Notes on Politics -- Obama Goes Dog-Heavy, Scott Brown's Lucky Shot, 'Scandal' & 'West Wing' Quasi-Reunion

Obama Goes Dog-Heavy at D.C. Dinner

This is how presidential humor is supposed to be done, at venues like the White House Correspondents' Dinner. And while President Obama was very funny delivering his litany of jokes -- my favorite was his "What a snob" Santorum reference -- the dog stuff ... really?

Apparently the Obama people believe that the way to short-circuit the Obama-ate-dog story is to drive hard into the belly of the beast like a linebacker. While I can respect the attempt, several of Obama's "I ate dog" lines were disconcerting, like that joke about the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull (stealing from Palin, obviously). Punchline: A pitbull is delicious. What's that now? Comparing the taste of dogs and moms? Bad taste.

Mr. Brown from Downtown

U.S. Senator Scott Brown, who's in a tough race against Elizabeth Warren in my home state of Massachusetts, visited the youth center on Cape Cod recently and, just for fun, tried a half-court shot. And made it.

 Despite the hullabaloo over the fact that his adult eldest daughter is on his Congressional health insurance plan, courtesy of the Obama health care law which he vigorously opposed, he's having a better week than Warren who's doing battle with her Native American ancestry flap. Perhaps she should brush up on her outside shot. Couldn't hurt.

Have You Seen Scandal Yet? Give It a Spin.

It's no West Wing. It doesn't pretend to be. But the new Thursday night ABC drama Scandal, the latest product from Grey's Anatomy guru Shonda Rhimes, is one fun ride.

The lead character, Olivia Pope -- played with intelligent, fierce luminescence by Kerry Washington -- is a powerful D.C. "fixer" who tries to help clients deal with, well, scandals. A former White House aide, Pope had an affair with the married president and, although she projects a ferocious I-don't-need-anyone aura, can project vulnerability, but only in private. She's recently taken on the underdog case of a young White House aide who not only said she too had an affair with the president -- which the president confirmed -- but that she's pregnant with a presidential love child, an interesting amalgam of the Monica Lewinsky and John Edwards scandals.

Sure, the show is larger than life in the way it shows Pope and her loyal collection of "gladiators in suits" prevailing more often than not, always happening to uncover the truth and ultimately doing the right thing. It wildly exaggerates. But given the crop of recent real life political scandals -- Weiner, Edwards, Sanford, Spitzer, Clinton, etc. -- it's not entirely off the mark.

I'm covering the show for CliqueClack TV and am having a blast doing so. If you're looking for dramatic escapism, Scandal's been fun thus fun.

Walk & Talk - The West Wing Reunion from Martin Sheen

West Wing 'Reunion'

Speaking of dramas about the president and the White House, several members of the cast of The West Wing -- including Josh Malina (Will Bailey) who's also on Scandal -- came out with a Funny or Die video promoting, hold onto your hats . . . walking. It's mildly amusing, and also makes me hanker to watch some West Wing repeats.

Image credit: Danny Feld/ABC.

Well Done, Mr. President

It was just what we needed in the wake of the horrific Tucson shooting: An uplifting speech by the president which highlighted the bravery and heroism of the people during that terrible moment on Saturday morning.

Husbands who threw their bodies on top of their wives to try to shield them from gunfire. A congressional aide who darted through the lethal chaos to attend to wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and apply pressure to her wounds. The people who wrestled the shooter to the ground and wrangled his ammo out of his hands, risking their own lives.

We, collectively, were uplifted by the life stories of those who were killed, the woman who volunteered at her church, the high school sweethearts who’d reunited, the young Congressional staffer who had big ideas of how government could help people. We learned that Giffords had opened her eyes for the very first time since being shot. And then there was the 9-year-old girl, Christina Taylor Green whose story President Obama told in such a tastefully poignant fashion that it brought me to tears.

And the president took pains to say that we shouldn’t blame political rhetoric for the actions of a disturbed man bent on violence. Instead of blaming and finger pointing, the president called upon us to lift up one another by communicating our political differences in civil terms and mold ourselves into the kind of nation that the young, idealistic Christina, born on 9/11/01, would have wanted to see in the country of which she was so proud: “She saw all of this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism of vitriol that we adults all too often take for granted. I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it.” When he threw in the line about how he imagined that Christina was “jumping in rain puddles” in heaven, the word that came to my mind: “Beautiful.”

It was a healing speech full of hope -- not anger, not partisanship, not blaming. It was full of tales that remind us that there are many more people in the world who are good and generous and brave and loving and hopeful even in the face of evil. And that’s what we needed to hear, at least that’s what I needed to hear.

Then this morning while watching Morning Joe, I heard that Colorado Senator Mark Udall is urging that during the January 25 State of the Union speech in the House chambers that the members from the Republican and Democratic parties sit amidst and next to one another as opposed to segregated on opposite sides of the room.

“Beyond custom, there is no rule or reason that on this night we should emphasize divided government, separated by party, instead of being seen united as a country,” Udall said in a press statement. “. . . Perhaps by sitting with each other for one night we will begin to rekindle that common spark that brought us here from 50 different states and widely diverging backgrounds to serve the public good.”

That, I think, is a brilliant idea would embody the notion that we are all Americans, no matter our views on tax policy, education reform and keeping troops in Afghanistan.

