Liberating Leon Panetta Thursday, Apr 26 2012 

Politics , victorgold 7:39 am

“For 40 years that I’ve been in this town, I’ve gone home because my wife and family are there and because, frankly, I think it’s healthy to get out of Washington periodically just to get your mind straight and your perspective straight.”

–Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, explaining why he ran up an $800,000 travel bill making 27 personal trips to his California home via government aircraft since July 2011.

Forty years enchained in Washington! Good God, where was the Thirteenth Amendment when Leon Panetta needed it? There was Leon, working his heart out for the American taxpayer in the unhealthy environs of our Nation’s Capital for four decades as – let’s see, how many government offices, elective and otherwise, has the poor soul had to endure? Let’s run down the list, beginning with his arrival as an upwardly mobile indentured servant in the mid-1960s:

From 1966 to 1969 he was legislative assistant to California Senator Thomas Kuchel; after which he served for two years at the Department of Health, Education and Welfare; after which he took a two-year break from Washington – to go into the private sector? No, to indenture himself on New York’s public payroll as the executive assistant to Mayor John Lindsay; then back to the federal payroll as a U.S. congressman for 15 years; after which he was shackled to the Clinton White House as OMB director and chief of staff, then. . . .

Have I made my point? If not, the question to be asked is how – after eight years breathing free air during the Bush 43 era – Leon was lured back to Washington to serve as CIA director (2009-2011), then Secretary of Defense (2011- )?

Given his obvious distaste, if not contempt, for the place, it’s an ongoing mystery. My solution? Term limits for appointed federal office holders. After four to six years in Washington, back to private, not to mention family, life. Call it the Panetta Rule, an Emancipation Proclamation for all those put-upon political hacks who’ve been in Washington so long they consider the town a place you have to “get out of periodically just to get your mind straight and your perspective straight.”

Sound bite to remember

“I don’t like country music, but I don’t mean to denigrate those who do; and for the people who like country music, denigrate means ‘put down.’”

                                                                                         –Bob Newhart

 

Reports from the campaign front . . . . Saturday, Mar 24 2012 

Politics , victorgold 12:52 pm

Santorum Sees Chastity Belts As Answer

New Orleans, La., March 21 (AP) – Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum told a rally here today that what he termed “a growing national crisis of marital infidelity and teenage pregnancy” demands “a strong leader, unafraid to return to the tried-and-true methods of a former time, up to and including the widespread use of chastity belts.”

The idea that prior presidential candidates, including John F. Kennedy, might be repelled by this notion, added Santorum, “is enough to make me throw up.”

Romney Campaigns in Flatbush

Brooklyn, N.Y., March 21 (Reuters) – Wearing a yarmulke and entering with a cry of “Oy gevalt!,” Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney paid a surprise lunch-hour visit to Goldstein’s Kosher Delicatessen today, regaling customers with stories about his days as a “young mensch” when he “noshed on knishes and matzo balls” to gain weight to qualify for his prep school’s squash team.

“My fondest memories of time spent with my father are those glorious summer weekends we went fly-casting for gefilte fish on Lake Michigan,” Romney told the midday crowd, adding that although he doesn’t have any Jewish friends who keep kosher, “I do know a number of kosher food manufacturers.”

Sound Bite to Remember (sports)

“The same things win that always win. The only thing that changes are the excuses when you lose.”

         –Paul “Bear” Bryant

 

Of Safety Nets and Muck-Ups Wednesday, Feb 8 2012 

Politics , victorgold 8:44 pm

Responding to Mitt Romney’s most recent Mittism – that he’s not concerned about “the very poor” because they have a safety net – Newt Gingrich tells an audience that he’s opposed to even a safety net because it’s part of  “the welfare state.”  Elect me president, says the Herodotus of West Georgia College, and I’ll replace the “safety net” with “a trampoline.” Meaning? Presumably an opportunity for “the very poor” to better their lives by gainful employment cleaning the lavatories at Tiffany.

Not that Republicans in the remaining primary and caucus states don’t have other choices: There is Rick Santorum, the most appealing presidential candidate to come out of Pennsylvania since Milton Shapp, and Ron Paul, who wants to do away with the Federal Reserve, return to the gold standard, and if that doesn’t work, the barter system.

Meanwhile we can take further comfort in having a President who, commenting on an upbeat jobs report, tells a Northern Virginia audience that the economy will continue to improve unless Congressional Republicans choose to – his eloquent choice of words – “muck it up.”

Democracy, said Churchill, is the worst of all forms of government – except for all those other forms.  It’s times like these that make me wonder whether we shouldn’t keep looking.

Sound Bite to Remember

“Never underestimate a man who overestimates himself.”

