So, where are we? We as conservatives are in the wilderness, and many of you are hopeless. So we have a guy, Bobby Jindal, 37 years old, first time on the national stage, shows up last night to make a response to The Messiah. All he did was articulate what we believe. All he did was articulate opposition to what Obama is doing, with the obligatory when he’s right, we’ll work with him, just like we worked with Clinton on NAFTA, just like we worked with Clinton on welfare reform after we brought him in. These things happen. It doesn’t mean that we lose our distrust. All Bobby Jindal did was tell us what conservatism is; he used his own life story to do it; he talked about the American people making the country work. He had it all. Now, he may not have done it in the same stylistic way as Obama. I can understand the Democrats trashing the man, just as they trashed Sarah Palin. They are mean-spirited, heartless, horrible winners. But the people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal on the basis of style.
Because if you think people on our side, I’m talking to you, those of you who think Jindal was horrible, in fact, I don’t want to hear from you ever again if you think that what Bobby Jindal said was bad or what he said was wrong or not said well, because, folks, style is not going to take our country back. Solid conservatism articulated in a way that’s inspiring and understanding is what’s going to take the country back. Bobby Jindal’s 37 years old. I’ve spoken to him numerous times. He’s brilliant. He’s the real deal. I’m not coming here to defend him, he doesn’t need that. We’re going to have to figure out what we want. Do we want to have somebody in our party who can sound as smart as Obama regardless what he says and convince people to vote for us, or do we believe in a set of principles that defined this country’s founding and will return it to greatness again?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
Inflation
Government has only two ways of getting money other than raising taxes. It can go into the money market and borrow, competing with its own citizens and driving up interest rates, which it has done, or it can print money, and it's done that. Both methods are inflationary." --Ronald Reagan
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Bill "Scum Bag" Moyers
The Washington Post reports today that the Johnson administration agreed to an FBI investigation in to sexuality of one of LBJ's top aides, Jack Valenti. It seems that J. Edgar Hoover wanted to determine whether Valenti maintained a sexual relationship with a male photographer. Johnson balked at first but eventually permitted his close friend to be investigated.
But it wasn't just Hoover who was checking up the sex lives of LBJ staffers. The Post's story reports: "Even Bill Moyers, a White House aide now best known as a liberal television commentator is described in the records as seeking information on the sexual preferences of White Houlse staff members." Contacted by the Post, Moyers pleaded an "unclear" memory.
What's really unclear is why the Post expresses surprise at Moyers' involvement in "dirty pool." Moyers was a nasty piece of work in the 1960s ( Peter Wehner reminds us that Moyers was a key figure in the creation of the notorious "Daisy" ad) and he's a nasty piece of work today; just ask James Watt. And he's a hatchetman man for essentially the same interests as he was 45 years, namely the left-liberalism of the day.
But it wasn't just Hoover who was checking up the sex lives of LBJ staffers. The Post's story reports: "Even Bill Moyers, a White House aide now best known as a liberal television commentator is described in the records as seeking information on the sexual preferences of White Houlse staff members." Contacted by the Post, Moyers pleaded an "unclear" memory.
What's really unclear is why the Post expresses surprise at Moyers' involvement in "dirty pool." Moyers was a nasty piece of work in the 1960s ( Peter Wehner reminds us that Moyers was a key figure in the creation of the notorious "Daisy" ad) and he's a nasty piece of work today; just ask James Watt. And he's a hatchetman man for essentially the same interests as he was 45 years, namely the left-liberalism of the day.
Monday, February 16, 2009
"Real Change"
Monday, February 16, 2009
Obama hit for comment on teachers
Ralph Z. Hallow (Contact)
President Obama's blunt but little-noted statement last week that bad teachers need to be fired and that some fellow Democrats resist real change in public schools has jolted educators and education critics alike.
"It was unusual for a Democratic president to say that," said Cynthia G. Brown, director of education policy for the liberal Center for American Progress. "I applauded when I watched him say it on television."
On the right, the surprise in some quarters was just as great.
"For any nationally recognized Democratic official, let alone a Democratic president, to bluntly talk about the need to remove teachers for poor performance is unprecedented," said Frederick M. Hess, American Enterprise Institute director of education policy studies.
The president's education comments were tucked in the prime-time press conference Feb. 9 that he had structured to corral public support for his $800 billion economic-stimulus bill, which he will sign Tuesday.
"I think there are areas like education, where some in my party have been too resistant to reform, and have argued only money makes a difference," Mr. Obama said, adding on the other hand that some Republicans say throwing money at public education doesn't improve it and these Republicans want to replace public schools with private and charter schools.
After offering something to teachers and school administrators by saying that "both sides are going to have to acknowledge we're going to need more money for new science labs, to pay teachers more effectively," he fired what some saw as a shot across the bow of teachers unions.
"But we're also going to need more reform, which means that we've got to train teachers more effectively; bad teachers need to be fired after being given the opportunity to train effectively," he said, adding that "we should experiment with things like charter schools that are innovating in the classroom, [and] we should have high standards."