Notes on Politics: Mass. Senate Election Ends Obama's Freshman Year with a Whimper

I don't totally buy into the notion that a major reason Republican Scott Brown beat Democrat Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts U.S. Senate race was because Bay State voters are ticked off at President Barack Obama. Other than Brown's declaration that he doesn't like the current health care reform legislation -- being negotiated in secret as pricey goodies are doled out -- and wants to start fresh with a new reform bill, I think this Senate race was about Massachusetts politics more than it was about the president, but the president's going to pay the price, perception-wise.

With a state mired in political scandal after political scandal, Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi said if Coakley lost, Democrats could point fingers at their own performance in the State House. Look at what's happened in Massachusetts state government in the past few years: Democratic House speakers have resigned their post in disgrace including one who's facing federal corruption charges and another who was stripped of his law license last week after he'd pleading guilty to obstruction of justice charges, a Democratic state legislator is awaiting trial on charges that she allegedly stuffed bribe money into a bra and the first-term Democratic governor has an anemic 39 percent approval rating. Vennochi wrote:

"The epic battle between Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley is drawing national attention as a referendum on President Obama. But Brown is also tapping into that special brand of anger that helps Republicans beat Democrats in otherwise solidly blue Massachusetts.

When the party in power gets too arrogant -- as often, it does -- the people get mad. Over the past two decades, they sent their message by electing three successive Republican governors."

However when President Obama made a last-minute trip to Boston on Sunday to try to revive the Coakley campaign, he unwisely injected himself into the Senate race. The Brown victory will now add to the perception that Obama is not only weakening, as he suffers from plunging approval numbers nationwide -- went from a high of 61 percent to the current 47, according to the Chicago Tribune -- but is also being dissed by one of the bluest state's in the country, one that gave him a 26-point margin of victory in 2008.

While watching MSNBC's review of Obama's freshman year on Morning Joe, it's clear that what started off on such a triumphant and positive note on a cold inauguration day in Washington, D.C. in 2009 has gone downhill quickly for the president. Hopefully year two will prove to be a better one.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

CBS has a comprehensive, number-crunching summary of Obama's first year including how many foreign trips he made, how many bills signed, pardons issued and rounds of golf.

Notes on Politics: In Snow & Sleet, Mass. Senate Race is Scalding Hot

With the exception of a few years of living in the Washington, D.C. area in the 1990s, I've lived in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts the rest of the time. In all that time, I cannot recall a general election for the U.S. Senate or Congress being this close. It's Massachusetts for God's sake, one of the bluest states in the union. Sure, there was a lot of national attention paid to GOP Gov. Bill Weld's 1996 attempt to unseat U.S. Senator John Kerry (Kerry prevailed with 52 percent), as there was when Republican Mitt Romney took on Sen. Ted Kennedy in 1994 (Kennedy won 58 percent of the vote). But those races weren't nearly as close as is this current contest between Democrat Martha Coakley, the state's attorney general, and Republican Scott Brown, a state senator.

Amid all manner of nasty political ads which air once every five seconds on radio and TV (I adore politics and even I'm sick of them, never want to hear the word "lockstep" again) and the tongue-clucking about Coakley's assertion that Brown supporter Curt Schilling is a Yankees fan (in Red Sox Nation of all places!), this once sleepy campaign where the Democrat (any Democrat, didn't matter who) was considered a shoe-in, so much so that Coakley didn't really campaign much last month, is now too close to call. And it's serving as a proxy for all things Obama and is considered to hold the key to the health care vote. If Coakley, once the presumptive favorite, doesn't prevail, pundits everywhere are saying this is bad news for the president who visited Boston yesterday to try to help boost the campaign.

I still can't believe it. Take a gander at the political reporters from all the big media outlets on TV who have to do live stand-ups outside in this New England January chill, in front of cars coated in salt and sand. They seem surprised and almost giddy, to have something this volatile to report. I was astounded to see the front page of the New York Times today feature a woman who'd been holding a Brown sign in Marlborough, MA who I drove by twice on Saturday while driving my youngest kid to hockey.

Here are the covers of the two biggest papers in Massachusetts, indicating that the stakes are indeed high for tomorrow's vote from the Boston Herald (where I used to work and for whom I used to blog) and the Boston Globe.

Notes on Politics: 'Lost' State of Union, Political Book Takes on Rage, Egos, Race and Infidelity

Lost State of the Union Address

There was quite a bit of consternation in them there internets last week about the possibility that White House officials would schedule the State of the Union address on February 2, the date of the Lost season premiere. Appalled Lost fans started tweeting and including the hashtag #NoStateofUnionFeb2.

Once it was announced by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs that while they didn’t yet have a date picked for the annual address he could assure folks that it won’t be on February 2, one of the Lost co-creators, Damon Lindelof posted a tweet, “OBAMA BACKED DOWN!!! Groundhog Day is OURS!!!!!! (God Bless America).”

Lindelof’s colleague Carlton Cuse, joked about the hullaballoo by posting this tweet, “In exchange for moving his speech Damon [Lindelof] and I promise to answer ANY questions the President has about LOST.”

On a more serious note, the campaign finance think tank Center for Responsive Politics suggested that the contributions of “people and political action committees associated with Walt Disney” totaling in $430,000 helped Disney make their case to secure February 2 for Lost.

