Republican Senator Jon Kyl, appearing on the weekly "Fox News Sunday" program yesterday, made an extraordinary admission that Democrats should put front and center of their campaigning -- because it points out the gigantic flaw in the Republican argument on the federal budget, the deficit, and the national debt. Republicans have been trying to have it both ways on this issue, and it took Fox's Chris Wallace to ask the question which exposed their double standard.

Continue Reading »

Since we took last week off to write something patriotic for Independence Day weekend, we've got two weeks to cover today. Fortunately, every other week in Washington (or so it seems) is vacation time for Congress, meaning they were only in session (or "working") for one week of that. Add to this the fact that Congress usually defines "a work week" as from noon on Tuesday to noon on Thursday (nice work if you can get it, eh?), and it puts it all in perspective.

But since it's still going to take a while to cover all this (and we're not even bothering to cover crazy Republican statements, other than Michael Steele's), we're going to skip this whole "intro" section this week, and move straight to the awards. Then, in lieu of Friday Talking Points, we're going to take a look at a speech by President Obama and an interview given by Rahm Emanuel, with a bit of commentary. So let's get right to it!

Continue Reading »

I have to apologize right away for that headline. But it is hard to resist the urge to use the "what have you been smoking?" joke when discussing California Attorney General Jerry Brown's recent comments on marijuana, since Brown is talking such patent nonsense.

Of course, Brown's got a good reason to be doing so: he's running for Governor. And no prominent Democrat in the state has so far come out in support of Proposition 19, which will (if it passes) legalize, tax, and regulate recreational (as opposed to medical, which is already legal) sales of cannabis to California adults, in much the same way alcohol is regulated and taxed. Democrats have been shy of politically supporting such things ever since Nancy Reagan did her "Just Say No" thing decades ago. Democratic politicians can easily visualize the ads which would run against them if they took such a stand: "Jerry Brown wants to teach your six-year-old daughter how to roll a joint!!!" So it's not really surprising that Brown has come out against the idea.

Continue Reading »

Inching back down again

To begin with, a slight apology for taking a full week to get the monthly Obama Poll Watch column done. Last Wednesday was the end of the month, so the data weren't yet complete, Fridays are "Friday Talking Points" days, and Monday was a holiday. So here we are, one week later, taking a look back at President Obama's poll numbers for June. Apologies for the delay, and also for the fact that this will be a shorter-than-normal look at Obama's poll numbers this month.

Obama, after gaining a bit in his average approval ratings in May, slipped back in June. But the reversal was slight, continuing a five-month streak of amazingly stable numbers. Since February, Obama's approval rating has stayed within one half of one percentage point, which is pretty remarkable. Unfortunately, this trend may be at an end, and his numbers may be headed even further downwards in July.

But before we get into speculation about what it all means, here is the updated graph of Obama's average monthly approval numbers:

[Click on graph to see larger-scale version.]

June, 2010

Continue Reading »

The Tea Party movement could possibly be generalized as a group of people who are proud of (and sometimes revel in) being impossible to generalize. This, of course, doesn't stop the media from trying. In today's sad state of American journalism, everything's got to have a simplistic narrative that fits within a 15-second soundbite, at the very maximum. Nuances and subtleties are out. Strong statements beginning with phrases like: "The Tea Partiers are..." (or "...believe...", or "....as a group...") are what is in. But even given this reduction in critical thinking, what's amazing is how wrong the media has gotten the Tea Partiers (or, at the least, a goodly portion of them).

Continue Reading »

To celebrate the traditional "Day After The Fourth Of July, Because All Federal Holidays Are Now Three-Day Weekends No Matter When The Date Actually Is," as it were, means there will be no column today.

Instead, as a surprise, we welcome back our in-house cartoonist who has been held captive by a roving band of wild secretaries. Ransom is being asked on the order of seven dollars and 42 cents, but so far, no takers. He managed to get this cartoon smuggled out with the aid of a trained squirrel.

Enjoy!

