200 Songs You Might Find On My Ipod Shuffle

[Ed. 6/9/12] I modified the post title from 'Shuttle' to 'Shuffle'. I thought the first generation device (in the shape of a pack of gum) was called the Shuttle; I'm not alone, e.g., "Perhaps I'm just misremembering the name but I was pretty sure that the gadget I have was called a SHUTTLE when I got it about three years ago. But perhaps it's always been called a Shuffle and I'm muddling up the name. Or maybe it was called a Shuttle originally and has now evolved into a Shuffle." Here's a web tutorial making use of the same name. It seems to be a common misspelling (perhaps the font used on original packaging?)

See here for a ranking of my current top 10 and 20 favorites.

1. Beatles - "Yesterday"
2. Beatles - "Something"
3. Carpenters - "Close to You"
4. Simon & Garfunkel - "Bridge Over Troubled Water"
5. Elvis Presley - "If I Can Dream"
6. BeeGees - "Run to Me"
7. Bruce Springsteen - "Candy's Room"
8. Elton John - "The One"
9. Led Zeppelin - "All My Love"
10. Beatles - "Help"
11. John Denver - "Annie's Song"
12. Rolling Stones - "Angie"
13. Barry Manilow - "Could It Be Magic"
14. Peter Gabriel - "In Your Eyes"
15. Joe Cocker - "When the Night Comes"
16. Bryan Adams - "Heaven"
17. Diana Ross/Lionel Richie - "Endless Love"
18. Debby Boone - "You Light Up My Life"
19. John Denver/Placido Domingo - "Perhaps Love"
20. Andrea Bocelli/Celine Dion - "The Prayer"
21. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers - "Woman in Love (It's Not Me)"
22. Journey - "When You Love a Woman"
23. Linda Ronstadt - "Dreams to Dream"
24. Josh Groban - "Alla Luce del Sole"
25. Donna Lewis/Richard Marx - "At the Beginning"
26. Jim Brickman featuring Collin Raye - "The Gift"
27. Foreigner - "I Want to Know What Love Is"
28. BeeGees - "Tragedy"
29. Boston - "More than a Feeling"
30. Moody Blues - "Your Wildest Dreams"
31. Aerosmith - "Angel"
32. Amy Grant - "El Shaddai"
33. Whitney Houston - "Only Man I Need"
34. Bread - "If"
35. Supremes - "Reflections"
36. Ike and Tina Turner - "River Deep, Mountain High"
37. Neil Sedaka - "The Immigrant"
38. Foreigner - "Feels Like the First Time"
39. Abba - "S.O.S."
40. Electric Light Orchestra - "Do Ya?"
41. Dave Mason - "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?"
42. George Michael - "Father Figure"
43. Neil Diamond - "America"
44. Barry Manilow - "Mandy"
45. Hollies - "He Ain't Heavy--He's My Brother"
46. Neil Diamond - "Holly Holy"
47. Patti Smith - "Because the Night"
48. Alan Jackson - "Where Were You (When the World Stopped Turning)?"
49. Lonestar - "Amazed"
50. Elton John - "Blessed"
51. Kenny Rogers - "Lady"
52. Mary Chapin Carpenter - "Grow Old Along With Me"
53. The Bangles - "Eternal Flame"
54. Chicago - "Old Days"
55. Cheap Trick - "The Flame"
56. Art Garfunkel - "All I Know"
57. Roy Orbison - "You Got It"
58. Beatles - "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"
59. Rolling Stones - "She's a Rainbow"
60. Boston - "Don't Look Back"
61. Paul Anka - "Hold Me Til the Morning Comes"
62. Bread - "Everything I Own"
63. Neil Diamond - "Pretty Amazing Grace"
64. Beatles - "Here, There and Everywhere"
65. BBMak - "Ghost of You and Me"
66. Chicago - "Love Me Tomorrow"
67. Dan Fogelberg - "Rhythm of the Falling Rain"
68. Heart - "Alone"
69. Simon & Garfunkel - "My Little Town"
70. Alabama/Lionel Richie - "Deep River Woman"