Political Book Portrays Elizabeth Edwards’ Temper, Hubby’s Ego

Political reporters John Heilemann and Mark Halperin have dug into the political mud fairly deeply to unearth some damning, behind-the-scenes portraits of the major 2008 presidential candidates and those folks with whom they surrounded themselves with. The results are in Heilemann and Halperin’s new book, Game Change.

Among the revelations that’ve garnered mucho publicity in the past few days is the derogatory depiction of the Edwardses excerpted in this week’s New York Magazine entitled, “Saint Elizabeth and the Ego Monster.” (John Edwards’ mistress Rielle Hunter must be raising a champagne glass.) Characterized in the most extremely negative light possible, Elizabeth Edwards was portrayed as an exceptionally difficult person with whom to get along, with campaign aides referring to themselves as “battered spouses” for having to deal with her:

“With her husband, she could be intensely affectionate or brutally dismissive. At times subtly, at times blatantly, she was forever letting John know that she regarded him as her intellectual inferior. She called her spouse a ‘hick’ in front of other people and derided his parents as rednecks. One time, when a friend asked if John had read a certain book, Elizabeth burst out laughing. ‘Oh, he doesn’t read books,’ she said. ‘I’m the one who reads books.’”

John Edwards didn’t come off well either, as he was described as a deluded ego-maniac who thought he could just breeze through the campaign while screwing around and lying about it. The book excerpt said:

“Yet it was [John] Edwards who stepped so far across the line that his career and life were reduced to rubble . . . Edwards’s story is equally, lastingly resonant: an archetypal political tragedy in which the very same qualities that fuel any presidential bid—ego, hubris, vanity, neediness, a kind of delusion—became all-consuming and self-destructive. And in which the gap between public façade and private reality simply grew too vast to bridge.”

I'm Going to Let David Letterman Handle the Joe Wilson Story

You've likely all heard about it by now. A U.S. congressman yelled, "You lie!" to President Obama during his health care reform address to a joint session of Congress this week. A classless move to be certain. Even my three grade school-aged kids were surprised that someone like a congressman would do something like that in a forum such as that.

But instead of saying all the things many people are already thinking, I decided to let David Letterman's Top Ten list do the heavy lifting on this one.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Obama Health Care Speech to Congress

On the speech last night that President Obama gave to a joint session of Congress, I'm going to quote the Washington Post's Tom Shales:

"Obama came across like Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: a bright-eyed young idealist up against entrenched power, old ideas and obstructionism.

It was also a chance for Obama to go on national television and look presidential again, asserting himself in ways that helped make up for the past few months of perceived defensiveness, of appearing to kowtow to other powers, and of seeming to do more following than leading."

I think the comparison to Stewart is apt. As an event of pure political theater, Obama was blunt, eager, tough and idealistic and seemed to grab the debate by the lapels and provide overarching themes with which most reasonable people -- Republican or Democrat -- would agree. Who thinks you should be banned from obtaining health coverage because you have a pre-existing condition? Who thinks American families should be bankrupted by their health care bills? Who thinks it's morally right for folks to be unceremoniously dropped by their health insurance company -- even though they diligently paid their premiums and deductibles -- when someone covered by their health insurance policy gets sick, or whose medical bills exceed a cap the insurance company has placed upon the family? I doubt you're going to find folks willing to say that all of those things are okay with them. (And if you do, it'll likely be someone named Mr. Potter, who had a run-in with Jimmy Stewart in another film, It's a Wonderful Life.)

When the president spoke of not adding "a dime to the deficit" with this new health care reform proposal, that he'd ask for a provision to be included in a bill to implement cuts if the promised millions in savings didn't materialize as he believed they would, those are sentiments around which most folks can rally.

The problem is, that's what they are, notions. We have no idea if they're going to eventually be true, no matter how much the president may want them to be because, lest we forget, he's not the one who makes laws. That's Congress' messy, messy, horse-trading job. What if the not "a dime to the deficit" has to be sacrificed in some deal to secure a bill's passage? Then Obama will have made a promise that Democratic senators and congressmen and women couldn't keep.

I went to the US Senate and House web sites and found links to two seemingly prominent versions of health care reform bills -- HR 3200 at 1,017 pages, the Senate bill passed by the Senate Committee on Health at 839 pages -- and haven't yet plowed through them.

Simply put, I'm left wondering what health care reform would really look like beyond the sweeping statements; the outcome of such reform would be very personal because it involves my family's health care. While some people may have liked the sound of the things the president is saying in general about the overhaul of one-sixth of the U.S. economy, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty implementation people, those for and against reform, get wary.

When President Obama last night said "significant details need to be worked out," laughter could be heard, only the president wasn't laughing. What's that old adage, the devil is in the details?

Suburban Mom's Pop Culture Week: Presidential Address, Julie & Julia, Beatles Get Cover Treatment & HBO's 'Hung'

This, in case anyone was wondering, is a non-Gosselin edition of Suburban Mom's Pop Culture. There's only so much of Jon & Kate that I can handle in one week, thank you very much . . .

TV

Who out there is planning to watch the presidential address to a joint session of Congress tonight? I'll be there, in front of the TV -- likely tuned to NBC's Brian Williams, love Brian -- with an open mind and ready to listen. On Thursday, I'll be ready to analyze. One thing I can't stand, though, about these addresses, is the repeated jumping out of one's seating and clapping all the time. Drives me nuts.

