A Balanced Perspective on Benghazi

The New York Times' investigation of the September 2012 events in Benghazi, Libya should force right-wing extremists to abandon their most extreme accusations against the Administration! The Administration's preliminary assessment that al Qaeda was not involved in the attacks has held up, as have its initial claims that attackers took advantage of a demonstration motivated by outrage over an offensive anti-Islamic video. However, left-wing extremists, and the Administration, must likewise come to terms with a fact that has never been refuted: THEY EDITED THE TALKING POINTS!

Somtimes Peple Get What thye Deserv!

Thisis so freakign perfct! I cuold wach this agan and aagain and agan! iS crcket always this greeat? Myabe if Piers mOrgan's show oepened wiht this sort of thnig I would watchit!

What cuold have been!

i keeep this piture in afreame on m ybedside table. Oh whenI think of what coudl havebeen!

Pretty Darn Good!

Is this the best of all possible worlds? Perhaps not, but it's still pretty darn good!

Nuit de Samedi!

Tonight is all about Noyau de Poissy, Duran Duran, and my new massage chair!

Putting Things in Perspective

Extended unemployment insurance benefits are ending tomorrow! While I know that this will create some hardships for unemployed people and their families, and it will harm the economy, I hope that the people who suffer will take some comfort in knowing that federal spending will be reduced by 0.2 percent as a result of their sacrifice! So it isn't all bad news!

Merry Christmas!

The war on Christmas. Is it a good thing, or a bad thing?

Obamacare Turning Point

Today, President Obama signed up for Obamacare, even though he has a personal physician and no need for health insurance! Will this gambit pay off in increased support for the program? Or will it be seen as a cynical attempt to manipulate public opinion? Time will tell, but one thing is certain; a year from now when Obamacare is either a smashing success or a crushing failure, we will look back on this moment as the turning point!

An Interview with David Brooks!

David Brooks is everyone’s favorite New York Times columnist! He’s probably my favorite columnist, period! He really gets Bipartisan Sensibleness, and he’s genius-level smart—like a social scientist, but without being too bookish! The public has been clamoring for me to do an interview with Brooks, and while we haven’t been able to schedule an on-camera interview, I am using this exciting new technology to bring the actual words of David Brooks to you! That’s right—all the answers in this interview are things that David Brooks has said (or written).

Blitzer: Thank you so much for conversing with me, David. You are a great columnist, one of the best. Yet, you are almost always wrong about everything. Can you explain this seeming contradiction?

Brooks: To get the most attention, the essay should be wrong. Logical essays are read and understood. But an illogical or wrong essay will prompt dozens of other writers to rise and respond, thus giving the author mounds of publicity.

Blitzer: Fascinating! Do you think that this approach to punditry serves the public?

Brooks: There's a collapse in the public's faith in American institutions. The media has done a poor job. We've become as insular and self-regarding as any [other institution].

Blitzer: Perhaps. But maybe when we address issues of real seriousness and weight, we can overcome this insular self-regard. For example, what do you think the prospects are for a democratic transition in Egypt?

A: It’s not that Egypt doesn’t have a recipe for a democratic transition. It seems to lack even the basic mental ingredients.

Brooks: Okay, maybe not! President Obama recently gave a speech decrying the increase in inequality. What is your take on this issue?

Brooks: The rich don't exploit the poor. They just out-compete them.

Blitzer: Ha ha ha ha ha!  I think that one of the things I enjoy most about your work is your unique take on populism. Most people think of populism as an effort to support the interests of the common people against the privileged elite. But you don’t see it that way, do you?

Brooks: Populism and elitism are the same thing. They are class prejudices, crude class prejudices that so-and-so, because they are uneducated, is less worthy, or so-and-so, because they are richer or more educated, is unworthy.

Blitzer: Your approach to language reminds me of Humpty Dumpty! I love it! It seems that one of your favorite rhetorical techniques is to position yourself as the sensible center between extreme views. I like to do that too!

Brooks: The main job of radicals in the Noam Chomsky or G. Gordon Liddy mode is to go around from one scruffy lecture hall to another reminding audiences that while they may be disdained or ignored by the mainstream culture, they are actually right about everything.