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told The Washington Times that "President Obama has potentially opened a very important dialogue about real reform and real investment in education. An important first signal of his real commitment to reform would be support for the Washington D.C. school-choice program, which has allowed the parents of poor children to place their children in schools that work."
"If the president would back up his press conference words with a real step like that, he would force Republicans to join the dialogue," Mr. Gingrich said.
Some saw in Mr. Obama's words something they had never seen before: a sitting president of either party, let alone a Democrat, standing up for the first time to the teachers unions, which represent one of the most powerful Democratic interest groups.
"I have not heard that language before about firing bad teachers," said Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst Dan Lips.
Ms. Brown saw possible tensions arising between the teachers and the president.
"The unions as a whole are skeptical of some of these changes - pay based on level of responsibility and on performance, for example," Ms. Brown said.
Mr. Hess called Mr. Obama's statements "important language."
"When it comes to reform and teacher pay, it´s bolder, clearer and more pointed than the language that President Bush or his officials used," he said.
But some conservatives, despite applauding the words, were skeptical about the follow-through, noting that Mr. Obama already has committed in the stimulus bill to spend huge new sums of money on education but without having conditioned it on concessions from teachers unions.
"At the same time, education interest groups are about to receive a grab bag of education-spending programs," Mr. Lips said. "So I don't think the administration upsets the education groups too much."
Mr. Hess complained that what Mr. Obama "was promoting was a stimulus package which will provide enormous new federal aid to schools without any quid pro quo."
"Rather than conditioning tens of billions in new aid on pushing states to embrace these reforms, the 'reform´ victories in this package are a handful of measures, totaling less than $500 million, in the House bill that address teacher quality and charter schooling, and a discretionary fund for the education secretary whose utility will depend entirely on what Education Secretary Arne Duncan might to do with the dollars," Mr. Hess said.
Teachers unions sought to play down any impression of a schism between them and the Democratic president, also noting that the president was discussing a stimulus bill with huge new spending projects for teachers and schools.
"If charter schools and getting rid of bad teachers were the only things he talked about, yeah, we would be concerned," said Joel Packer, spokesman for the National Education Association, the largest teachers union with a claimed membership of 3.2 million. He noted that as a candidate, Mr. Obama had said he wanted flexibility in Mr. Bush's No Child Left Behind program.
"There's nothing he said that would make us say, 'Oh, my God, that awful; we're going to have a big fight with him,' " Mr. Packer added.
The smaller American Federation of Teachers professed to be as much of a reform agent as Mr. Obama.
"There is no dichotomy between teachers unions and reform," said AFT spokeswoman Janet Bass. "The AFT is itself a reformer, and we have supported many of the programs he talked about."
Ms. Bass said her union supports "programs that help with monitoring teachers that have been identified as struggling."
"And if there are chronic problems, we feel they should be removed after offering them help," she said.
The AFT also favors charter schools so long as they are "innovative and fair to teachers."
Mr. Obama's words sound similar to those of D.C. Public Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, who has become a pedagogical rock star to many education reformers who say teachers unions have a stranglehold on the public education system.
"We have to be able to remove ineffective teachers from their positions, absolutely," Mrs. Rhee said after starting recent negotiations with the Washington Teachers' Union.
- Clark Eberly contributed to this report.
Obama hit for comment on teachers
Ralph Z. Hallow (Contact)
President Obama's blunt but little-noted statement last week that bad teachers need to be fired and that some fellow Democrats resist real change in public schools has jolted educators and education critics alike.
"It was unusual for a Democratic president to say that," said Cynthia G. Brown, director of education policy for the liberal Center for American Progress. "I applauded when I watched him say it on television."
On the right, the surprise in some quarters was just as great.
"For any nationally recognized Democratic official, let alone a Democratic president, to bluntly talk about the need to remove teachers for poor performance is unprecedented," said Frederick M. Hess, American Enterprise Institute director of education policy studies.
The president's education comments were tucked in the prime-time press conference Feb. 9 that he had structured to corral public support for his $800 billion economic-stimulus bill, which he will sign Tuesday.
"I think there are areas like education, where some in my party have been too resistant to reform, and have argued only money makes a difference," Mr. Obama said, adding on the other hand that some Republicans say throwing money at public education doesn't improve it and these Republicans want to replace public schools with private and charter schools.
After offering something to teachers and school administrators by saying that "both sides are going to have to acknowledge we're going to need more money for new science labs, to pay teachers more effectively," he fired what some saw as a shot across the bow of teachers unions.
"But we're also going to need more reform, which means that we've got to train teachers more effectively; bad teachers need to be fired after being given the opportunity to train effectively," he said, adding that "we should experiment with things like charter schools that are innovating in the classroom, [and] we should have high standards."
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told The Washington Times that "President Obama has potentially opened a very important dialogue about real reform and real investment in education. An important first signal of his real commitment to reform would be support for the Washington D.C. school-choice program, which has allowed the parents of poor children to place their children in schools that work."