From the commander in chief addressing Congress to a male prostitute. There's just no good segue here . . . I've been ODing on HBO's new comedy Hung, about the down-on-his-luck high school teacher/basketball coach/divorced father of two teens Ray Drecker who turns to high-priced prostitution -- calls himself a "happiness consultant" -- to pay his bills and get the funds to fix his home which was partially ruined by fire. (He didn't have the cash to pay his home owner's insurance premiums and let the policy lapse, so now he's living in a tent next to the house.)

After I've seen the season finale (airs Sunday night), I'll devote a separate blog item to the show. It's mighty quirky, in a Weeds sort of way. I love the dynamic between the main character and his pimp Tanya, a confidence-craving poet who has worked at a temp job in a law firm for more years than she'd care to admit.

Books/Magazines

I finished Julie Powell's book Julie & Julia on Monday, upon which half of the movie of the same name is based. I was entertained throughout, though the sections on Powell cooking organ meat curdled my stomach. (When I told my 11-year-old son about the chapter on cooking brains -- given, we were at the dinner table at the time -- he curtly thanked me for killing his appetite.) A great number of the events which occurred in Powell's life during the year in which she was cooking her way through Julia Child's first book and blogging about it were omitted from the film, so reading this helped fill in the blanks. Once I completed Julie & Julia, I moved on to finally cracked open Jack Kerouac's On the Road. I'm just at the very beginning though. Never read Kerouac. Have no idea what to expect.

After sitting unloved on my desk for a while, Wired Magazine's latest issue has been beckoning me. Meanwhile, I enjoyed basking in the Beatles Mania in this week's Entertainment Weekly and harassing my kids by singing tidbits of Beatles songs at random moments.

Movies/DVDs

This week I watched the first DVD in the first season for The West Wing. God did watching that show that bring me right back to the 1990s, before people were using BlackBerries or doing things like Twittering and Facebooking. It's almost charming to hear people mention faxes, which aren't used like they were when this show began. I fondly remembered Leo, Sam, Josh and C.J., and realized I'd forgotten how sanctimonious Jed Bartlett could be. The discs for the remainder of the award-winning freshman season are on my Netflix queue. Can't wait. (And no, I haven't watched Milk yet, which I've had for some time from Netflix, sitting next to the TV.)

The Spouse and I did, however, watch Flash of Genius over the weekend starring Greg Kinnear and Lauren Graham. Aside from production/film issues (the camera would sometimes move awkwardly, almost jarringly, and some of the clothing did NOT appear period, maybe I've been spoiled by the anal retentive Mad Men folks) I found the tale of inventor/college professor Robert Kearns getting screwed by the Ford Motor Company after they stole his invention, bittersweet. The drama peaked when Kearns wouldn't drop his lawsuit against Ford, even with his family, his job and his sanity at stake. If this had been made 40-50 years ago, I can imagine someone like Jimmy Stewart in the lead role, of the little guy getting taken by the big, expensive-suited power brokers.



Image credit: Entertainment Weekly.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: 'Buy American' Stimulus $ Controversy, Mass. Senate Seat Contest & Sawyer Gets ABC Anchor Desk

'Buy American' Stimulus Money Controversy

The Boston Globe ran a disturbing page one story about how some of the $787 billion in federal stimulus money, which was supposed to be used to put Americans back to work and help keep American companies stay afloat, is being spent on products made in other countries. The Globe reported:

"As local governments race to spend stimulus money, many are seeking exemptions from the law's 'Buy American' restrictions, which were intended to prevent taxpayer money from ending up on foreign pockets. The administration has granted waivers for goods as varied as steel for public housing projects, high-speed Internet equipment, and Auburn's (Maine) manhole covers, which have heavy-duty hinges to help withstand the town's heavy truck traffic.

The Obama administration could not provide a list or amount of waivers granted -- which potentially could total billions of dollars -- and Vice President Joe Biden's office, which has responsibility for overseeing the stimulus, did not respond to requests for comment."

However when I read this line, "the EPA issued a blanket exemption for foreign-made components last month as long as they do not amount to more than 5 percent of a stimulus project's cost," I had to wonder exactly how much money we're talking about being spent on foreign made goods. Granted, President Obama and Congress sold this stimulus package as a Put-America-Back-to-Work program, but have apparently, when it comes to the nitty-gritty of distributing the funds, administration officials have quietly decided to alter the program's dictates after the fact, making it a Put-America-Back-to-Work-Except-If-Some-Entities-Using-Federal-Money-Really-Want-Foreign-Products.

In order to figure out just how big of a deal this really is, we need to know exactly how much is being spent on non-American goods and whether there's any truth to what "critics" of the "Buy American" clause in the stimulus plan say, that "the waivers reflect the reality that the United States no longer makes many basic goods, and that in a global economy many products are assembled in several countries, rendering the rules unenforceable."

Mass. Senate Seat Contest Gains At Least One Contender

Now that the late Sen. Ted Kennedy has been laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery, candidates to serve out the remaining couple of years of his term are starting to come out of the woodwork. Kennedy's nephew, former U.S. Congressman Joe Kennedy is expected to announce within the next day or two whether he'll pick up the political baton on behalf of his family and run.