Blitzer: Like that! You truly are a master at this! It never would have occurred to me to create an equivalence between one of the most important intellectuals of the last century and a ex-con radio talk show shouter! My head is spinning, so let me ask you a question that no doubt has a more straightforward answer: What do you think about Jerry Sandusky raping all of those boys?

Brooks: I don’t think it was just a Penn State problem.  You know, you spend 30 or 40 years muddying the moral waters here.  We have lost our clear sense of what evil is, what sin is; and so, when people see things like that, they don’t have categories to put it into.  They vaguely know it’s wrong, but they’ve been raised in a morality that says, “If it feels all right for you, it’s probably OK.”

Blitzer: Golly! All right, let’s switch to talking about governance. What did you think of George Bush’s presidency?

Brooks: Almost single-handedly, Bush reconnected with the positive and idealistic instincts of middle-class Americans. . . . Bush has ennobled and saved American conservatism.

Blitzer: Speaking of Bush, can you remind me what you were saying during the early days of the Iraq War?

Brooks: Back then I said: “Chicken Littles like Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd were ranting that Iraq is another Vietnam. Pundits and sages were spinning a whole series of mutually exclusive disaster scenarios: Civil war! A nationwide rebellion! Maybe we should calm down a bit. I've spent the last few days talking with people who've spent much of their careers studying and working in this region. We're at a perilous moment in Iraqi history, but the situation is not collapsing.”

Blitzer: In retrospect, how do you think that column holds up today?

Brooks: Every column is a failure.

Blitzer: But such a beautiful way to fail! What do you think about President Obama?

Brooks: Culturally, he will have to demonstrate that even though he comes from an unusual background, he is a fervent believer in the old-fashioned bourgeois virtues: order, self-discipline, punctuality and personal responsibility.

Blitzer: Okay. Not sure where that came from! Anyway, my favorite of the old-fashioned bourgeois virtues is fiscal responsibility. What’s your take on that issue? Why is our deficit so big?

Brooks: Every generation has an incentive to borrow money from the future to spend on itself.

Blitzer: I didn’t know that it was possible to borrow money from the future! This is so informative! I’m passionate about fiscal responsibility. What political ideas are you passionate about?

Brooks: When you cover politics, you realize that knowing how to talk about character matters more and more. The way we hold ideas is more important than the ideas.

Blitzer: That is so true! Thank you for holding your ideas, whatever they may be, with such character!

nO MORe Mr nice Guy

i may come off as a mildd guy but whn i'm psissed the wolf comesout! So a word to the soots at the network-- back in bufalo i climbed over tougher dudes than yuo just to kck a real hard guys ass.

ONe that got aweigh

Did yuo ever hav a woman that dorve yoi crazy? tHat you juts had to have alll to yuorself, becaus you loved here so much? And then you lossed her becasue you where two psosessive? I have! yOung men-- if yuo love something set it freee, ect, etc.  Dont make teh same missteak i did! !

Happy

Happy happy joy joy!

Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting

Relaxation time, with hot toddies, a bubble bath, and Nickelback turned up to 11! If anyone sees Anthony Bourdain coming my way, call 911 (I kid)!

Media Criticism

I don't like media criticism and I'm not one to engage it it myself! But I'm willing to make an exception in those rare cases where the media as a whole is failing to bring us an important story! We're in such a situation now! So here goes:

Why is the American media failing to bring us the important stories about developments in the royal family? Surely William and Kate can't fully agree on all aspects of little George's upbringing! Is it possible that the Queen hasn't provided some unwanted advice to her daughter-in-law? Who are Pippa's drinking buddies? I know these stories aren't easy to get but that's no excuse!

A friendly word to my colleagues: we've got to do better than this!

Inequality: A Distraction

Why is everyone talking about inequality these days, from the President on down? I'm not saying that inequality isn't an important issue! But with our political system so riven by conflict that it's difficult to Get Anything Done, wouldn't it be better for the time being to focus on issues that we agree on, rather than ones that divide us? Since everyone who matters agrees on the need to slash Social Security and Medicare benefits for the sake of reducing the deficit, let's do it! There'll be plenty of time later to talk about more controversial issues, like whether government policy should be focused primarily on benefiting the rich. Let's solve one problem at a time, people!

A wArning!

