[ Posted Wednesday, December 16th, 2009 – 19:00 UTC ]
It didn't have to be this way. It really didn't.
The epic struggle for healthcare reform is entering its final days in Washington. And the Democrats (being Democrats) have managed to snatch political suicide from the jaws of legislative victory. But, I keep thinking, it didn't have to be this way. If [...]
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Tuesday, December 15th, 2009 – 18:02 UTC ]
So today I offer up the questions I would ask, were I interviewing President Obama in the next week or so. Because you never know what media outlet he'll pop up in next.
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Monday, December 7th, 2009 – 18:42 UTC ]
As 2009 draws to a close, the politically wonky among us begin to turn our eyes towards the 2010 election landscape. Congressional midterm elections will be taking place less than a year from now, meaning (while some might consider it laughably premature) it is time to pay some attention to the upcoming races.
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Friday, December 4th, 2009 – 18:18 UTC ]
We do offer a heartfelt apology for the silliness of our opening segment. We make a solemn promise that such silliness will not appear in these hallowed pages ever again... once such silliness disappears from both politics in general, and the media's obsessive lunacy. Once silliness is absent from both of those, we'll never resort to it again, how's that?
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Tuesday, November 24th, 2009 – 17:45 UTC ]
The idea itself is a basic one -- pay for the costs of war now, instead of endlessly borrowing money in order to do so. A few weeks ago, the White House leaked an interesting factoid -- it costs one million dollars to put one U.S. soldier in Afghanistan for one year. This is a nice round number, and gets people to think about the war in a new light -- how much it costs.
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Monday, November 23rd, 2009 – 16:56 UTC ]
For those of you not conversant in the language of gambling, allow me to explain. When you have a good poker hand you start raising the betting until, at some point, you are said to be "pot committed." This means you've invested such a major portion of your available chips in that hand's kitty (or "pot") that folding is no longer an option for you -- because it would leave you too weak to effectively continue playing. But if another player is equally as confident about their hand, a bidding war will ensue. And, at some point, you just decide the heck with it and push all your chips into the pot. You know that if you lose this hand, you'll effectively be sidelined in the game anyway, so you might as well win as much as you can in the current pot... if the cards turn up in your favor. That's a big "if," though -- because if you lose, you're out of the game. It's a bold and risky move, but one that can pay off in a big way.
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Friday, November 20th, 2009 – 18:28 UTC ]
Our illustrious (cough, cough) White House press corps showed it could get to the bottom of a story with impressively journalistic and probative skills this week. The story that so obviously required multiple questions to President Obama on his trip to Asia? Whether he's eating enough, and whether he's losing weight. Oh, and his gray hair.
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Thursday, November 19th, 2009 – 17:55 UTC ]
Palin's family owned a Rambler? Shoot, now I have to be nice to her, I guess [Full disclosure: I am a big Rambler fan]. Well, she'll never beat Mitt Romney for Rambler credentials by anyone's measure, seeing as how Mitt's dad George was the head of American Motors Corporation at the time the Rambler was introduced, and was duly called the "Father of the Rambler." But still, the thought of a young Palin rambling around certainly does give her a connection to American families everywhere (of a certain age).
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Thursday, November 12th, 2009 – 17:10 UTC ]
Are presidential approval numbers tied inexorably to the state of the economy, as measured by the unemployment rate? That is the question The New Republic tries to answer in a recent article, which comes complete with graphs purporting to provide an unequivocal answer. Unfortunately, while they do present their case, they also undermine it by cheating a bit with the statistics themselves, and a very selective process for choosing which numbers to examine. Meaning the only answer we can adequately take away from the article is: "possibly."
Read Complete Article »
[ Posted Friday, November 6th, 2009 – 17:28 UTC ]
This column today celebrates a milestone -- triple digits on the odometer! That's right, as hard as it may seem to believe, this is the one hundredth volume of your weekly Friday Talking Points column. For a little over two years now, we've brought you our thoughts on "the week that was in politics," and for a little less time than that, we've announced our weekly winners of both the aforementioned MIDOTW as well as the ignominious Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. And we wrap it all up with some practical, good old-fashioned, home-brewed Democratic spin, our Talking Points for the week ahead.
Read Complete Article »