Meanwhile, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has said she's in, regardless of whether any Kennedy family member enters the race. (If she won, she'd be the first female senator from Massachusetts.) Others who are toying with running include former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling (who, if Politico is right might have trouble running on the GOP ticket), former Mass. Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey and former Bush White House Chief of Staff Andy Card.

This has the makings of an exciting Senate race, something Massachusetts hasn't had in some time.

Sawyer Gets ABC Anchor Desk

To learn that, come January, two out of three of the anchors for the Big Three network newscasts will be women was very heartening to me. I'm so looking forward to the day when seeing and regarding a woman as an authoritative network news anchor is no longer a question to be debated or discussed, but simply a given. Women anchor the cable network newscasts all the time, all day long, so why should a woman anchoring a network newscast be any different (other than the small fact that the network news audience skews older than for the cable news networks and may be more uncomfortable with a female anchor)?

When Katie Couric assumed the helm of the CBS Evening News, her initial reviews were mired in sexist language and were sometimes patronizing, as people mused and mocked her clothing, her body and her make-up. She was skewered and verbally flogged. Before Couric, Elizabeth Vargas had been chosen to be the co-anchor of the ABC World News along with Bob Woodruff. That lasted about six months or so before Woodruff was seriously injured while covering the Iraq War and Vargas decided to move over to ABC's weekly news magazine 20/20 after learning she was pregnant with her second child and that the World News schedule wouldn't work for her. Decades ago, Barbara Walters and Connie Chung struggled as co-anchors on network broadcasts, gigs that didn't last long. Will the anchoring experience be different for Sawyer?

Former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather joined the crew of Morning Joe to discuss women as network news anchors. See the first part of their chat here:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

However my glee over Sawyer's ascension was tempered once I started to read some of the details and reactions to Sawyer's selection, details like the quote from ABC president David Westin who told the New York Times, "This was not a result I wanted." Details like the rumors that outgoing ABC anchor Charlie Gibson is "livid" that Sawyer was tapped as his replacement.

Then there are the photos people have been running of Sawyer when she was a young beauty queen, long before she was hired to work in the Nixon White House and before she became a household name. Where, I ask you, are the high school and teenaged photos of male news anchors so that we can see "how far" they've come? Did we see photos of a young, awkward Brian Williams when he became the anchor of the NBC Nightly News? Or of Gibson when he took over from Vargas and Woodruff? Or is this kind of hey-don't-take-her-so-seriously shtick just reserved for female anchors like Couric and Sawyer?

And what was with U.S. News & World Report's Bonnie Erbe who, instead of celebrating, derided the whole development, calling network newscasts a "pink collar ghetto" because now women are the majority of anchors? Erbe wrote:

"That Charlie Gibson is leaving his post as anchor of World News Tonight and Diane Sawyer is replacing him may be emblematic of the declining power of the network evening newscasts . . . First Katie, now Diane. It should be an historic moment for female newscasters, who now outnumber men by 2 to 1 on the three major commercial broadcast networks. Instead, it feels like an after-thought. Funny, I never thought I'd live to see the day when the network newscasts became a pink collar ghetto. But with Rachel Maddow now almost as prominent than Katie Couric and Bill O'Reilly much more frequently in the news than Charlie Gibson, it's fair to say that day has arrived."

Sometimes it seems like women just can't win.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Obama's Shorts, Health Care Battle & Jenny Sanford Sounds Off

Obama's Shorts

I have a special request for the news media, plus every group or web site that now loosely qualifies as the "news" media: Please cease and desist with the Michelle Obama-wore-shorts-and-oh-boy-what-a-scandal stories. You aren't fooling anyone when you cover the "faux controversy" and try to convince us that you don't understand what all the uproar is all about, yet you're still reporting on it and then soliciting viewers'/readers' opinions on whether it's appropriate for a First Lady to wear shorts.

Michelle Obama is a healthy, active, youthful woman in her forties. It's summer time. She's got young kids. It's damned hot. Give her a break. Who cares that she wore shorts? This is so a non-issue.

Health Care Battle

On to REAL news stories . . . Now that White House sources have indicated that government-run health insurance option may hit the cutting room floor and (possibly) be replaced by subsidized, non-profit health care co-ops in an attempt to move a health care bill forward, President Obama (whose approval ratings have taken a precipitous fall amid the intense health care legislation debates) still has a fight on his hands . . . with fellow Democrats. Liberal Democrats want the government-run health insurance option to remain viable, while conservative "blue dog" Democrats, worried about costs and government "take over" of health care, seem to cotton to the co-op idea. If the Dems can't reach an agreement amongst themselves, there will be no health care reform at all and Obama will be handed a major defeat.

I'll be interested in reading the compromise legislation before it goes to a House-Senate conference committee, if it makes it that far. Then we'll get a better idea of what this'll really mean.

Jenny Sanford Sounds Off

It was serendipitous to discover this week that the new issue of Vogue includes an interview with Jenny Sanford, the wife of South Carolina's Governor Mark "Don't Cry for Me Argentina" Sanford, looking fabulous and sounding strong. My new pop culture and politics column is about political wives whose husbands have conducted illicit affairs that inevitably devolved into full-blown public scandals, while the spouses and their children proved to be collateral damage.

