This column is proud to admit that we've been awarded an Honest Weblog Award. We're normally in the habit of handing out awards (on Fridays) here, and this is the first actual award the column's been presented with.

So this column would like to thank its hairdresser, its agent, its publicist....

Um, well, maybe not. I don't think I'm supposed to give a speech at this point. In fact, rules come with this award. I haven't found an "official Honest Weblog Award" page yet, but I did find two slightly different versions of the rules:

Continue Reading »

Welcome back again to our ongoing series of beginning-of-the-month looks at President Barack Obama's approval ratings in the public opinion polls. As always, I feel the need to state up front that if you're one of those people who either: (a) doesn't believe any polls, because they're all voodoo; or (b) doesn't believe polls which don't tell you what you want to hear, because they're so plainly biased; then I strongly -- strongly -- urge you to spend your precious time reading something else. Because you're just going to wind up annoyed, one way or another, by reading this. Consider yourselves warned.

So, with the standard disclaimer aside, we can delve in to Obama's poll numbers for August. The news for Obama fans continues to be bad, unfortunately. There may be a faint glimmer of a spark of hope in the numbers -- but that's about all I can promise here, sorry about that. Obama's approval numbers continued their downward trend this month, and his disapproval numbers also increased. We'll go into these numbers in detail, up front.

Afterwards, continuing our series of looking at Obama's approval numbers through the lens of previous presidents' records, we will take a look at Obama as compared to President George W. Bush. Last month we highlighted Bush's first term numbers, and this month we will do the same for Bush's second term -- which, it should be noted, is a much more agreeable enterprise for Democrats to contemplate. Now, logically, we should have looked at Bush v. Obama before we looked at Clinton v. Obama, but the data for Clinton were easier to manage, so that's just kind of the way it happened. As Groucho Marx was wont to say: "Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana." Ahem.

Continue Reading »

So here is where we find ourselves -- in a recent CBS poll, two-thirds of the respondents said the current ideas proposed for healthcare were confusing. This is why Obama wanted just two bills to have emerged from Congress at this point -- to lessen this confusion. But this is also largely due to the Democrats utter lack of being to explain themselves coherently, it should also be pointed out.

The poll results show the breadth of this confusion, and how quickly it has set in (you can read a CBS story about the poll results, or download the PDF file with the actual questions and numbers -- it appears to be an excerpt of a longer poll, since the PDF file is only two pages long and is all about healthcare reform).

When asked whether "you have an understanding of healthcare reform ideas," only 31 percent of Americans responded "yes, I understand the reforms" while 67 percent said "no, they're confusing." When asked if "President Obama had clearly explained his plans for healthcare reform," 31 percent responded "yes," and 60 percent "no." Even among Democrats, only 52 percent answered "yes" to that last question.

Continue Reading »

Some of the Wall Street firms who got so-called "bailouts" from the taxpayers are making money again. But this is not a scandal, it's good news. Because the United States Treasury is raking in some of these profits, as a result of the money invested earlier under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (or "TARP"). This should not come as a stunning surprise, but it indeed may to some people -- because of the massive failure to politically frame the issue correctly when the money was originally invested. This failure, it should be noted, is shared by both the Bush and Obama administrations.

Here's a quick quiz: When I say "bailout," what springs to your mind? Shoveling taxpayer money at Wall Street for free? Or investing public funds to shore up our banking system, with the expectation that when times got better we'd turn a profit on these investments? While the program has been derided in the public's awareness as the former, the latter is closer to the actual reality. And the reason many Americans would choose the first answer is a failure of politics.

Continue Reading »

Republicans, masters of chutzpah that they are, have launched a pre-emptive strike against "politicizing" Senator Edward Kennedy's funeral with unseemly Democratic ideals. This should be so ridiculous as to endanger Americans' health from side-splitting laughter, but (Democrats being Democrats) it might just work.

A quick recent history of political funerals is in order here. I was shocked, after Richard Nixon died, that the commentary was so respectful. Lots of "elder statesman" talk, very little talk of "only president to resign in disgrace." Watergate was glossed over, his red-baiting congressional career wasn't even mentioned, and certainly very few critical words were said about the man by the inside-the-Beltway "journalists." It's as if a different man was buried.

Continue Reading »

Today, a boy in England set the record for being the youngest person to sail around the world solo. This record had been set last month by an American boy who was 17 years old when he achieved this feat. The English lad was 16 when he started, and turned 17 on the voyage. But both of these may soon be considered rather elderly, because a 13-year-old girl from the Netherlands may be setting out on her own record-setting sail. But at what point do we have to ask: "What is 'too young' to attempt these kind of records?"

The 13-year-old Dutch girl is about to find out. Because the Dutch equivalent of "Child Protective Services" is trying to put her in dry dock. They are asking the Dutch courts to, in essence, overrule her parents and deny her the chance to set her own record.

Continue Reading »

[The following is the transcript of Senator Edward Kennedy's speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.]

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Caroline.

My fellow Democrats, my fellow Americans, it is so wonderful to be here.

And nothing -- nothing is going to keep me away from this special gathering tonight.

I have come here tonight to stand with you to change America, to restore its future, to rise to our best ideals, and to elect Barack Obama president of the United States.

As I look ahead, I am strengthened by family and friendship. So many of you have been with me in the happiest days and the hardest days. Together we have known success and seen setbacks, victory and defeat.

Continue Reading »

In the calendar of politics, throughout the year, the label "Take Out The Trash Day" is attached by the media to Fridays. Late Friday afternoon (or even evening, after the national television news deadline), the White House releases news that they'd really rather just ignore -- and would be very happy if everyone else ignored as well. There's a good reason for this timing: Friday evening (and Saturday as well) is the time of week when the least amount of the public is paying attention to the news. Meaning that embarrassing or awkward stories can be released with the fewest possible ripples in the body politic's attention. But this concept sometimes broadens to encompass an entire week. With Congress, the president, and what the White House hopes is a maximum amount of the public all on vacation this week, it seems to be the time to toss a few news stories over the wall, in the hopes that they'll get less attention than normal.

Continue Reading »

Would the Democratic Party, and Senate Democrats in particular, be better off if current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid loses his re-election bid next year? This is a provocative question, but it is now one that needs consideration, since Reid's poll numbers in his own state remain so dismal. The possibility of Reid becoming only the second Majority Leader since the 1950s to lose his own seat (Daschle was the other one) is looking more and more like the safe bet (to put it in gambling-friendly Nevada terms, as it were). Which leads to the question of what impact this will have on the Senate, what impact on the Democratic Party, and what impact on the country at large.

Continue Reading »

President Obama stunned the political world today by announcing he will switch political parties, and soon become a Republican. "It seems the only way we're going to get bipartisanship in this town is if I lead the way," he said, in brief remarks before leaving for vacation. "The Republicans have refused to work with me because I'm a Democrat, and Republicans' biggest strength has always been the ability to fall into line with whatever their leaders tell them, unlike other certain unnamed political parties in America..." (the president appeared to cough several times at this point, although one of his coughs sounded suspiciously like the word "Democrats," if truth be told...). The president, clear-throated now, continued, "So I will now be the leader of the Republican Party, and they will fall in line with what I tell them to we're going to do. The Democrats who are interested in bipartisanship can join us to pass Medicare-for-all, instead of the Rube Goldberg machine which they have been attempting to construct."

Continue Reading »