–Franklin D. Roosevelt on General Douglas MacArthur

 

Why 2012 Should Be a GOP Year Monday, Jan 9 2012 

History and Politics , , , , victorgold 9:58 am

“Why 2012 Should Be a GOP Year”

– Headline, George Will’s New Year’s column

The Oracle has looked into his crystal ball and foreseen the future. According to the Washington Post‘s pre-eminent conservative pundit, Republicans should “stride confidently” into the coming election year, with nothing but good news ahead – unless you include losing the presidency again to Barack Obama.

That’s what the man said: Republicans will win the House and Senate but because of a flawed nominating process will lose the White House. They can then spend the next four years blocking everything Obama wants to do in a happy state of partisan gridlock.

Flashback: I recall a bright young Post columnist once summing up a dismal political situation with the trenchant observation that “if you set your standards low enough a train wreck can be counted a success.”

That columnist, if my octogenarian memory serves, was George Will. But of course George, as he confessed in another recent column, has now reached the septuagenarian stage of life, so he can be forgiven a few lapses; such as recommending, in his  second column of the new year, that a Romney-Santorum ticket is just what Republicans need to capture the key state of Pennsylvania come November.

That would be Rick Santorum, the Great Right Hope of the moment, who lost his home state of Pennsylvania by 17 points when he ran for re-election to the U.S. Senate. Small wonder why Will is touting a Romney-Santorum ticket for the fall: He’s out to make his prediction of an Obama victory a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But I digress — a common failing among those who have lived through too many presidential elections to take the promise of “change” seriously. My original point was that if the GOP loses to Obama in November it won’t be because of its nominating process but the fact that Republicans took over the House in the mid-term elections.

Lucky Barack Obama. What would the odds against his re-election be this new year if he didn’t have an out-of-control Republican majority in the House to blame for his failure to deliver “change you can believe in.”

A little political history is in order, if Professor Gingrich won’t mind my muscling into his territory:

In 1948 Harry Truman was so unpopular that both the left and right wings of his party broke off to nominate their own candidates for president. Yet he won re-election not by running against his nominal opponent, Tom Dewey, but a Republican Congress whose time and energy had been spent trying to repeal the New Deal.

Flash forward half-a-century to find another unpopular Democratic president rescued by the mid-term election of a Republican House that undid itself by closing down the government because, as its Speaker confessed, he was asked to leave Air Force One from the rear rather than the front exit.

In that case, it was lucky Bill Clinton. What would the odds against his re-election have been in 1996 if he hadn’t had an out-of-control Newt Gingrich to blame for his failure to deliver the New Covenant he’d promised.

Obviously the idea that elephants never forget doesn’t apply to pachyderms of the political species. On the other hand their Democratic opponents have taken heed: A front-page New Year’s headline in the New York Times tells us OBAMA PLANS TO RUN AGAINST CONGRESS.

SOUND BITE TO REMEMBER

Steele might become a reasonably good writer if he would pay a little more attention to grammar, learn something about the propriety and disposition of words and, incidentally, get some information on the subject he intends to handle.

                                 — Jonathan Swift on Richard Steele

 

Thirteen years? Unlucky (or unlikely) number Thursday, Dec 8 2011 

History and Politics , , , victorgold 12:49 pm

So Herman Cain has dropped out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination after a woman came forward with a lurid story of a 13-year sexual relationship with the one-time GOP frontrunner.

My cynical Louisiana-bred reaction? Big mistake to leave the race. In former Gov. Edwin Edwards’ famous formulation, there is no practical reason for any modern-day politician to quit running unless he’s found in bed with a live boy or a dead girl.

Consider David Vitter, still spouting platitudes on the U.S. Senate floor, despite being listed as a frequent guest at a wicked Washington call house. Or, for that matter, the private life of Cain’s successor as the Iowa frontrunner, Newt Gingrich.

No, what Herman Cain should have done on getting word of a pending sex scandal was punch in Edwin Edwards’ number to find out what Edwards advised Bill Clinton when a model named Gennifer Flowers claimed that she had a 12-year relationship with Clinton during his days as attorney general and governor of Arkansas.

As Edwards recalled the occasion, Clinton, then in the early stage of his run for the presidency, got news of the charge while on a fund-raising trip to New Orleans. Concerned about its impact, he asked his fellow Southern governor, Edwards, what he should do.

“I told him,” said Edwards, “that if that sort of claim were made against me I’d say, ‘12 weeks, maybe. Twelve months, maybe. But 12 years? Never.’”

Clinton, a simple Arkansas philanderer who lacked the flair of his Louisiana counterpart, said he didn’t think he could do that. Instead he and Hillary headed for “60 Minutes” and the first of what would be an eight-year series of “Stand by Your Man” reconciliations.

It worked, but I still prefer Edwards’ way. Mendacious perhaps, but it had the virtue of political wit, an element sadly lacking in the current race for the Republican nomination. For that reason alone, we’re going to miss Herman Cain’s presence in the field. He was the only candidate running who could at times be intentionally funny.