"If the president would back up his press conference words with a real step like that, he would force Republicans to join the dialogue," Mr. Gingrich said.
Some saw in Mr. Obama's words something they had never seen before: a sitting president of either party, let alone a Democrat, standing up for the first time to the teachers unions, which represent one of the most powerful Democratic interest groups.
"I have not heard that language before about firing bad teachers," said Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst Dan Lips.
Ms. Brown saw possible tensions arising between the teachers and the president.
"The unions as a whole are skeptical of some of these changes - pay based on level of responsibility and on performance, for example," Ms. Brown said.
Mr. Hess called Mr. Obama's statements "important language."
"When it comes to reform and teacher pay, it´s bolder, clearer and more pointed than the language that President Bush or his officials used," he said.
But some conservatives, despite applauding the words, were skeptical about the follow-through, noting that Mr. Obama already has committed in the stimulus bill to spend huge new sums of money on education but without having conditioned it on concessions from teachers unions.
"At the same time, education interest groups are about to receive a grab bag of education-spending programs," Mr. Lips said. "So I don't think the administration upsets the education groups too much."
Mr. Hess complained that what Mr. Obama "was promoting was a stimulus package which will provide enormous new federal aid to schools without any quid pro quo."
"Rather than conditioning tens of billions in new aid on pushing states to embrace these reforms, the 'reform´ victories in this package are a handful of measures, totaling less than $500 million, in the House bill that address teacher quality and charter schooling, and a discretionary fund for the education secretary whose utility will depend entirely on what Education Secretary Arne Duncan might to do with the dollars," Mr. Hess said.
Teachers unions sought to play down any impression of a schism between them and the Democratic president, also noting that the president was discussing a stimulus bill with huge new spending projects for teachers and schools.
"If charter schools and getting rid of bad teachers were the only things he talked about, yeah, we would be concerned," said Joel Packer, spokesman for the National Education Association, the largest teachers union with a claimed membership of 3.2 million. He noted that as a candidate, Mr. Obama had said he wanted flexibility in Mr. Bush's No Child Left Behind program.
"There's nothing he said that would make us say, 'Oh, my God, that awful; we're going to have a big fight with him,' " Mr. Packer added.
The smaller American Federation of Teachers professed to be as much of a reform agent as Mr. Obama.
"There is no dichotomy between teachers unions and reform," said AFT spokeswoman Janet Bass. "The AFT is itself a reformer, and we have supported many of the programs he talked about."
Ms. Bass said her union supports "programs that help with monitoring teachers that have been identified as struggling."
"And if there are chronic problems, we feel they should be removed after offering them help," she said.
The AFT also favors charter schools so long as they are "innovative and fair to teachers."
Mr. Obama's words sound similar to those of D.C. Public Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, who has become a pedagogical rock star to many education reformers who say teachers unions have a stranglehold on the public education system.
"We have to be able to remove ineffective teachers from their positions, absolutely," Mrs. Rhee said after starting recent negotiations with the Washington Teachers' Union.
- Clark Eberly contributed to this report.
Jeb
Republicans Must Be a National Party
Florida's former governor on immigration, school choice, and the GOP's limited-government foundation.
By FRED BARNES
Miami
His grandfather Prescott Bush was a U.S. senator, and his father and brother were presidents. Yet Jeb Bush doesn't believe in political dynasties, and seems perfectly willing to let his family's legacy of serving in high office in Washington pass him by.
Ismael Roldan
It's "possible," he says, that he'll never run again -- for anything. That includes the presidency in 2012. "I'm totally comfortable with what I'm doing and how I'm going about it. I hope I can find a role to play that doesn't include running for office to make a contribution."
Mr. Bush, who turned 56 this week, stepped down in 2007 after eight years as governor of Florida. Now he's working in real estate, consulting, giving paid speeches, promoting education reform, and offering advice to the Republican Party. Even the U.S. Senate seat that Republican Mel Martinez will vacate next year didn't entice him. That, he says, would require a seven and a half year commitment -- a year and a half of campaigning and six years in office. He sounds weary merely discussing another campaign.
But Mr. Bush becomes animated when talking about ideas and policy innovations -- he's an unorthodox Republican who latches onto reform ideas wherever he finds them. He's a fan of the school system in Sweden (more on this below). Currently he's reading "Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns" -- on his Kindle electronic reader. And he's convinced Republicans should make a heroic effort to govern California because it's "a center of innovation and a place that looks like the changing demographics of our country, similar to Florida."
But the first question I ask Mr. Bush is about his life and work after declining to seek a Senate seat. He's not second-guessing his decision. He's relaxed, dressed Miami-style in slacks, a tattersall shirt and no tie. When Mr. Bush left the governor's mansion in Tallahassee, he worked out of an office in his Coral Gables condo. Six months later, he moved to the Four Seasons office complex five miles away on the fringe of downtown Miami. It is not plush, but modest and functional with a modern print on the wall and a few dozen books -- on policy, politics, religion -- on two shelves.
