First GOP Prez debate .... or Jeopardy?

NO, it's not a choice between watching the two.

Rather, "Jeopardy" is what the debate or whatever looks like. I'm not sure the five together could beat Watson the computer of Jeopardy fame. Yet, Salon felt compelled to live-blog it.

Now ... if I were moderator ...

First, I'd ask Ron Paul about the racial elements in those newsletters that went out under his name as publisher, and Lew Rockwall as author, during his first stint in Congress. I'd then read some quotes from them and ask Herman Cain what he thought.

Second, I'd ask Cain why, since he can't even get as many white GOP votes as Alan Keyes, he's even running.

Third, I'd ask Gary Johnson if he thinks Paul is a real libertarian, since Paul is anti-choice on reproductive rights, is anti-family on gay marriage or civil union rights, is anti-freedom on marijuana legalization, etc.

Fourth, I'd ask Rick Santorum and Tim Pawlenty if they understood what the phrase "white bread" meant. If they said yes, I'd ask which of them was worse - or it was Herman Cain.

Fifth, if I saw a particularly loony Santorum response get crushed by any other candidate, I'd ask Santorum if he now understood that he'd just been "Santorumed."

That said, Santorum needs a new day gig; Fox just gave him the ax over his presidential run.

That would be the best reason yet for The Quitter with a Twitter to run - get her off the air.

Obama's birth certificate - the political angle and timing

President Obama has finally released his full, long-form birth certificate.

And, as the Guardian notes, as of the moment before the official release, 4 in 10 Republicans believe he was not born in the United States.

And, with that release, birtherism as looniness vs. allegedly serious GOP candidates, especially just a week after Arizona Gov. Jan. Brewer veteod her legislature's birther bill, becomes more stark. Brewer herself served up a poster quote to that end:

"I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for President of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their 'early baptismal or circumcision certificates' among other records to the Arizona Secretary of State," Brewer wrote in her veto letter. "This is a bridge too far."

Now, the 2012 GOP presidential campaign is slowly starting to gain traction. And, in current governance, Obama faces a GOP-lead House with significant tea party elements pushing to slash, slash, slash on the budget.

So, "a bridge too far" has been exposed to the light of day. GOP presidential candidates and House leadership alike are going to have to decide not only how strongly they want to personally repudiate birtherism, but how strong they want to repudiate it within their party as a whole.

That said, Obama gets a political kudo for the timing of this issue. He knocks Donald Trump down a peg (not that what passes for seriousness in a GOP "establishment" was taking him seriously), invites other GOP presidential candidates to play with birtherism at even greater general-election peril, and sets up "serious" GOP candidates for other offices to deal more directly with tea partiers and other true loons.

Besides Trump, this could most hurt Huckabee, given his recent comments about Obama, Kenya and anti-American anti-colonialsm. He's been quietly fence-straddling the birther issue for some time, and he's now going to have to put up or shut up. I'm waiting for the first interview of him forthcoming to squarely ask him this issue. Also hurt? Sarah Palin. Contra Salon magazine thinking Andrew Sullivan is a wingnut for asking for more information about Trig Palin's birth, her already-shredded credibility will fall even lower if she raises the birther issue more.

"Helped"? The serious but Obamacaring Romney and the serious but bland Pawlenty. And, if you're Obama, you know Romney doesn't "rally the base," and Pawlenty's attempts to do so have pandering fingerprints all over them.

Now, is birtherism going away? No, because a fair strain of it has been a smokescreen for racism, unthinking anti-Muslim feelings or some combination thereof.

Assuming Texas state Rep. Leo Berman is typical, we have clear evidence of how birtherism will shift its goalposts.

I just got off the phone with Texas GOP State Rep. Leo Berman, sponsor of his state's birther bill, and a vocal proponent of the idea that the President was not born in this country. Berman, who has explained previously that he gets much of his news via "YouTubes," was not aware of the White House's release when I called him up, but his initial reaction more or less set the tone: "I wonder why it took them almost two years to release that? That seems kind of strange."

I sent Berman the White House's statement and a copy of the certificate, and after a few minutes he called back ready to talk. "If this is the true birth certificate, I'm very happy to finally see it," he said. But today's news didn't answer his lingering doubts; if anything, it raised even more questions. Berman was comparing the White House release with another birth certificate he said was from Mombasa, Kenya. "There are two hospitals [in Honolulu] at the time and neither hospital will claim him," Berman said. "Today, if you have a hospital where the president was born they'd probably take the room where he was born and make a shrine out of it." Plus, the Kenyan certificate just seemed more compelling: "When I look at the one from Kenya, there is a British lord who is the clerk for registering all births in Kenya at that time." He added, "The one from Mombasa even has a footprint on it. Like a human footprint."