My essay points to CBS's new fall show, The Good Wife -- starring Julianna Margulies as a devoted political wife whose husband resigned from office and is in jail after he frequented prostitutes and was accused of abusing the power of his office -- which seeks to offer viewers a peek behind the curtains of the homes of these wives (Sanford, Edwards, Spitzer) and show what damage has truly been wrought. Seeing Jenny Sanford pictured in Vogue and spouting off lines that make it sound like she's so unbelievably together, was a step toward reclaiming her life, and the lives of other devastated wives of pols. More power to her.

Image credit: Jonathan Becker/Vogue.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Hillary Clinton Tells Off Questioner, Dances, Plus Testy Health Care Town Mtgs

Hillary Clinton Tells Off Congo Questioner

Me thinks that our secretary of state must've been on the receiving end of a whole mess o'sexist commentary thus far in her tenure, and constantly feel one-upped by her suck-all-the-oxygen-out-of-the-room spouse who got international accolades for helping to negotiate with the North Koreans for the freedom for two U.S. journalists last week. That's the only explanation I have (except maybe sleep deprivation) for Hillary Clinton ditching her normally professionally cool responses to difficult questions and telling a college student from Congo, in a matter of speaking, that she didn't like her question. One problem: The questioner didn't intend to insult Hillary Clinton. The translator screwed up. Whoops.



Hillary Dance Party

I always feel badly for U.S. officials when they venture abroad, play along with local customs and show courtesy to their hosts. How many presidents have donned un-western-like clothing and gotten mocked for wearing the duds by the folks back home?

So when an international host invites you to dance, what are you supposed to say, "No thank you. The late night comedians and folks on the internet will torture me about my dancing. Forever. I'll pass."

Of course not. You dance. And then be a good sport and suffer through the ridicule. Like Hillary Clinton has to at the hands of Conan O'Brien's staff about her dancing during her trip to Africa:



Testy Health Care Town Meetings

The recent spate of health care/health insurance town meetings between congressmen and senators and their constituents have gotten fairly heated haven't they? Some have devolved into circuses where no one gets heard and no one communicates and it all becomes white noise as tempers flare.

As I've watched this unfold, I've seen two sides getting fired up and becoming unable or unwilling to actually listen to the concerns of the other side, with the exception of Barack Obama himself, who seems game to field and handle pointed questions without shutting people down. (However people haven't been as nasty to him personally as they have been to U.S. congressmen and senators.)

The pro-Obama administration folks have tended to parrot the president's lines, like the ones spoken today at Obama's town meeting in New Hampshire: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan." Obama said he doesn't want government bureaucrats OR insurance company bureaucrats "meddling" and getting involved in medical decisions made between you and your doctor. He said there won't be "death panels" run by the government to decide if a frail or sick senior should be provided health care. Obama has repeatedly told the story of his mother spending the last weeks of her life fighting with the health insurance company over her cancer treatments. He's also fond of saying, "No one in America should go broke because they got sick." The White House has created a web site which officials said seeks to clarify some of the misinformation voters have been given about the various health care reform bills. (Full disclosure: I haven't read the health care reform bills, though I think I might and then post what I find.)

All of those things seem to be common points of interest on which both conservatives and liberals could, essentially, agree. Keep all bureaucrats out of medical decisions. Pick your own health plan and your doctor. You shouldn't be driven into bankruptcy if someone in your family is sick. All good.

However there's a divergence from all of those common points when it comes down to actual legislation. People, many of them conservative-leaning, have been doing some research into the bills and have become nervous. They fear panels of government officials making decisions related to their health. (I imagine someone from my state's notoriously unfriendly Registry of Motor Vehicles handling my or my children's health claims and I shudder.) They don't want a single, government-run health care plan, which Sen. Arlen Specter today said he'll consider as senators discuss competing pieces of health insurance legislation. People are justifiably leery about how much this is going to cost, particularly during a recession.

Then, at town meetings across the country where there have been people posing well reasoned questions about the plans, there've also been screaming nutcases. The media give a lot of the coverage to the nutcases and eventually everyone who questions the plan is lumped under the category of an unruly mob. It's at this point when we realize that when it comes to health care and making life-and-death decisions, people take things very personally.

Democratic proponents of the health care overhaul haven't made things better by labeling the voters who are getting riled up at town meetings "un-American," like several of the people at Senator Specter's meeting with constituents today. There's a way to express your skepticism, disapproval and ask tough questions without being a jack ass.

Having partisans like Ann Coulter and James Carville chattering on Good Morning America about these emotional town halls certainly doesn't help bestow calm or promote rational discussion. But rational discussion can be quite boring, mind-numbing at times, and doesn't make for good TV which thrives on drama and conflict. I'd love to see leaders from both sides of the aisle, step up and seek the calm, boring middle ground here, tamp down the fury and the name calling and bore us all to death with reasonable and open discussions. For as long as it takes, without rushing. But I guess that's just too much to ask for.

Or we could just call Jon Stewart for his read on the situation. While he is a liberal, he's funny.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Healther Skelter
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Spinal Tap Performance

Parents of Teen in the Infamous "Leering" Photo Reportedly Furious

The parents of the 17-year-old high school student who appears to have had her behind ogled during the G8 summit last week by Nicholas Sarkozy and maybe/maybe not Barack Obama (you've got to see the video tape before making a call on Obama) are livid that their daughter, who they described as "timid and ashamed of her body" and "dedicated to helping the poor, not to seducing world leaders," is at the center of an international booty scandal.