71. Beach Boys - "Good Vibrations"
72. Don Henley - "The Boys of Summer"
73. Patti LaBelle - "If You Asked Me To"
74. Steve Perry - "Oh, Sherrie"
75. Diana Ross - "Do You Know (Theme from Mahogany)"
76. Mick Jagger - "God Gave Me Everything I Want"
77. Jim Croce - "I Got a Name"
78. Lee Ann Womack - "I Hope You Dance"
79. Barry Manilow - "The Old Songs"
80. Bread - "Lost Without Your Love"
81. Carpenters - "Bless the Beasts and the Children"
82. Styx - "Lady"
83. Beatles - "A Hard Day's Night"
84. Faith Hill - "Where Are You Christmas?"
85. Celine Dion - "It's All Coming Back to Me"
86. Peter Frampton - "Signed, Sealed, Delivered"
87. Four Tops - "Indestructible"
88. Richard Harris - "MacArthur Park"
89. Moody Blues - "I Know You're Out There Somewhere"
90. Bobby Darin - "If I Were a Carpenter"
91. Rolling Stones - "Paint It Black"
92. Paul McCartney & Wings - "Maybe I'm Amazed"
93. Natalie Cole - "Unforgettable"
94. Survivor - "The Search is Over"
95. Savage Garden - "Truly, Madly, Deeply"
96. Lee Greenwood - "God Bless the USA"
97. Dan Fogelberg - "Same Auld Lang Syne"
98. Cat Stevens - "Morning Has Broken"
99. Air Supply - "Two Less Lonely People in the World"
100. Elvis Presley - "In the Ghetto"
101. Pat Benatar - "Hell Is For Children"
102. Roy Orbison - "Oh, Pretty Woman"
103. Jackson Browne - "Somebody's Baby"
104. Four Tops - "Baby I Need Your Loving"
105. Jim Brickman featuring Michael W. Smith  - "Love of My Life"
106. Mac Davis - "Whoever Finds This, I Love You"
107. Anne Murray/Dave Loggins - "Nobody Loves Me Like You Do"
108. Commodores - "Sail On"
109. Looking Glass - "Brandy"
110. Celine Dion - "To Love You More"
111. Mariah Carey/Whitney Houston  - "When You Believe"
112. Mark Schultz - "He's My Son"
113. Hollies - "Stop in the Name of Love"
114. Whitney Houston & Jermaine Jackson - "If You Say My Eyes Are Beautiful"
115. Johnny Cash - "Sunday Morning Coming Down"
116. Kenny Loggins - "Conviction of the Heart"
117. John Stewart - "Midnight Wind"
118. LeAnn Rimes - "I Need You"
119. Eagles - "Desperado"
120. Bruce Springsteen - "Born to Run"
121. Glen Campbell - "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress"
122. Peter Cetera - "Glory of Love"
123. Maureen McGovern - "The Morning After"
124. Art Garfunkel - "I Only Have Eyes for You"
125. Herb Alpert & the Tijuana Brass - "This Guy's in Love With You"
126. Meat Loaf - "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad"
127. Dan Fogelberg - "Longer"
128. Kenny Rogers/Wynonna Judd - "Mary, Did You Know?"
129. Neil Diamond - "Solitary Man"
130. Little River Band - "Cool Change"
131. Abba - "Knowing Me, Knowing You"
132. Boxtops - "The Letter"
133. B.J. Thomas - "Whatever Happened to Old-Fashioned Love"
134. Diana Ross - "Ain't No Mountain High Enough"
135. Lionel Richie - "Running with the Night"
136. Alabama - "Feels So Right"
137. Olivia Newton-John - "Have You Ever Been Mellow?"
138. Petula Clark - "Downtown"
139. Joan Osborne - "One of Us"
140. Robert John - "Lonely Eyes"
141. Abba - "Momma Mia"
142. Andy Kim - "Rock Me Gently"
143. Aerosmith - "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing"
144. Rick Springfield - "Jessie's Girl"
145. John Parr - "St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)"
146. Faith Hill - "There You'll Be"
147. Eric Clapton (original rock version) - "Layla" 
148. Madonna - "Like a Prayer"
149. Bonnie Tyler - "Total Eclipse of the Heart"