The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
Nevertheless, his current lack of interest in elective office surely is not the last word on Mr. Bush's political career. He's popular with both moderate and conservative Republicans, and more easy-going and genial than his brother George. Mr. Bush was a successful governor (1999-2007) of the fourth most populous state. His tenure was memorable because of his intense focus on reform of education, government, the budget process, civil service, health care, procurement and race-based programs. He also cut taxes in a state with no income tax.
What comes through when Mr. Bush is asked about education is how radical his views are. He would toss out the traditional K-to-12 scheme in favor of a credit system, like colleges have.
"It's not based on seat time," he says. "It's whether you accomplished the task. Now we're like GM in its heyday of mass production. We don't have a flourishing education system that's customized. There's a whole world out there that didn't exist 10 years ago, which is online learning. We have the ability today to customize learning so we don't cast young people aside."
This is where Sweden comes in. "The idea that somehow Sweden would be the land of innovation, where private involvement in what was considered a government activity, is quite shocking to us Americans," Mr. Bush says. "But they're way ahead of us. They have a totally voucherized system. The kids come from Baghdad, Somalia -- this is in the tougher part of Stockholm -- and they're learning three languages by the time they finish. . . . there's no reason we can't have that except we're stuck in the old way."
So are Republicans, Mr. Bush believes. But with a few adjustments, the GOP can become a modern reform party. "I don't think there's anything that holds us back," he says. "I think we're actually well positioned to do exactly that." Mr. Bush would stand the party on its head by de-emphasizing Washington and mounting "a real effort to play offense outside of Washington in advancing a reform agenda. I think a respectful, policy-oriented opposition in Washington will be quite effective." But the states are where "being able to change things is easier to do."
This approach "worked in the early 90s," Mr. Bush says. "We had some fantastic governors who were my role models." He mentions his brother when he led Texas, John Engler of Michigan and Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin. "We had an all-star team." He likes the current crop of Republican governors, including Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Haley Barbour of Mississippi.
"Beyond the ideas and all of that," Mr. Bush says the GOP must be a national party. That means "we need to be competitive in California," where the "burden of big-government policies" has produced a $42 billion deficit. "I don't care how big the state is, that's mind-boggling. It's not a tax problem. Don't they have the 'excuse me for living' tax out there? The growth of government spending has been enormous. And a creative, reform-minded candidate on the Republican side" could be elected governor.
He encouraged Meg Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, to try. "She's the kind of person who's lived and managed and led through the disruptive changes that are going on in our lives," Mr. Bush says. On Feb. 9, Ms. Whitman set up an exploratory committee, normally a precursor to running.
Mr. Bush commented last fall that "a big-government Republican" is a nonexistent species. What did he mean?
"I think the one common thread throughout all these strains of conservative thinking and Republicanism is limited government. If we don't have that in common, what else do we have? And the next question you'll ask is what do I think of my brother's record. I think circumstances come into play. When you're attacked as a nation it's legitimate to spend resources to deal with huge holes in national security. And so there are times in history when it's important to use the power of government."
Republicans must also clean up their act on immigration, Mr. Bush insists. Last year, he says they "set a tone" that pushed Hispanic voters away. "The tone of the debate reached a point that was very damning to the Republican Party, and the evidence is in. The chest pounders lost."
Mr. Bush supports immigration reform as championed by his brother and John McCain, which would allow illegals already in this country to stay. "Politics has to be about ideas and values and aspirations." he says. "It shouldn't be about anger and preying on people's emotions. You can't lead a mob."
To publicize their alternatives to President Obama's policies, Mr. Bush wants Republicans to emulate the British ("recognizing that we have a different system") and set up a shadow cabinet. "We should organize our opposition based on policy," he says. "I don't think the [2008] election was a transformational one in the ideological sense. I don't think Americans went to the left. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't get that sense. It's a huge opportunity to advocate reforms and advocate our beliefs and do so with some humility and recognition that the other guys won."
What did he take away from his experience as governor? Mr. Bush says he "learned you could change things if you worked at it. What I learned was how to take ideas and implement them over the long haul. The thing with politics is that it's focused on the here and now." However, "by focusing on the longer-term things I had a chance to take conservative ideas and reform-minded thoughts and put them into practice. It was invigorating. It was uplifting to me personally to see that in America a whole lot of people can work together to accomplish that."
As Mr. Bush explains it, an exhausting strategy is required. "You have to have an aspirational goal, and you have to communicate it over and over and over. You have to have the humility to recognize that people aren't watching your every word. . . . You have to be constantly adding to the reforms. You have to take the risk of measuring the success or lack of it. You have to be held accountable . . . Sometimes it's not fun."
Mr. Bush has kind words for Mr. Obama. He was the first Democrat to win Florida since 1976, and Mr. Bush has nothing but praise for his "spectacularly well-run campaign. They started with the premise that we're going to have a huge database and we're going to connect people to this campaign. When things got going in earnest in the general election, it was a finely tuned machine, to Obama's credit." The campaign spent $60 million in the state, Mr. Bush says, based on the correct assumption that "if they won Florida, they'd win the election."