A message for Don lEmon-- I respcet you and and i valeu you as a coleage. I reely do. Butt ill be goddammed fi you are ogoing two get a primetmie slot while I;m still around! Doo not test me! I'm fucking serious! you. will. regert. it.

Kissing Dinae

Do you think that Diane sAwyer wood be a good kisser? i bet she wood! Shes good at eeverything else!

Sweetness!

The small amounts of bitterness in my life only make the sweetness sweeter!

Saturday Night!

Tonight I'm kicking back with piña coladas and Zamfir up to 11 on the stereo. You know, he really is the master of the pan flute!

In Praise of Statesmanship

Other duties have kept me away from blogging for the past few days, but never fear, I'm back! What's on my mind today is the historic budget deal negotiated this week. While this deal falls short of the sort of grand compromise that we so desperately need (oh how I long for entitlement reform and massive deficit reduction!), it is a hopeful sign that the grownups are back in charge and that Bipartisan Sensibleness is possible in Washington once again!

So let us praise the statesmen who made this deal possible. First, Rep. Paul Ryan. He forcefully penetrated the nation's consciousness with his brilliant insights into budgetary matters, and powerfully thrust himself into the debate over the role of government. Then he bravely, even heroicly, stood up to extremists in his own party who would refuse to compromise! So I salute you Paul Ryan for your muscular assertion of your principles; I stand before you in awe!

Next consider Sen. Patty Murray. She was very gracious during the negotiation process, and was highly receptive to overtures from her negotiating partner. She helped gestate some good approaches, gave birth to an important compromise, and really nursed the process along. She also performed a valuable service by managing the unruly children in her own party who would insist on a budget that would reflect the priorities that most of the country shares. Good job, Patty!

Hypocrisy!

The hypocrisy of some people is amazing! And both sides are guilty! How can conservatives justify their opposition to the nuclear deal with Iran when so many of them wouldn't want to live next to a nuclear plant themselves? And how can Democrats claim to be in favor of a woman's right to choose when they themselves consistently refuse to have abortions?

Link Bait

Sorry dear readers, but today I am too busy for regular posting. So instead, here's some link bait (I don't read the Huffington Post for nothing):

Sideboob!
Ugliest former child actors!
8 things you can do to make him cheat on his wife!
Eat healthy to beat cancer!
Twerk!
10 brothels that should be on YOUR bucket list!
Racist!
Celebrity fatty!
The 5 things you're doing with your penis that she hates!
Miley Cyrus!
Crazy cat antics!
Heartwarming dog video!
Underboob!

I Wish I Had Said That: Thomas Friedman Edition

Thomas Friedman-- today's column shows that you are a master of Bipartisan Sensibleness!

Democrats who protect teachers’ unions that block reforms to give teachers more ownership and accountability, and who refuse to address long-term entitlement spending that threatens to deprive us of funds to invest in the young, are harming our future. Republicans who block investments in things like early education and immigration reform — today we educate the world’s top talent in our colleges and then send them back to their home countries — are harming our future.

Propaer Atire

Shoud a tv achor wear t-shirst on a regulat basis? Do peeple say woah, cheque out those mussels hes so cool! Or do thye say, put on some cloths yuo stupid duche? Possibly ist the latter!

Shes a Starr

You know whose the funiest person? Barbara Starr! oNce she swiched our galsses and Iwent on the aiir waring her glasses! I couldnt' read the telepromter! aFter I jsut about pissed myself laffing! I liek her alot!

No Complaints!

When you have a life like mine, there's nothing to complain about!

S A TUR DAY NIGHT!

Saturday evening-- relaxation time! Tonight it's eggnog and the Bay City Rollers!

A Real Problem

It looks like Paul Krugman agrees with me! He too has noticed (two weeks after I pointed it out!) that declining healthcare costs are undermining the case for needed bipartisan sensible entitlement reforms! It's a real problem!

Fiscal Liberal isn't Even a Thing!

I've been catching up on old episodes of 30 Rock, mostly to catch the hilarious cameos of my friend Brian Williams (Brian-- pay no attention to what everyone is saying. I don't think your dignity and credibility is compromised at all by your amateurish clowning!) Anyway, my favorite non-Brian moment in the series is when Liz's old boyfriend, Dennis, describes his politics as "social conservative, fiscal liberal." That's hysterical, because it's supposed to be the other way around!

