2010 memoirs about the decisions he made while in office, and the circumstances as he interpreted them during that decision-making process. That was a couple of weeks ago. Today, ESPN tells me that he's throwing out the first pitch for the first game of the Texas Rangers this season.

Bush would do well to sit back and let the smoke thin out a little longer than a few months than to bust back onto the national spotlight.

Cheny is sticking his nose into the limelight, to the tune of thunderous boos and hisses, even from Republicans.

There will come a time when his voice may want to be heard. Not by everyone, mind you, but by some. But for right now, even the GOP is trying to figure out how to move on Bush free.

Presidents are often guided by precedents, and skewing from those boundaries can often lead to hot water. One such precedent is to not speak ill of another President while they're in office, even if they're of a different party. You never heard that much from Bill Clinton about W, until he began campaigning for his wife, in which case he subscribed to the obligatory shackling of Bush to the GOP at large. That criticism is often taken poorly, which is why Jimmy Carter and Clinton aren't the best of buddies.

Another such precedent, the precedent for a President to fade into the background for awhile, ought to be heeded more actively by W. There's not a lot of good, if any at all, that can come from this.

Aside, of course, from a Disney-esque freak accident that enables the President from tossing 103 mph fastballs in his opening day pitching. That'd be noteworthy. But otherwise, let's just save it.

Slick Obama

Our new President is a smooth character.

He goes on Leno. He goes to basketball games. He's the regular Smith everybody wanted and wants to go to Washington, but he's also the Arthurian Knight of our dreams, an icon so bright that he remains quite popular in the midst of a number of cabinet appointments gone sour, and an at best loathsome economy.

And now he's kicked the dust off these traditional, meddlesome news outlets and has gone straight to the people.

The President is hosting an online town hall meeting. Rather than taking questions from the press, he's taking them from the people.

Never mind that there are already close to 70,000. Never mind that there's no way he can possibly answer every one of those questions, and that the filtering process might be, I don't know, favorable to him, maybe even pre-scripted for him.

He'll get asked tough questions. He'll give straight answers. He'll be praised by some. He'll pass praise to someone else in his cabinet, spreading it around with thoughtful magnanimity. He might even let some criticism get through. He politely crush it.

He'll walk away being a new politician, a true man of the people, connecting with the commoner in his own medium.

On Bill Clinton, I heard a wise sage ask a question about his sincerity in light of his obvious political savvy.

"So there you sat in the audience, asking yourself yet one more futile time whether this was an instinctively good man or a consummate political being, and whether this person or any person could possibly be both."

I'm not about to compare Obama to Clinton in the dawn of his administration, but I think this is a good question of all politicians. And, after all, the President is now under the 24-hour surveillance of the people's now technologically advanced eye.

Obama & Signing Statements: Big Whoop

Beneath the mire of all of this altogether uninteresting business about stem cell research, there was another bit of uninteresting news that Maxwell "Not the Coffee" Brantley brought to my attention.

The headline reads "Bye Bye Bush Era," and it applauds that Obama advising that signing statements under G.W. Bush may be ignored if convenient.

Bush's signing statements — clauses attached to bills that basically call for certain parts of a bill to be openly ignored — had enough coverage in its day. It basically is a loop around line-item vetoes, which are prohibited. So, Obama, accordingly, said that they are all now subject to interpretation by Atty. General Holder, and then they can be deemed constitutional or not.

I wonder how many of them will make it through the filter. What's the over/under on one to two?

Obama getting elected was the mandate. Once in office, he quickly did away with many of Bush's policies and rules, notably the implementation of a White House Happy Hour and looser dress code.

But then Maxwell misses another "important" piece of the NYT puzzle: Obama isn't against doing all that his own dern self. Is this not the pot calling the kettle black?

Of course, not. This is OBAMA we're talking about. You remember? The Hope and Change for America? He makes houses appear for the homeless, jobs appear for the jobless, and still has time to hoop with the Bulls?

I say that sarcastically, not to say that Obama won't do any of those things (he's done all of them) or even that he won't do any of them again (he's on track to do it all again and again).

It's just another example of how bias is often thinly-veiled and useless when some good ole fashioned objectivity would be a better lens.

The next president, who will likely be a Republican if trends mean anything, could reverse Obama's reversal. In fact, I bet he (or she!) might throw out nearly everything Obama puts into play. Clinton did it to Reagan's ugly step-child, Bush I. Bush II did it to Clinton, which I'm sure sticks in some people's craw, that Obama is reminding some of Bush. I'm sure that wily coot Jefferson did it to that old buzzard Adams, and then that upstart Adams II returned the favor, although I'm sure wigs and gloves were more involved back then.

I understand that there are liberal commentators and conservative ones, and I especially understand that those views are more prominently displayed in the blogosphere. I'm just saying that there ought to be a little more objectivity out there.

So I therefore understand the roof raising by some, heck, by many that Bush is gone and out, exiled to his Crawford Ranch and new ritzy Dallas condo. But that's a little old news by now, don't you say Maxwell? Olbermann still harps on Bush, and Maddow is relegated to doing fluff pieces about Boy Scouts, and now this. There's nothing to be critical about in Obama's short time as President? COUGH Wow! Look at all that pork in the gazillion dollar stimulus! COUGH!

I say let's freshen up that material. Frankly, we're still dealing with Bush's inheritance with this whole economy business and I'd rather not bring him up unless we have to. I don't think this is one of those have-to moments.