Note all the goalpost-shifting:
1. "If this is ... "
2. The reverse spinning of Obama hagiography
3. The "truthism" of the fake Kenyan certificate
4. An arguably racist (whether conscious or not) comment with "like a human footprint." Not "a human footprint," but "like" one.

Mojo is right on why this won't go away, too. Birtherism is just a smoke screen for even greater loonery. That said, Obama again gets the timing kudo.

Salon has a roundup of birther responses. A couple are fully accepting, others are splitting hairs and yet others are like Leo Berman. Those in Berman's league or beyond already had the next steps in their conspiracy thinking ready and have now unleashed them.

So, Huckabee will have to decide whether he wants to raise the Kenya issue any more.

John Boehner and Eric Cantor will have to decide how forceful they want to be when any of their caucus still spot birtherism - or when Obama's minions or other Democrats link birtherism to other tea party nonsense.

Per another story on the release and Obama's news conference.:

"We're not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers," Obama told reporters. "We're not going to be able to do it if we just make stuff up, and pretend that facts are not facts."

And now, GOP leadership had to decide how much or how little slack to cut "carnival barkers" in its own ranks.

Well done, Mr. President, on the "timing."

Interestingly, wingnut blogger Hot Air agrees with me on the political timing issue.

More evidence that this is part of a plan? AlterNet notes that Obama seems to really want to campaign against Ayn Rand luster Paul Ryan. Now, Ryan hasn't come out as a birther, but, beyond his scorched-earth budget, he's played enough footsie with tea partiers that it's clear this is part of strategy.

Joan Walsh seems to speak for many when she talks about letting bullies win, but, you're wrong on this one, Joan.

That all said, per this history professor (and many others, including me), will Obama nonetheless find a way to blow this big gain in political capital? Or, more to the point, will he not blow it, as a campaign move, but yet not get serious with real liberal answers to the needs of everyday Americans?

George Will basts 4-5 on 2012 GOP field

George Will is spot-on when he says Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich probably can't gain enough public trust to run a lemonade stand, let alone the White House.

As for five five relatively sensible GOP candidates? I agree on Mitch Daniels, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman. But, after numerous gaffes already by the Mouth of Mississippi, if Will thinks Haley Barbour is a viable candidate, his picker's still a bit broken.

The crystal ball for top Republicans says …

Just as Hillary Clinton’s Democratic primary campaign failure can be reduced to one event – deciding to campaign in Iowa – so McCain’s failure in the general election can largely be reduced to one event.

In this case, Sarah Palin was McCain’s Achilles heel.

And, it’s not just me; 59 percent of Americans, which has to include at least a few Republicans, find her a drag on the ticket.

I don’t think he ever totally got over the petulance he had at being told by Karl Rove that he couldn’t pick Joe Lieberman as his Veep. (And, some “maverick,” eh? If he really were a maverick, he would have told Rove and Steve Schmidt where to get off.)

Another turning point? McCain’s “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” line. But, I think he could have done more to overcome that without the Palin baggage.

That said, what’s ahead for McCain?

He’s a 72-year-old senator whose one signature piece of legislation was passed in the face of massive opposition from senators in his own party. And, for the next two years, he’ll be in a Senate with shrunken GOP membership and, on many issues, an inability to filibuster. On other issues, Harry Reid, assuming he stays as majority leader, is likely to call Republican filibuster bluffs.

If you thought McCain was in danger of melting down during this year’s election, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

He’s up for re-election in 2010, and there’s already plenty of speculation popular Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, who has shown she can stand up to the GOP, will run for his seat.

I actually hope he doesn’t retire in 2010; I’d like to see him get another beatdown.

Meanwhile, here’s what happens to some other top Republicans.

Sarah Palin? Well, her future has taken yet another twist in the last week or so, with Ted Stevens’ conviction followed by his re-election. Assuming his appeals fail and he finally gets the boot from the Senate, she has to be eyeing his seat.

If not? I expect she’ll face both a primary challenge and a three-way general election race for governor in 2010. That’s unless she decides to run for Lisa Murkowski’s Senate seat, in which case she’ll have her head handed back to her in a hat. She may try to run for president in 2012, in which case she’d better have a hat ready for her head again. After that, the Peter principle kicks in and she goes to Fox News.

Meanwhile, Newsweek delivers more of the goods on the horribleness of Campaign Barbie, from the Secret Service seeing her incitements raise the threat level against Obama to just what a clothes horse she really is.