Sound Bite to Remember (Occupiers and Tea Party members take note)

“Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.”

                               — Theodore Roosevelt (1913)

 

When is a lobbyist not a lobbyist? Sunday, Nov 20 2011 

History and Politics , victorgold 4:40 pm

“I wasn’t a lobbyist, I was a strategic adviser.”

– Newt Gingrich, explaining why he took $1.8 million in fees from Freddie Mac, a federal agency that operates on taxpayer/bailout money

Move past, if you will, the part of this story that involves a Republican presidential candidate’s having what reporters call “baggage” (though in this particular candidate’s case it’s sure to be either Gucci’s or Louis Vuitton’s).

That Newt Gingrich has always viewed political cachet as a route toward becoming Newt Getrich dates back to his first touch of power, assuming the House speakership in 1995 and immediately hooking onto a $4.5 million book deal he gave up only after being pressured by his embarrassed Republican colleagues.

No, Gingrich-being-Getrich shouldn’t be the focus of media attention here. That’s old news. The question to be raised – the thing to be condemned by good government moralists in the media – is why federal departments and agencies like Freddie Mac are allowed to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to lobby Congress for additional millions of taxpayer dollars.

Gingrich’s audacity (somebody has to pay those Tiffany bills, so why not Freddie Mac?) simply expresses the routine acceptance by members of Congress — Democrat and Republican alike — that influence-peddling not merely for but with taxpayer money is now the accepted norm in Washington.

There ought to be a law against it — and as a matter of fact, there is: Taxpayer-subsidized federal departments and agencies are strictly prohibited from using their funds for lobbying purposes. But then, this isn’t lobbying, is it? No, it’s “strategic advice,” given when the price is right by ex-Republican and ex-Democratic congressmen alike.

Who says there isn’t bipartisan agreement on some federal expenditures?

Sound Bite to Remember (circa 1955)

“Why is it that when I take it, it’s stealin’, but when a governor who’s a lawyer takes it, it’s called a fee?”

 Alabama Governor Big Jim Folsom, complaining about the inequity of it all

 

Biden in 2016? It’s All in the Game Wednesday, Oct 26 2011 

Media and Politics victorgold 5:51 pm

I can’t pinpoint precisely when Presidential politics turned into a game, but I can tell you who owns the casino.

Flashback: Halfway through the Nixon v. McGovern campaign of 1972 — ancient history, but bear with me — Vice President Spiro Agnew arrived in Los Angeles prepared to answer reporters’ questions about the Vietnam war, Nixon’s new economic policy, and a host of other major issues (including the Watergate break-in five months earlier). Instead, the first question asked by a local TV reporter was whether the Vice President was planning to run for president in 1976.

As Agnew’s press secretary at the time I’d long since learned to expect the unexpected when the man was provoked by what he regarded as nattering nabobs. What followed was true to form: A glare, a clearing of the throat, then: “In ten years of holding press conferences on a local, state and national level,” said the Vice President, “that is absolutely the stupidest question I’ve ever been asked.”

All of which came to mind last week when I tuned in to hear CNN’s Candy Crowley ask Vice President Joe Biden the same stupid question: Was Biden, in his campaign travel this year, laying the groundwork for a presidential bid in 2016?

For Crowley, of course, the question was anything but stupid. It was smart television, what she’s paid to do. That whatever answer Biden gave – it was predictably vapid – would shed no light on the issues and substance of the current campaign made no difference. As a political correspondent for a cable news network, her job is to give the dull grind of a presidential campaign the casino touch.

It’s all about the game – the ratings game – and second only to controversy, there’s nothing like speculation to entertain an audience, raise the numbers that keep sponsors happy. What value would those vacuous candidate “debates” be without a covey of instant analysts and partisan touts coming on to tell us who won, who lost, who held the hot hand, who crapped out.

In their book The Permanent Campaign and Its Future, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein deplore the impact that pollsters and spin doctors have had on our political system, blurring the line between running for and holding office. All to the good, as far as the boys (and girls) on the Permanent Campaign Bus are concerned.

Joe Biden running in 2016? Why should this question come up now? The answer is that having exhausted the list of prospects for the 2012 race, there was nowhere else to go. Remember Trump, Daniels, Barbour, Palin, Christie?

The last named, you’ll recall, became so tired of telling reporters he wasn’t going to run that he famously asked, “What do I have to do to convince you? Commit suicide?”

And if a non-candidate did in fact kill himself to end speculation about his running, what then? No problem. I can hear Chris Matthews now: “Good campaign move.”

Sound Bite to Remember (1972)

“He’s a Democrat. What would you expect him to say, ‘Kiss my elephant’?”

– Campaign manager Frank Mankiewicz explaining why his candidate George McGovern told an obnoxious heckler to ‘kiss my ass’

 

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 29 other followers