Obama the Transparent

President Obama has stepped into the batting cages of the political sphere with 100 m.p.h. fastballs being flung at his head. While being a rookie, only a month and a few days in office, he still sits in the catbird seat.

Obama has made it clear and acknowledged that he understands what everyone else understands: That this malignant economy and the stimulus he has prescribed will make or break him.

I don't think it will cost him the 2012 election; The circumstances are dire enough to merit a pass if the economy is still struggling.

But President Obama has done something very well throughout his 38 days thus far. He has been thoroughly sincere and thoroughly transparent throughout the process. They are related as his transparency begets his sincerity.

His sincerity cannot and should not be measured by his speeches. He's a politician, after all. His speeches had better be moving and compelling otherwise he'd be out of a job, not that that is all a politician does but it's mighty important. There's no real worry here — Obama has, in short order, moved toward the elite echelon of Presidential orators, like Lincoln, Roosevelt (both of em), and Reagan.

Rather his sincerity should be measured by his actions. He's certainly been talking the talk, as he does so well, but I've been impressed with the fact that he is indeed walking the walk. Being usually suspect of a government opaqued by politicians in the past, Obama has been up front. He has been transparent.

Obama has actively reached out in this regard, actively shown himself to be transparent, and he has done so at every level of population.

He flew across the country, speaking to the people in town hall meetings, similar to the ones his political opponent John McCain had challenged him to during the race. He yielded questions, concerns, complaints, and comments from the audience. In some moves of once-in-a-lifetime political spectacle, he made a home for a homeless family appear out of nowhere (or should I say a congressman's second home) and a dream job opportunity appear for an enthusiastic, if not slightly obnoxious, McDonald's employee.

Talk about walking the walk.

That was Obama reaching the people. Obama also spoke to businesses. In factories, he pushed his stimulus bill, but also has spoken adamantly about the sloth and shameful irresponsibility of Wall Street. It's one thing to tell everyone how everything is going to be all a-ok. It's another to call people out and make them accountable. He might've lost some friends in the bureaus for that — friends who may or may not have campaign funds in their pockets — but he held nothing back.

But what about the infrastructure and the legislators who will ultimately dole this money out? President Obama gathered mayors — yeah, mayors — from cities and towns as obscure as North Little Rock, Arkansas, for the sole purpose of making sure that everything was done by the book, and that all anxieties were alleviated.

Nothing against the NLR or its mayor, Patrick Hays, but they're no where near a blazing metropolis, like New York, LA, Atlanta, and so on. This shows Obama's broader strategy: He wants absolutely everyone on-board, even us backward, cousin-marryin', cave dwellers in Arkansas.

He convened with Governors as well. Gov. Mike Beebe had a reasonable question regarding just how much of this money was flexible, as he rightly assessed, the needs of some states are very different from others. He met with them to assure them and get them on the same page, as it will be them and their legislators who will ultimately carry out his ambitious plan.

In the halls of Congress is where he has met his most staunch opposition at the hands of the GOP. Obama only succeeded winning over three Republican Senators, but he lobbied hard for them and more. This is despite the fact that he didn't have to. Democrats have a kung fu grip on both chambers. House Speaker Pelosi wanted to move at an even faster speed, claiming there was a mandate that vindicated Democrats her thinking to go about their business and leave Republicans in their dust. Obama said otherwise, reaching across the aisle.

It's commendable to reach across the aisle. It's more commendable to do so when no one is reaching back. It's even more commendable to keep the hand out there.

He then met with the Joint Session of Congress, the brilliant coup de grâce that expertly balanced fair warning with optimism, with the whole world watching with bated breath. It was wonderfully done, even without the paltry excuse of a rebuttal that followed from Bobby Jindal. The rebuttal itself was followed by a thud as everyone in American, conservative and liberal, collectively slapped their foreheads and shook their noggins.

Obama's walking the walk, all right. For all of our sakes, let's hope he's not walking us into more troubled waters. But he has at least given us that hope, and we have no real reason, outside of reasonable reflection and deliberation, to think otherwise.

Obama to Cross Border for Bacon and Flapjacks

The Washington Post says President Obama is headed north to meet with the Kanucki ringleader, Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

This is the first trip to a foreign land for our new executive. The roads will be scary, the dialect will be nearly unintelligible, and the climate will be frightful. Thankfully, Obama will have translators and Canadian Sherpas there to guide his every step.

But with the eyes of the world watching our historic president diplomating on foreign soil, it will be important to put a powerful foot forward. Many aides are suggesting that Obama walk right past Harper and punch the biggest bodyguard he can find right in the neck.

Actually, Obama aides say that the majority of the discussion will be about assuring trades and general good relations with the Maple Nation. Within the encyclopedia of pages within the stimulus bill, provisions and possible tax exemptions will be made to companies that "Buy American," helping to boost revenue and the economy. Apparently, Canada didn't appreciate such a clause, saying that it would hurt the trade relations between the U.S. and them.

What we actually trade with them that isn't already ours, they didn't say, but the price of Labatt Blue and Canadian Bacon pizzas, even the ones with pineapple, have skyrocketed in the past few days following the passing of the stimulus by Congress.

Anyway, that's where Obama is today, and let's hope Obama can do some good work, because let's face it: We need Canada as much as they need u-...sorry, I couldn't say that with a straight face.