He also has a suggestion. "I think it would be great politically for President Obama" to break with one of his party's interest groups, Mr. Bush says. "I hope it's the teachers' union. He can bring about a transformation of education" and speak "on behalf of the kids that traditionally are shut out of the learning process, and [allow] a thousand flowers to bloom, not just one prescribed from Washington."
Mr. Bush has a personal motive for urging Republicans to "avoid personal, partisan attacks" on Mr. Obama, a strategy they've largely followed in Washington. "I would never want Obama to go through what my brother went through. It might be fair that every president gets the same amount of vitriol. But it's not right for our country, it's not going to help us, and it's not going to help Republicans."
Mr. Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard and a Fox News Channel commentator.
Florida's former governor on immigration, school choice, and the GOP's limited-government foundation.
By FRED BARNES
Miami
His grandfather Prescott Bush was a U.S. senator, and his father and brother were presidents. Yet Jeb Bush doesn't believe in political dynasties, and seems perfectly willing to let his family's legacy of serving in high office in Washington pass him by.
Ismael Roldan
It's "possible," he says, that he'll never run again -- for anything. That includes the presidency in 2012. "I'm totally comfortable with what I'm doing and how I'm going about it. I hope I can find a role to play that doesn't include running for office to make a contribution."
Mr. Bush, who turned 56 this week, stepped down in 2007 after eight years as governor of Florida. Now he's working in real estate, consulting, giving paid speeches, promoting education reform, and offering advice to the Republican Party. Even the U.S. Senate seat that Republican Mel Martinez will vacate next year didn't entice him. That, he says, would require a seven and a half year commitment -- a year and a half of campaigning and six years in office. He sounds weary merely discussing another campaign.
But Mr. Bush becomes animated when talking about ideas and policy innovations -- he's an unorthodox Republican who latches onto reform ideas wherever he finds them. He's a fan of the school system in Sweden (more on this below). Currently he's reading "Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns" -- on his Kindle electronic reader. And he's convinced Republicans should make a heroic effort to govern California because it's "a center of innovation and a place that looks like the changing demographics of our country, similar to Florida."
But the first question I ask Mr. Bush is about his life and work after declining to seek a Senate seat. He's not second-guessing his decision. He's relaxed, dressed Miami-style in slacks, a tattersall shirt and no tie. When Mr. Bush left the governor's mansion in Tallahassee, he worked out of an office in his Coral Gables condo. Six months later, he moved to the Four Seasons office complex five miles away on the fringe of downtown Miami. It is not plush, but modest and functional with a modern print on the wall and a few dozen books -- on policy, politics, religion -- on two shelves.
The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
Nevertheless, his current lack of interest in elective office surely is not the last word on Mr. Bush's political career. He's popular with both moderate and conservative Republicans, and more easy-going and genial than his brother George. Mr. Bush was a successful governor (1999-2007) of the fourth most populous state. His tenure was memorable because of his intense focus on reform of education, government, the budget process, civil service, health care, procurement and race-based programs. He also cut taxes in a state with no income tax.
What comes through when Mr. Bush is asked about education is how radical his views are. He would toss out the traditional K-to-12 scheme in favor of a credit system, like colleges have.
"It's not based on seat time," he says. "It's whether you accomplished the task. Now we're like GM in its heyday of mass production. We don't have a flourishing education system that's customized. There's a whole world out there that didn't exist 10 years ago, which is online learning. We have the ability today to customize learning so we don't cast young people aside."
This is where Sweden comes in. "The idea that somehow Sweden would be the land of innovation, where private involvement in what was considered a government activity, is quite shocking to us Americans," Mr. Bush says. "But they're way ahead of us. They have a totally voucherized system. The kids come from Baghdad, Somalia -- this is in the tougher part of Stockholm -- and they're learning three languages by the time they finish. . . . there's no reason we can't have that except we're stuck in the old way."
So are Republicans, Mr. Bush believes. But with a few adjustments, the GOP can become a modern reform party. "I don't think there's anything that holds us back," he says. "I think we're actually well positioned to do exactly that." Mr. Bush would stand the party on its head by de-emphasizing Washington and mounting "a real effort to play offense outside of Washington in advancing a reform agenda. I think a respectful, policy-oriented opposition in Washington will be quite effective." But the states are where "being able to change things is easier to do."
This approach "worked in the early 90s," Mr. Bush says. "We had some fantastic governors who were my role models." He mentions his brother when he led Texas, John Engler of Michigan and Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin. "We had an all-star team." He likes the current crop of Republican governors, including Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Haley Barbour of Mississippi.
"Beyond the ideas and all of that," Mr. Bush says the GOP must be a national party. That means "we need to be competitive in California," where the "burden of big-government policies" has produced a $42 billion deficit. "I don't care how big the state is, that's mind-boggling. It's not a tax problem. Don't they have the 'excuse me for living' tax out there? The growth of government spending has been enormous. And a creative, reform-minded candidate on the Republican side" could be elected governor.