The New York Post caught up with her parents, who are seriously steamed. The Post quoted her father as saying: "Why are they looking at her like that? This is a girl who is articulate and intelligent and just wants to to the right thing. Instead, they are forcing her into a negative light."

He added, "That photograph has ruined my whole family."

She's collateral damage in a tabloid world.

Image credit: New York Post.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Did He Or Didn't He Ogle That Gal's Behind?

Everyone's been talking about it.

The photo.

Of Barack Obama, Nicholas Sarkozy and that shapely gal.

DID Barack Obama ogle that woman in the way it appears in the photo that's been the lead image on the Drudge Report all day?

Look at ABC's Good Morning America's video and judge for yourself:



Image credit: The Drudge Report.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Obama as Superhero (& Suave Fly Killer)

Okay, so it doesn't involve killing a fly with a single, vicious, ruthless slap, but the new JibJab satire which spoofs President Obama taking on everything that's wrong with the world with his superhero powers is sharp. And pretty cool. Like the superhero Obama, with an Obama campaign logo on his chest where the super "S" should be.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Obama vs The Fly

President Obama took on a pesky, interloping fly (insert a snarky, put-down of an annoying pol) during a taped interview with CNBC. And Obama won. It was a literal smack-down.

Then, as the CNBC camera folks trained the lens on the fly's carcass lying on the White House rug the President said, "I got the sucker."



'Twas an odd, albeit amusing bit of video. But not, apparently to PETA, if the gossipy celeb-centric web site TMZ is to be believed. The group reportedly issued a statement which took the presidential fly killer to task for summarily executing the insect. The statement said in part, "He isn't the Buddha. He's a human being and human beings have a long way to go before they think before they act."

Good grief.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: A Supreme Court Nominee from the Bronx

The nomination of U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the nation's highest court to fill the seat vacated by outgoing Supreme Court Justice David Souter will likely succeed, but not without some degree of controversy.

There's enough material out there on Sotomayer onto which folks with myriad viewpoints can latch and make hay. Conservatives, for example, are ticked that she described the U.S. Appeals Court as have a law-making role, not an interpretative one. (During a panel discussion she said: "[The] Court of Appeals is where policy is made. I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. Okay. I know. I'm not promoting it. And I'm not advocating it.")

Plus there's that inflammatory comment Sotomayor made a few years ago that's been talk radio fodder this afternoon about how people's life experiences come into play when judges render legal opinions: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

The web site Politico described Sotomayor's positions on the wedge issue of abortion as "murky:" "In 17 years on the federal bench, she has issued no opinions dealing directly with abortion rights. And in two cases dealing tangentially with the issue -- involving anti-abortion protesters and the government right to limit abortion-related speech by foreign recipients of U.S. aid -- the appeals court judge's ruling favored abortion opponents. Still, anti-abortion forces are convinced that [President] Obama would not nominate Sotomayor without being confident that she supports abortion rights."

But on one thing, I think people along the various points on the political spectrum can agree: She's got a great story. Sotomayor grew up in a Bronx housing project with her parents, born in Puerto Rico, and brother. Her dad died when she was 9 and her mother, a nurse, worked like crazy to pay for parochial school for her two children. Sotomayer, who was an avid fan of Nancy Drew mysteries as a child, according to the New York Times bio on her here, went on to attend Princeton on a scholarship and then Yale Law School, worked as an assistant district attorney and a corporate litigator before becoming a judge. Then there's the story about how Sotomayer "saved baseball" during the MLB baseball strike in the mid-1990s. ("She ended a long baseball strike [in 1995], briskly ruling against the owners in favor of the players," the Times wrote.)

The most moving moment in the announcement of her nomination occurred when she tried to describe how much she appreciates everything her mother did to help make this moment possible and she teared up. No matter what happens during this summer's confirmation process -- save for a scandal, she'll almost certainly be confirmed, though not without some protest over the justices-as-lawmakers comment -- it is heartening to hear a success story like Sotomayor's. (To hear her remarks, go about 11+ minutes into the video.)

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: WH Spokesman Tells Reporters What Biden 'Meant to Say' on Swine Flu

Who didn't see this coming? The White House's awkward backing off from what Vice President Joe Biden said on the Today Show this morning, that he wouldn't go in any confined area like an airplane or a subway while the swine flu is spreading.

You had to feel badly for WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, having to stand there at the podium, on national TV and, with a straight face, BS his way through this quagmire, where the president tells everyone to remain calm, wash their hands and stay home if sick, while the vice president says he for one isn't gonna get trapped in some subway car potentially loaded with people carrying the swine flu.

ABC's Jake Tapper asked Gibbs about Biden's statements and Gibbs talked in nonsensical circles saying that what Biden was really saying was that if you feel sick you should take precautions. To which Tapper replied, "With all due respect . . . that's not even remotely close to what he said."

"I'm telling you what he meant to say," Gibbs said as the reporters guffawed. (Link to the question and answer here.)



Meanwhile, in another development on the swine flu front, the Associated Press reported that a White House aide and his family are being tested for the flu. "A member of the U.S. delegation that helped prepare Energy Secretary Steven Chu's trip to Mexico City has demonstrated flu-like symptoms and his family members have tested probable for swine flu."

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Was Biden Truth-Telling About the Swine Flu or What?

