It is significant, to me at least, that President Barack Obama's true first anniversary in office is about to be overshadowed by a special election to fill a Senate seat in Massachusetts. Think about it for a minute -- Obama's milestones have been obsessively tracked by the media, with countless stories about his "first 100 days" in office (and even quite a few on his "first 50 days"), lots of followup "second 100 days" articles, and then a truly bizarre paroxysm of stories on the anniversary of his election night. But as we approach the real milestone, tomorrow at noon (East Coast time), any "first year" stories are likely to be buried beneath microscopic analysis of whatever happens tonight in the Bay State. This is a stunning turnaround from not just a year ago, but from a few months ago. And, as I said, it is significant, because many are now left wondering: how did we get here? How did Obama get to the point he occupies now, from where he was a year ago?

Read Complete Article »

To be blunt, Obama needs to pick a few fights. Healthcare reform is winding up, but this particular fight has been so long and hard-fought that even proponents of the reform bill are exhausted and would really prefer not to hear or talk about it much longer. This is telling, because Democrats (all the way up to Obama) have simply not done a good job on the communications front during this battle. Who would have thought, a year ago, that Obama's main problems would be a lack of communication skills, and a perceived lack of passion in fighting for what he said he believed in?

Read Complete Article »

President Barack Obama has the potential of having a pretty good second year in office. Conventional inside-the-Beltway wisdom is that "nothing much gets done in a congressional election year," but this ignores the fact that life itself does not halt for electioneering, but rather keeps right on happening. And there are quite a few positive things either explicitly scheduled for 2010, or at least very likely to happen. This doesn't automatically mean the president is guaranteed to have a great year, but it certainly sets the scene for Obama managing to have a fairly good year.

Read Complete Article »

Who, exactly, is the "Tea Party," is the true question. Are they a grassroots bottom-up movement among like-minded individuals, or are they just crazy people waving hate-filled signs? Are they economic populists, or do they just want to see the president fail spectacularly? Are they a Republican fake-grassroots (or "AstroTurf") mob who is ready, willing, and able to scream on demand, or are they a freedom-infused movement of rugged individualists angry at the overreach of the federal government? Will they force the Republican Party in a bold new direction, or will they actually form a separate Tea Party, complete with their own third-party candidates and platform?

Read Complete Article »

While that may seem a rather redundant headline the day before a world-wide party is scheduled, it was actually less provocative than my original concept of selling the theme that America needs more than two viable political parties, which was: "Party! Party! Party! Party!" But then I noticed I had already used one exclamation point in a headline this week; so I realized if I ran my original choice, I would be jeopardizing my standing among the Professional Journalists And Wannabes Who Play One On The Web Guild (the beloved PJAWWPOOTWG, pronounced like... um... well, it's best not to try to pronounce the acronym until you've got at least three stiff drinks under your belt). Where was I? Oh, right, party headlines.

Read Complete Article »

Democrats should realize, by this point, that they're going to have to reposition themselves a bit if they stand any chance in next year's midterm congressional elections. Fortunately for them, there are two issues out there just begging for exploitation. The first is the Republican Party, who has reportedly decided they are going to run next year on taking something away from voters which Democrats have given them -- the healthcare reform bill. And the second is a little-noted bill introduced a few weeks ago by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA), John McCain (R-AZ), and Russ Feingold (D-WI), which would bring back a chunk of the banking regulations passed in the Great Depression known as "Glass-Steagall." Together, these two issues present an opportunity for Democrats to reap some of the populist anger brewing out there in the electorate.

Read Complete Article »

Welcome once again to our year-end wrapup and awards ceremony. Honesty dictates that I immediately genuflect to The McLaughlin Group, from whom I have stolen all these award categories. We will begin this week with Part 1 of these annual awards, and then next Friday on New Year's Day, we will present Part 2, with reduced volume levels (for those who are nursing hangovers... ahem).

Read Complete Article »

Al Franken provided the sole moment of humor this week, when he smacked down Joe Lieberman, and for that he deserves an Honorable Mention. Franken, sitting in as the guy with the gavel running things in the Senate, was asked by Joe Lieberman for a few more moments (over his 10-minute limit) to speak, by "unanimous consent." Franken, who later said he was just doing what he was told and keeping a strict 10-minute limit, told Lieberman most emphatically "No," and that he -- in the role of senator -- objected, and Lieberman needed to, essentially (Franken was not this blatant), "sit down and shut up."

Read Complete Article »

The White House has always been a magnet for all kinds of lunatics, so it's not surprising that a pair of wannabe reality show stars attempted to crash a party last week. What surprised everyone, of course, is that they got in. This shocked the media and politicians alike, because together they compromise the "inside the Beltway" set -- who become more than a little bit afraid when the "common folk" intrude on their shindigs. Hence the widespread and breathless coverage of this story for nigh on a week now. But, I repeat, the White House has always been a giant magnet for lunatics and other invaders throughout America's history.

Read Complete Article »

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 »