He encouraged Meg Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, to try. "She's the kind of person who's lived and managed and led through the disruptive changes that are going on in our lives," Mr. Bush says. On Feb. 9, Ms. Whitman set up an exploratory committee, normally a precursor to running.
Mr. Bush commented last fall that "a big-government Republican" is a nonexistent species. What did he mean?
"I think the one common thread throughout all these strains of conservative thinking and Republicanism is limited government. If we don't have that in common, what else do we have? And the next question you'll ask is what do I think of my brother's record. I think circumstances come into play. When you're attacked as a nation it's legitimate to spend resources to deal with huge holes in national security. And so there are times in history when it's important to use the power of government."
Republicans must also clean up their act on immigration, Mr. Bush insists. Last year, he says they "set a tone" that pushed Hispanic voters away. "The tone of the debate reached a point that was very damning to the Republican Party, and the evidence is in. The chest pounders lost."
Mr. Bush supports immigration reform as championed by his brother and John McCain, which would allow illegals already in this country to stay. "Politics has to be about ideas and values and aspirations." he says. "It shouldn't be about anger and preying on people's emotions. You can't lead a mob."
To publicize their alternatives to President Obama's policies, Mr. Bush wants Republicans to emulate the British ("recognizing that we have a different system") and set up a shadow cabinet. "We should organize our opposition based on policy," he says. "I don't think the [2008] election was a transformational one in the ideological sense. I don't think Americans went to the left. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't get that sense. It's a huge opportunity to advocate reforms and advocate our beliefs and do so with some humility and recognition that the other guys won."
What did he take away from his experience as governor? Mr. Bush says he "learned you could change things if you worked at it. What I learned was how to take ideas and implement them over the long haul. The thing with politics is that it's focused on the here and now." However, "by focusing on the longer-term things I had a chance to take conservative ideas and reform-minded thoughts and put them into practice. It was invigorating. It was uplifting to me personally to see that in America a whole lot of people can work together to accomplish that."
As Mr. Bush explains it, an exhausting strategy is required. "You have to have an aspirational goal, and you have to communicate it over and over and over. You have to have the humility to recognize that people aren't watching your every word. . . . You have to be constantly adding to the reforms. You have to take the risk of measuring the success or lack of it. You have to be held accountable . . . Sometimes it's not fun."
Mr. Bush has kind words for Mr. Obama. He was the first Democrat to win Florida since 1976, and Mr. Bush has nothing but praise for his "spectacularly well-run campaign. They started with the premise that we're going to have a huge database and we're going to connect people to this campaign. When things got going in earnest in the general election, it was a finely tuned machine, to Obama's credit." The campaign spent $60 million in the state, Mr. Bush says, based on the correct assumption that "if they won Florida, they'd win the election."
He also has a suggestion. "I think it would be great politically for President Obama" to break with one of his party's interest groups, Mr. Bush says. "I hope it's the teachers' union. He can bring about a transformation of education" and speak "on behalf of the kids that traditionally are shut out of the learning process, and [allow] a thousand flowers to bloom, not just one prescribed from Washington."
Mr. Bush has a personal motive for urging Republicans to "avoid personal, partisan attacks" on Mr. Obama, a strategy they've largely followed in Washington. "I would never want Obama to go through what my brother went through. It might be fair that every president gets the same amount of vitriol. But it's not right for our country, it's not going to help us, and it's not going to help Republicans."
Mr. Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard and a Fox News Channel commentator.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Fair and Balanced
Prominent journalists join Obama team
By Jim Rutenberg
Published: February 3, 2009
WASHINGTON: Republicans have long accused mainstream journalists of being on the payroll of President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, a common refrain of favoritism, especially from those on the losing end of an election.
But this year the accusation has a new twist: In some notable cases it has become true, with several prominent journalists now on the payrolls of Obama and Democratic congressional leaders.
An unusual number of journalists from prominent, mainstream organizations started new government jobs in January, providing new kindling to the debate over whether Obama is receiving unusually favorable treatment in the news media.
These are not opinionated talkers in the vein of Chris Matthews, the television host who flirted last year with a run for the Democratic nomination for the Senate from Pennsylvania - and who more recently said he would do "everything I can to make this thing work" for Obama.
Rather, they are, for the most part, more traditional journalists from organizations that strive to approach the news with objectivity.
Jay Carney, the new communications director for Vice President Joseph Biden Jr., was, until late last year, the Washington bureau chief at Time magazine, where he covered the campaign and, coincidentally, was a co-author of an article in September titled, "McCain's Bias Claim: Truth or Tactic?"
Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the leading candidate for surgeon general, is CNN's chief medical correspondent. His resume as a practicing neurosurgeon - and one of People magazine's "sexiest men alive" in 2003 - is not that of a traditional journalist. But he reported on the health records of the presidential candidates last year, along with their health care proposals.
