4 Beers

Pool report from today's Rose Garden event (referred to yesterday in the briefing room variously as the "Beer Blast", "Beer Fest" by colleagues, to be gently chided by Gibbs that the event was a more serious one than that) notes that, unexpectedly, Biden was also present.

The thinking here, I believe was 1) to balance a focus of 2 men, actively engaged, and one President--e.g. to provide balance, and round off the numbers should the two become overactively engaged; and 2) To let Joe's loquaciousness take some of the steam and punch out of any arguments that could arise, draining it off with words, words, words, and deflecting some of the focus off of Obama, a key role for Biden since the start.

Pool report notes that POTUS drank Bud Light--popular and unobjectionable; VPOTUS: Bucklers--need we say, a "near beer"; Gates: Sam Adams, a quality home brew, and Crowley: Blue Moon, which we might note is meant to appear different and a rarer brew, but is actually owned by Coors--although they don't like to advertise this.

Birth Pangs

National Review has an almost sane editorial today that, although enshrouded in a multitude of caveats meant to dispel any possible momentary belief that they may be approving of any of his actions, makes clear that they recognize that he, indeed, was "Born in the U.S.A."

The unsigned op-ed, which still manages to impute questions about his biography, letting the faithful know that even in that realm, their not giving away all of their cards, manages to get one good line in among the protective bombast (which even attempts to normalize the Birthers through citation of questions about Chester Alan Arthur's putative Canadian birth):

The director of Hawaii’s health department and the registrar of records each has personally verified that the information on Obama’s birth certificate is identical to that in the state’s records, the so-called vault copy. Given that fact, we are loath even to engage the fanciful notion that President Obama was born elsewhere, contrary to the information on his birth certificate, but we note for the record that his mother was a native of Kansas, whose residents have been citizens of the United States for a very long time, and whose children are citizens of the United States as well

In any event, the Review's action is only politically wise, as the patent iron clad conspiracy theories of the Birthers prevents their only slightly less distorted usual positions from being visible. This is a case of a typical technique (factual distortion that incites and draws the masses) done both too poorly--too easily seen as absurd even by the analytically unskilled--and too well, drawing attention away from the mischaracterizations and inaccuracies that can be more easily passed over on the public.

There's health care to distort and mischaracterize--let's not muddy the waters with the more obvious fallacies of the Birthers.

Iran: Bluster and Thought

Welcome back.

The outrageous, narrow, contradictory, self-serving position of those on the Right--such as Robert Kagan, who makes at least some attempt at casting a veil of intellectual coherence, or the bloviating Mike Pence, who only goes as far as enjoying the familiar sound of his words--is another example of the continuing simple-minded viciousness that lies at the heart of a large sector of those who identify as conservative.

The logic here is simple. They are itching for a fight. They want to draw Obama into "confronting" Iran, prodded by rhetoric that really comes down to no more than opportunism hiding behind the usual protective shield of patriotic boilerplate, so that Iran will then accuse the U.S. of meddling.

Obama can then be accused of "failing" in foreign policy--because of the conflict that they conveniently and typically encouraged. And Iran can be placed in the role which they find more comfortable and exciting, and which they are more accustomed to--the place that they can and should fight.

That this permits the Iranian government to have a critical distraction from the battle for freedom, focusing attention on an external enemy--that is, that it will serve to undercut the "freedom" that they declare is their purpose--is not mentioned.

Sad, hypocritical, tiresome...ah! A return to the feelings of the Bush Administration!

Where Rubber Meets Road

Today I received an email, as did many of you, from the Obama team about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

It differs from the many emails sent before in that, for the first time, post-Inauguration, they are asking for action. This is the turn--the first test of whether the enthusiasm for sacrifice shown during the campaign and post-election period will actually translate into the actions of a populace--one willing to act on what they enthusiastically endorsed, one that is committed beyond fulfilling emotions, brief, self-gratifying opinion-making and the next entertainment--the actions, as Obama has briefly tested the phrase--of a movement.

This is where we see if the pleasure people took in voicing opinions, and experiencing change translates into active behavior in the interest of the nation. Work--where the rubber hits the road.

I have to say that, from a psychological point of view, when we consider that this is the first time that American citizens will be asked to be so broadly mobilized for such an event, outside of a campaign's carrying enthusiasm, in more than a generation--and given their preparation for action and sacrifice by the last Administration--the email is short on agenda.