About the Cartoonist | Reprint Policy

[Program Note: Our usual Friday Talking Points column is going on a one-week hiatus, so that we are able to present a special offering today, for the Independence Day weekend. So as not to cause withdrawal symptoms among our fan base, we offer up two do-it-yourself suggestions for discussion this week (which sounds way better than: "assigning summer homework"), which were so unbelievable that they deserve mention here before we get all patriotic. The first comes from Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker, who just wrote possibly the most monumentally stupid column she's ever penned (which is saying a lot, for her), titled: "Obama: Our First Female President" -- bringing the art of emasculation to new lows. Secondly (and much more fun to respond to) was John Boehner's interview with a Pittsburgh newspaper, in which he described the effort to pass Wall Street reform as "killing an ant with a nuclear weapon." Democrats have begun jumping on Boehner's comments, as well they should. Feel free to write your own talking points on these subjects in the comments section. Friday Talking Points will return in its normal time slot next week.]

The Revolutionary War lasted a lot longer than most of us realize. Begun in 1775, the war didn't end for six long years, and wasn't fully resolved for another two. During this time, American forces had some notable victories, and also more than a few ignoble defeats at the hands of the British. Some of these battles have been inscribed on the nation's consciousness so deeply they are remembered in name (if not in complete detail) by its citizenry more than two centuries later. For instance, as schoolchildren we all learned the following names: Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill, Fort Ticonderoga, Valley Forge, and Trenton (or "Washington crossing the Delaware"). This litany of sacred spots (which includes Valley Forge even though no battle was fought there, since we all know the name), began with "the shot heard 'round the world," and ended decisively with the surrender of the British General Cornwallis, at Yorktown, Virginia. Yorktown was the endpoint of the war, we all learned as children, and the surrender of the British forces to the ragtag Americans was the decisive victory which forced the British to negotiate an end to the entire conflict. But what we weren't taught is that this battle may not have been such a key one if it hadn't been for a naval battle which had happened over a month earlier. This battle -- called variously the "Battle of the Chesapeake," or the "Battle of the Virginia Capes" -- is one very few Americans have even heard of. This is probably due to the fact that no Americans took part in the battle -- or even witnessed it (except perhaps from afar) -- because it was a slugfest between the British and the French navies. But if the Battle of the Chesapeake hadn't happened, it is very likely General Washington wouldn't have won the Siege of Yorktown, and the American Revolution would have continued on for a lot longer than it did -- and may have been lost, in the end. Which is why it's a shame that almost nobody remembers such a turning point in our country's history.

Continue Reading »

President Obama gave a speech today on immigration reform. He made his case, and pleaded with Congress to deliver up a comprehensive legislative package on the issue. But chances of this happening, as the old saw goes, are somewhere between "slim" and "none." Perhaps President Obama will achieve immigration reform at some point in his presidency, but I personally just don't see it happening any time soon.

Obama is, quite bluntly, becoming a victim of his own over-promising on the campaign trail. Obama told a lot of groups of people that their particular issue would be taken care of in his "first year in office," which then ran smack into the brick wall called the United States Senate. I believe (with nothing more to go on than a gut feeling, I have to admit) that Obama truly felt he could change the "politics as usual" nature of Washington, single-handedly. It turned out that Washington wasn't all that eager to change, which has delayed much of Obama's agenda far beyond when he had planned.

Continue Reading »

There has been a lot of media attention given lately to the military, our troops, and our war strategy. Almost without exception, this attention has focused on Afghanistan. Of course, there's a good reason for this, since President Obama just removed the commanding general from Afghanistan and replaced him. And the Senate just confirmed General David Petraeus to take over the American war effort there. But with all of this attention -- especially the attention of Republican senators on Obama's "timetable for withdrawal" of the current Afghanistan "surge" effort next July, what is noticeable by its absence is any discussion of how our timetable for withdrawal is going in Iraq. In all the media discussion of Afghanistan, there has been virtually no mention of what's happening currently in Iraq.

Continue Reading »

The Wall Street reform bill, now christened Dodd-Frank, is entering its final stretch this week. The House/Senate conference committee is finishing up work on the bill, and the goal is to get it through both houses of Congress and on the president's desk by July Fourth. A quick look at a calendar shows that this is a very tight schedule. To complicate matters, the death of Senator Robert Byrd now means the Democrats are short a vote they had been counting on. Which means they need some Republicans to vote with them, or the bill won't survive the inevitable filibuster attempt.

In the midst of this high-pressure environment, the Republicans which Democrats have been courting suddenly took umbrage at a provision in the bill -- because they want taxpayers to bear the cost, instead of Wall Street. Yes, you heard that right. After making mountains of political hay out of the "bailouts," Republicans are demanding that any future "bailouts" are paid for by taxpayers, instead of the banks themselves.

Continue Reading »