Should he get the job, Gupta will be working for the Department of Health and Human Services, whose prospective assistant secretary for public affairs is Linda Douglass, a longtime television network news correspondent who left journalism for Obama's campaign last spring.
On Capitol Hill, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts has hired Douglas Frantz as his chief investigator on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Frantz is a former managing editor of The Los Angeles Times and before that was an investigative reporter there, at The New York Times and The Chicago Tribune.
Administration officials report they have had discussions with other print journalists looking for work as their news organizations begin to shed jobs.
The changes also give fodder to conservatives who have long complained that mainstream journalists are sympathetic to the views of Democrats.
"It is, I think, indicative of a certain affinity," said Rich Lowry, the editor of the conservative magazine National Review. "You would not have seen so many people from mainstream outfits going to work for John McCain."
It is not a one-way street. The administration of George W. Bush had as a press secretary the late Tony Snow, who had been in and out of journalism for years, though he spent much of his career as an opinion writer. In 2007, the Bush administration hired Geoff Morrell, a former ABC News White House correspondent, as a Pentagon spokesman. Morrell has stayed on in the Obama administration, under Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Some of those who are heading into government say they do not see their new jobs as particularly partisan.
As the chief investigator of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Frantz said he was acting much like an investigative reporter, but with two potential tools he could only dream about having previously: subpoena power and, should his application be accepted, security clearance to review classified data.
Frantz, who left The Los Angeles Times as it was changing owners in 2007, said he was ready for a career change. But he acknowledged, "If the newspaper industry were more robust, I would hope to still be managing editor of The Los Angeles Times."
Carney, the former Time bureau chief who now works as Biden's spokesman, said he did not view his job as particularly political either, given his boss's promise of bipartisanship.
"This is a Democratic administration. We're obviously on that side of the aisle, but I don't see this as a partisan job at all," Carney said in an interview.
He acknowledged having "an affinity for Joe Biden and Barack Obama." But he said it never influenced his coverage of the presidential campaign, as evidenced, he said, by the angry notes he often received from liberals last year concerning his coverage.
By Jim Rutenberg
Published: February 3, 2009
WASHINGTON: Republicans have long accused mainstream journalists of being on the payroll of President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, a common refrain of favoritism, especially from those on the losing end of an election.
But this year the accusation has a new twist: In some notable cases it has become true, with several prominent journalists now on the payrolls of Obama and Democratic congressional leaders.
An unusual number of journalists from prominent, mainstream organizations started new government jobs in January, providing new kindling to the debate over whether Obama is receiving unusually favorable treatment in the news media.
These are not opinionated talkers in the vein of Chris Matthews, the television host who flirted last year with a run for the Democratic nomination for the Senate from Pennsylvania - and who more recently said he would do "everything I can to make this thing work" for Obama.
Rather, they are, for the most part, more traditional journalists from organizations that strive to approach the news with objectivity.
Jay Carney, the new communications director for Vice President Joseph Biden Jr., was, until late last year, the Washington bureau chief at Time magazine, where he covered the campaign and, coincidentally, was a co-author of an article in September titled, "McCain's Bias Claim: Truth or Tactic?"
Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the leading candidate for surgeon general, is CNN's chief medical correspondent. His resume as a practicing neurosurgeon - and one of People magazine's "sexiest men alive" in 2003 - is not that of a traditional journalist. But he reported on the health records of the presidential candidates last year, along with their health care proposals.
Should he get the job, Gupta will be working for the Department of Health and Human Services, whose prospective assistant secretary for public affairs is Linda Douglass, a longtime television network news correspondent who left journalism for Obama's campaign last spring.
On Capitol Hill, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts has hired Douglas Frantz as his chief investigator on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Frantz is a former managing editor of The Los Angeles Times and before that was an investigative reporter there, at The New York Times and The Chicago Tribune.
Administration officials report they have had discussions with other print journalists looking for work as their news organizations begin to shed jobs.
The changes also give fodder to conservatives who have long complained that mainstream journalists are sympathetic to the views of Democrats.
"It is, I think, indicative of a certain affinity," said Rich Lowry, the editor of the conservative magazine National Review. "You would not have seen so many people from mainstream outfits going to work for John McCain."
It is not a one-way street. The administration of George W. Bush had as a press secretary the late Tony Snow, who had been in and out of journalism for years, though he spent much of his career as an opinion writer. In 2007, the Bush administration hired Geoff Morrell, a former ABC News White House correspondent, as a Pentagon spokesman. Morrell has stayed on in the Obama administration, under Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Some of those who are heading into government say they do not see their new jobs as particularly partisan.
As the chief investigator of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Frantz said he was acting much like an investigative reporter, but with two potential tools he could only dream about having previously: subpoena power and, should his application be accepted, security clearance to review classified data.
Frantz, who left The Los Angeles Times as it was changing owners in 2007, said he was ready for a career change. But he acknowledged, "If the newspaper industry were more robust, I would hope to still be managing editor of The Los Angeles Times."
Carney, the former Time bureau chief who now works as Biden's spokesman, said he did not view his job as particularly political either, given his boss's promise of bipartisanship.