Without it, and with very little practice or preparation for doing this in the past, the very real risk is that most Americans won't know quite what to do--and in that moment, in such a situation, the best predictor of behavior is past behavior--e.g., watch TV, someone else will do it, not sure how to act, hope it works out, maybe I'll do something later--and a critical defining opportunity will be lost, while another one occurs: that email that asks one to do something that sounds nice, something that they never do, instead of the email that enables them to continue to carry forward their enthusiasm and commitment with clear action.

People know how to act during a campaign--cheer and enthuse and enjoy the contest and battle of opinions, glorying in their superior knowledge. They don't know how to galvanize these thoughts and emotions for a bill--especially in a house meeting, something that will feel new and undefined itself.

Nevertheless--I'm in. I worked for this and I want it to work. So I'll provide the agenda:

INVITATION:

Talked the talk? Walk the walk. Come to the Georgetown House Meeting on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Agenda:

1) INTRODUCTION: Understanding the Act and its key initiatives.

2) CONGRESS: identifying and contacting key members of Senate; developing key arguments for vulnerable members

3) MEDIA: Broadcast (Radio/TV) and Cable: Identification and development of local and national stories/narratives describing how the Act will support families and communities
New Media: Development of Twitter and Facebook campaigns (Facebook app?), short-form video to support the Act

4) SUMMARY AND ACTION PLAN: Detail team and individual actions for the above and point persons for completion and follow-up


Where: Dr. Alan J. Lipman
1010 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.
The Waterfront Center, Georgetown
Suite 320
Washington, D.C.

When: Saturday, February 7th, 2-4 pm.

The Waterfront Center is located along the Potomac in Georgetown, on the corner of K Street and Wisconsin. There is metered parking directly in front of the new Georgetown Park, as well as a parking garage.

Call to RSVP: 202-423-6153

Change and The EPA

From Reuters, via Yahoo News:

President Barack Obama began reversing the climate policies of the Bush administration on Monday, clearing the way for new rules to force auto makers to produce more fuel-efficient and less polluting cars.

The president told the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider immediately a request by California to impose its own strict limits on vehicle carbon dioxide emissions, blamed for contributing to global warming.

The Democratic Obama took over last Tuesday from former President George W. Bush, whose Republican administration had denied the request, prompting California and other states to sue.

"The federal government must work with, not against, states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Obama said at the White House, taking a stab at his predecessor's policies.

I recall watching the torturous testimony of former EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson on this issue, as he went against the recommendations of his own agency staff.

Last Vestiges...

From Talk Left:

The Supreme Court issued opinions and orders today. Among them:

* Ruled that a man wrongly convicted and sent to prison for 24 years cannot sue the former Los Angeles district attorney and his chief deputy for violating his civil rights. The court said unanimously that decisions of supervising prosecutors, like the actions of prosecutors at trial, are shielded from civil lawsuits.

* Ruled that police officers have leeway to frisk a passenger in a car stopped for a traffic violation even if nothing indicates the passenger has committed a crime or is about to do so.

Trying to get as many in as possible before Obama will be able to shift the balance?

Hello Robert

By which we provide friendly advice to Robert Gibbs, who is very capable and well-experienced from the campaign--but who could not enjoy the benefit of a little friendly advice?

Larry Summers is certainly distinguished in many ways. And, in the swirl of internalizing broad swaths of information, managing egos, and getting one's wheels on the ground that is the growing job of Press Secretary, it certainly makes sense to protect that ego--particularly when someone else will (likely) be the Treasury Secretary.

But is it really necessary to refer to him as "Dr. Summers"--and Peter Orszag as "Peter"? Doesn't that establish/signify a bit of a listing coming together of the Cabinet--and suggest initial and future fractures?

A small point perhaps, but one that people notice. Best to keep the pragmatic, no- nonsense tone for all--and show the public that all of you have more important things in mind than ruffled feathers.

Kristol's "Work"

In November, Mr. Kristol told Portfolio.com, “I’m ambivalent” about the prospect of continuing to write the Times column. “It’s been fun,” he said, adding, “It’s a lot of work.”

~The New York Times, in reporting the "mutual" decision to end his column, January 26, 2009.


Thinking.

It's a lot of work.

Thinking about where we should go to war, dreamily touting Vice Presidential candidates.

It's work, I tell you.

And when you work, you're prone to mistakes.

Just look at the New York Times--they have to run corrections, why, most every day.

Fortunately, policy pieces and recommendations aren't followed by corrections.

That makes them--a lot less work.

Tom Friedman and "Jaws"

If Tom Friedman uses that "we need a bigger boat" metaphor from "Jaws" one more time, I will scream.