Somehow, I don’t think her and First Dumbass Todd being seen as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast” helps her image unless Alaskans are even more down with political corruption and cynicism than say, Louisiana voters.

Mitt Romney? He’d like to bid to be the “kinder, gentler” Religious Right-focused candidate. But, especially if GOP bloodletting after this convention pushes the part further right, there’s no chance of that. Beyond general reasons, his Mormonism will remain unacceptable to many. On the flip side, the way Mormon money pushed Prop. 8 over the top, he has to be looking at 2012.

Mike Huckabee? He could be the Religious Right front-runner, but I won’t say “should be”; he’ll have to keep himself in the public eye enough in the next four years.

Tim Pawlenty? If re-elected in 2010, he could be the “sensible conservative” alternative. Obama’s victory aside, governors still have many advantages over senators in running for the presidency. (Don’t forget that before Obama, the last Senator-cum-President, Jack Kennedy, had been in the Senate less than a decade.)

Mitch Daniels, re-elected in Indiana, is a possible up-and-comer. He raised taxes there despite protests from Grover Norquist and his ilk.

Rudy Giuliani? He’ll continue to get rich off 9/11 legends of his involvement. At the same time, he misses the game. I think he has to be tempted to run against Patterson for gov in 2010, but only if he has a pretty clear GOP field. With Mike Bloomberg apparently wanting another term as mayor of the Big Apple, one potential opponent is out of the way.

Mike Bloomberg? He’ll be the Hamlet of Gracie Mansion on another third-party bid.

Arnold Schwarzenegger? I’m really not sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t run for re-election. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did and lost. Or won. Or ran for the Senate in 2010 against Dianne Feinstein. She’s going to be 75-plus, and I don’t doubt age will be an issue. That all said, his “No on 8” stance has probably ended what remains of his love affair with the California GOP. I think he could win a primary for the Senate as easily as he could for his current spot, if not more so.

Charlie Crist? If the GOP bloodletting turns out not to make the party into a Constitution Religious Right party writ large, Crist has to be considered a front-runner for the nomination. His dignified, quiet distancing of himself from McCain’s more nutbar attacks on Obama, ACORN, etc., stand him in good stead.

The Republican Party? McCain’s loss will probably be interpreted through the lens of Prop. 8 success in California. That said, a pro-life issue in Colorado lost, so Religious Righters could push the GOP into further trouble if they insist their view is the correct one.

Meanwhile, let the infighting begin.

Outgoing National Republican Senatorial Conference Chairman John Ensign says the GOP needs a bigger social tent, while Grover Norquist and Tony Perkins are gathering a meeting of ’wingers tomorrow.


I think the choice to head the RNC in the future will be a “tell.”

LATER – some leading Democrats.

Post does Veep prognostication – and fails (updated)

Chris Cillizza and Shailagh Murray take their guesstimate shots at who Barack Obama and John McCain will name as vice presidential nominees.

The duo stumbles from the start by claiming polls show Schmuck Talk Express™ doing better against Obama than against Clinton, so much better than he wouldn’t need to consider Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, whom they rank only No. 4 among the top five.

The two ignore, or are unaware of, the fact that in Florida, Democrats now outnumber Republicans among registered Hispanic voters. (The story’s worth a read in and of itself, as Florida Congressional races will also be affected, including the possibility of toppling some Cuban-American Republicans.)

And, since Florida has more electoral votes than either Tim Pawlenty’s Minnesota or Rob Portman’s Ohio, Crist has to be considered No.1.

Of course, this bungling on analyzing McCain’s potential choice, and needs, is nothing compared to Cillizza’s and Murray’s bungling on the Democratic side.

In a nutshell, no way in hell Hillary Clinton is running with Obama. She would be 69 after two Obama terms, and yes, age bias is greater against women than men. Second, the way she’s running out the string would almost indicate she hopes Obama loses the general, so she can bring back the “electability” argument in 2012.

As for other choices? Sam Nunn’s a retread and probably wouldn’t help that much with Southern white voters.

That said, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland would help indeed with Midwestern white voters.

And, why was Big Bill Richardson not even on the list? He brings in the Hispanic vote, Western states vote (especially with Libertarian Bob Barr in the race, much of the West will be in play), and offers foreign policy gravitas.

That said, the Post writers do get it right on Obama’s best option, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. Putting a woman, a governor and the leader of a more conservative Midwestern state on the ticket covers a lot of bases. I said this months ago.

To cover Hispanics and the West, Obama could make an advance announcement that Richardson will be his Secretary of State-designee, then.