"This is a Democratic administration. We're obviously on that side of the aisle, but I don't see this as a partisan job at all," Carney said in an interview.
He acknowledged having "an affinity for Joe Biden and Barack Obama." But he said it never influenced his coverage of the presidential campaign, as evidenced, he said, by the angry notes he often received from liberals last year concerning his coverage.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Kentucky
Thanks to the Anchorist:
Kentucky: No Power, No FEMA - UPDATED
Shadydowns:
I know, an ice storm in Kentucky is not a hurricane in La. but still, thousands of people STILL without power, that’s heat and water. It’s cold here folks.Food is getting scarce in some places and I heard on the radio some places folks are getting water from streams etc.
We not all a bunch of dumb rednecks who have no meaning or matter in this country. Where is the outrage about the lack of action? Where?
Americans are freezing and dying but I guess I’ve missed Anderson Cooper flying to the midwest and crying and Geraldo shouting, “where is the help?” I guess I’ve missed members of the press demonizing President Obama for eating steak and having cocktails with the press while people are freezing and without food.
When a million people in flyover country are suffering, and 42 people have died, we don’t hear much about it. If this was New York, Washington, Boston, (or if the president had an R after his name) you’d see non-stop reports, and the press would be roundly criticizing FEMA’s absence, and the White House’s disregard. Right?
Thousands of people in ice-caked Kentucky awoke in motels and shelters, asked to leave their homes by authorities who said emergency teams in some areas were too strapped to reach everyone in need of food, water and warmth.…Dozens of deaths have been reported and many people are pleading for a faster response to the power outages. About 438,000 homes and businesses across Kentucky were without power, down from more than 600,000, the largest outage in state history, and as far away as Oklahoma, around 10,000 customers still had no electricity.
The outages disabled water systems in much of the western part of the state, where some in rural areas resorted to dipping buckets in a creek. Authorities warned it could be days or weeks before power was restored in the most remote spots.…
“We’re asking people to pack a suitcase and head south and find a motel if they have the means, because we can’t service everybody in our shelter,” said Crittenden County Judge-Executive Fred Brown, who oversees about 9,000 people, many of whom spent a fifth night sleeping in the town’s elementary school.
Local officials grew angrier at what they said was a lack of help from the state and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. [Emphasis mine - admin]
In Kentucky’s Grayson County, about 80 miles southwest of Louisville, Emergency Management Director Randell Smith said the 25 National Guardsmen who have responded have no chain saws to clear fallen trees.
“We’ve got people out in some areas we haven’t even visited yet,” Smith said. “We don’t even know that they’re alive.”
Smith said FEMA was still a no-show days after the storm. [all emphasis mine - admin]
Kentucky: No Power, No FEMA - UPDATED
Shadydowns:
I know, an ice storm in Kentucky is not a hurricane in La. but still, thousands of people STILL without power, that’s heat and water. It’s cold here folks.Food is getting scarce in some places and I heard on the radio some places folks are getting water from streams etc.
We not all a bunch of dumb rednecks who have no meaning or matter in this country. Where is the outrage about the lack of action? Where?
Americans are freezing and dying but I guess I’ve missed Anderson Cooper flying to the midwest and crying and Geraldo shouting, “where is the help?” I guess I’ve missed members of the press demonizing President Obama for eating steak and having cocktails with the press while people are freezing and without food.
When a million people in flyover country are suffering, and 42 people have died, we don’t hear much about it. If this was New York, Washington, Boston, (or if the president had an R after his name) you’d see non-stop reports, and the press would be roundly criticizing FEMA’s absence, and the White House’s disregard. Right?
Thousands of people in ice-caked Kentucky awoke in motels and shelters, asked to leave their homes by authorities who said emergency teams in some areas were too strapped to reach everyone in need of food, water and warmth.…Dozens of deaths have been reported and many people are pleading for a faster response to the power outages. About 438,000 homes and businesses across Kentucky were without power, down from more than 600,000, the largest outage in state history, and as far away as Oklahoma, around 10,000 customers still had no electricity.
The outages disabled water systems in much of the western part of the state, where some in rural areas resorted to dipping buckets in a creek. Authorities warned it could be days or weeks before power was restored in the most remote spots.…
“We’re asking people to pack a suitcase and head south and find a motel if they have the means, because we can’t service everybody in our shelter,” said Crittenden County Judge-Executive Fred Brown, who oversees about 9,000 people, many of whom spent a fifth night sleeping in the town’s elementary school.
Local officials grew angrier at what they said was a lack of help from the state and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. [Emphasis mine - admin]
In Kentucky’s Grayson County, about 80 miles southwest of Louisville, Emergency Management Director Randell Smith said the 25 National Guardsmen who have responded have no chain saws to clear fallen trees.
“We’ve got people out in some areas we haven’t even visited yet,” Smith said. “We don’t even know that they’re alive.”
Smith said FEMA was still a no-show days after the storm. [all emphasis mine - admin]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)