Dream Big!

You know what the world needs now? Not for some, but for everyone? Tax credits for research and development!

The Bipartisan Sensibleness of theThird Way

Yesterday, I began to outline a new sort of centrist politics that could be the salvation of America-- an approach that I'm calling Bipartisan Sensibleness! So I was delighted to see in this very morning's Wall Street Journal editorial page a call from Third Way's Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler for their own version of Bipartisan Sensibleness! I agree with all of the praise directed at this fantastic article from various segments of the blogosphere! I'll just add that they were really shoveling the Bipartisan Sensibleness, and not for the first time!

Bipartisan Sensibleness

Today I'm going to start a series of posts outlining the prospects for an incipient political movement! A movement that represents the best hope for this nation, but a movement that as yet is so underdeveloped that it doesn't have a name! Until now! I am dubbing this movement "Bipartisan Sensibleness." I hope it catches on!

While I have recently noted already some hopeful signs of Bipartisan Sensibleness in both parties, sadly there doesn't seem much hope for Bipartisan Sensibleness in Washington at the moment! The signs of hope that I have seen on the Republican side are in the states, and the signs of hope on the Democratic side are in lobbying firms! So I suppose that there is hope for Bipartisan Sensibleness in Washington if a Republican governor gets elected President or if K-street lobbying firms somehow manage to gain a foothold within the Democratic party! But neither of these things will happen until 2016, at least!

So how can we find a path towards Bipartisan Sensibleness here and now? Towards popular policies that are currently being blocked by special interests and partisanship? Bipartisan Sensible policies like:

• imposing painful sacrifices for beneficiaries of programs such as Social Security and Medicare, balanced by temporary token tax increases on the wealthy;
• enacting a compromise on health care reform, such as repealing only half of Obamacare;
• admitting that climate change is real, while agreeing not to do anything about it; 
• maintaining abortion rights for women, while extending them to men as well;
• increasing support for student loans, as the Democrats want, but targeting it towards shady for-profit institutions, as the Republicans want;
• striking a deal in which Republicans promise to suspend efforts to suppress voting by minorities and the poor, in exchange for a Democratic promise not to propose policies that would make minorities and the poor want to vote for them.

To build a stronger nation, we need to start with a shovel-full of Bipartisan Sensibleness! In the weeks and months to come, I will be outlining ways that we can start shoveling towards Bipartisan Sensibleness now!

In Defense of Krauthammer, and Journalism

Today non-entity "Jonathan Chait" (an obvious pseudonym) attacks our modern Edmund Burke (I refer of course, to the great Charles Krauthammer)]! "Chait" calls Krauthammer a "hack" because Krauthammer changed his position on the Senate filibuster between 2005 and today, being inconsistent with his own stated principles but being consistent in his support of the Republican position. I object! While it is an accepted practice to hold politicians to account for changes in their positions (this is known in the business as "the Russert"), it is a serious breach of practice to use this approach with fellow journalists! Therefore, I call out "Chait" for disgracefully violating the ethics of his profession! I apologize for the strong language, but I feel very passionate about journalistic ethics!

A David Brooks Study Guide

Here's the brilliant and eloquent David Brooks, talking about the problems with Obamacare on today's Meet the Press: 

I have to say, people are appraising whether this government can work. Can government be nimble? Can it learn from its mistakes? And I would say the website is just a small symptom that is not nimble. Government is like an offensive lineman. It can do something really well. It can do blocking. It can create order. But when you ask government to be a wide receiver, then you're asking two things it can't do. And I think we're in a situation like that. We're asking it to do things it can't do. Republicans win elections when Democrats overreach by asking government to do things it can't do.

What genius! I love this so much, that I encourage all of my fans to read it repeatedly! I have provided the following questions as a study guide to help you get all that you can out of this thoughtful statement about government!

1. Are offensive linemen nimble?
2. Should government be a wide receiver?
3. When you ask government to be a wide receiver, what are the two things that you're asking that it can't do? (hint: it isn't correct to say "be wide" and "be a receiver.")
4. Why does creating order require only "blocking" whereas creating a health care exchange requires "nimbleness."
5. What happens when Democrats try to get government to do things that help people (other than create order)?
6. Why should Democrats bother to win elections?