Last night President Barack Obama told America not to panic about the swine flu pandemic. Be reasonable, he suggested, wash your hands and cover your mouth when you cough. If you become sick, he said, stay home, contact a doctor if you suspect that you or a loved one has flu-like symptoms.

Then this morning Vice President Joe Biden told viewers of the Today Show, "I wouldn't go anywhere in a confined space right now." He even seemed to be suggesting that people should avoid places where there are lots of other people. Like the NBA and NHL playoffs being played in confined arenas? Baseball games being played in parks where the concession areas are confined? Indoor concerts? Movie theaters? Malls? Public bathrooms? Schools?

My questions are: Does Biden know more than he's letting on and just being honest, on a personal level? Or is he overreacting?

It's really hard to determine who's being truthful here, the federal officials who are talking "mitigation" and preaching "reasonableness," while I know full well that they're engaging in a cost-benefit analysis where they're weighing the number of deaths with the economic impact of a public, Biden-like shut-down on an already weakened economy. There'd be a steep economic cost in terms of dollars that'd happen in the wake of this kind of a recommendation, which, I can only imagine would be issued in only the severest of flu cases, so as not to hurt the economy further. That's understandable.

But when I hear the vice president -- a guy who took Amtrak back-and-forth from Delaware to D.C. during his Senate days, someone who earned the nicknamed "Amtrak Joe" -- say he wouldn't want to be in a confined space, that gives me reason to pause and wonder what the internal, White House projections are for the impact of this flu and what costs are being weighed against what benefits.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Seriously, What's Up With This Prez. Beefcake Cover?

When I saw the cover of the May issue of Washingtonian Magazine online -- with an artificially glowing, unethically Photoshopped image of the president bare chested and in his swimming trunks -- I was disgusted. How in the heck could the magazine's editors have thought this particular image would be a wise choice, except if they were only seeking a lot of negative buzz? (No doubt the number of hits the magazine's web site has received spiked this past week.)

Certainly the editors, in their "reasons to love Washington" issue, could've used a different, albeit still attractive cover image highlighting President Obama or the photogenic Obama family. They didn't need to resort to the salacious. And they shouldn't have. (Doesn't this simply feed the notion that the media are totally in the tank, Obamified lapdogs?)

This image simply diminishes President Obama, reduces him to some tabloid personality akin to a Hollywood celebrity, an object at which to gawk. (Remember the McCain campaign's "celebrity" ads? This plays into that argument.)

Throw in the fact that the cover was doctored -- a la Time Magazine's infamous OJ cover and Newsweek's Martha Stewart cover, as the color of Obama's swimming trunks was changed, as was the lighting on his chest (see the original photo here) -- and it was just a bad move all around. When I taught a journalism ethics course to undergraduates last year, we dedicated an entire class to the discussion of altered magazine covers and made the distinction between magazines that supposedly abided by news oriented-journalistic ethics (under which I would think the Washingtonian would fall) and those that didn't (like Redbook's Faith Hill cover).

We've got serious problems to address with our economy in a precarious condition and an ongoing two-front war, with troubling stories emerging from Afghanistan. And a respected monthly in the nation's capital put the president on the cover of their magazine while he's in his bathing suit accompanied by the headline, "Our New Neighbor is Hot." What is wrong with this picture?

Image credit: Washingtonian Magazine.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Covering the Obamas

There's nothing wrong with noticing that the Obama children are exceptionally cute. It's also reasonable to suggest that the prospect of seeing the girls playing on the White House lawn with their new puppy Bo or swinging on their new swingset outside Dad's office would be a welcome respite from the dour economic news to which we've been treated for the past several months. More than once I've heard and read political pundits likening the White House photos of 10-year-old Malia and 7-year-old Sasha to photos from the Camelot days a generation ago of Caroline and John Kennedy.

As long as media coverage is respectfully restrained and the Obama girls aren't hounded and don't have everything that's on or near their bodies catalogued (like tracking down the makers of their clothing, backpacks, toys, etc.). There was a degree of media restraint afforded Chelsea Clinton when the 12-year-old accompanied her parents to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in 1993, but that was still in the pre-blog days, so I remain skeptical that the media can or will exercise such decorum when it comes to the First Kids.

But what has already exceeded decorum and has veered into the arena of tiresome is the coverage given to Michelle Obama, an Ivy League educated lawyer and former hospital executive, a woman with something substantive to say on many subjects. Last month I examined the type of media coverage Michelle Obama was receiving -- including the odd, fetish-like obsession with her bare arms -- in a column which noted that during the span of two weeks, the First Lady was on the cover of four national magazines.

And that was before the G-20 summit in London and the Obamas' trip abroad. Before phrases such as "fashion faceoff" were uttered and the media pit Michelle Obama with the spouse of the French president, as if the women's clothing was competing against one another. Before so-called news media outlets started running slideshows on their web sites of Michelle Obama's outfits and discussing wearing stilettos versus flat shoes on national NEWS programs.

After a week's worth of fluffy, insipid news coverage, I was steamed. My irritation yielded this week's Pop Culture and Politics column over on Mommy Track'd in which I satirically imagine what it would be like if the male leaders' attire was subjected to the type of media scrutiny that their spouses' duds, where the media pay lavish attention to pumps, not the policies and causes the women try to spotlight. How I wish the media would treat these women as women of substance, not as walking mannequins that they want to dress up in designer duds.

Image credit: Huffington Post.