150. Carpenters - "Superstar"
151. Kiss - "I Was Made for Loving You"
152. Dave Loggins - "Please Come to Boston"
153. Journey - "Don't Stop Believing"
154. Cat Stevens - "Remember the Days of the Old Schoolyard"
155. Alan Parsons Project - "Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether"
156. The Babys - "Everytime I Think of You"
157. Meatloaf - "I'd Do Anything For You (But I Won't Do That)"
158. Peter Cetera - "One Good Woman"
159. Newsong - "Christmas Shoes"
160. Eric Clapton - "My Father's Eyes"
161. Procol Harum - "Conquistador"
162. Kim Carnes - "Bette Davis Eyes"
163. Glen Campbell - "Galveston"
164. B.J. Thomas - "Don't Worry Baby"
165. Frankie Valli - "My Eyes Adored You"
166. Bruce Springsteen (Jerry McGuire mix) - "Secret Garden"
167. Bing Crosby/David Bowie - "Little Drummer Boy/Peace on Earth"
168. Elton John - "The Last Song"
169. Carpenters - "Goodbye to Love"
170. Foreigner - "Waiting for a Girl Like You"
171. Bette Midler - "Wind Beneath My Wings"
172. Cyndi Lauper - "True Colors"
173. Remy Zero - "Save Me"
174. Beach Boys - "God Only Knows"
175. Joshua Kadison - "Jessie"
176. David Cassidy/Partridge Family - "I Think I Love You"
177. Peter Frampton - "I'm In You"
178. Abba - "The Winner Takes It All"
179. Dolly Parton/Kenny Rodgers - "Once Upon a Christmas"
180. Supremes - "I Hear a Symphony"
181. Bob Carlisle - "Butterfly Kisses"
182. Neil Diamond - "Brooklyn Roads"
183. Madonna - "Frozen"
184. America - "I Need You"
185. Elton John - "Believe"
186. Theme from "Beauty and the Beast" - Episode Intro / "The First Time I Loved Forever"
187. Willie Nelson/Sinead O'Connor - "Don't Give Up"
188. Rick Astley - "Cry for Help"
189. Joe Cocker  - "You Are So Beautiful"
190. Eddie Money - "Take Me Home Tonight"
191. Michael Jackson - "Man in the Mirror"
192. Charlene - "I've Never Been to Me"
193. Four Tops - "Reach Out I'll Be There"
194. Seals & Crofts - "The First Years" (Theme from "Paper Chase")
195. Paul Anka - "Having My Baby"
196. Harry Chapin - "Cat's in the Cradle"
197. Journey - "Faithfully"
198. Don Williams - "I Believe in You"
199. Neil Sedaka - "Laughter in the Rain"
200. Kenny Loggins - "For the First Time"

Lessons From the McCain Defeat

In my last post, I was sorely tempted to list the McCain campaign as an honorable mention for the Blago award. I'm not going to write another post on the reasons he lost, but there were puzzling choices made.

We were frequently reminded, by the campaign of the fact that John McCain is a former POW and a hero. This is a fairly risky thing to do. A hero lets his or her deeds speak for themselves. Second, it's not such a great idea to show 40-year-old film clips (black and white ones, at that) when competing against a man 25 years younger for a job that is taxing, physically and psychologically. A typical response might be: "What have you done for me lately? Why do you have to go back 40 years to find something positive to say about McCain?" 

McCain also smirked in comparing his experience and judgment to Obama's.The problem is that the public had two basic types of input on which to directly compare the two: their reaction to the financial tsunami and the debates. McCain unilaterally suspended his campaign, did not really distinguish his position from Obama's, and came to the debate empty-handed for all his efforts. In essence, this largely neutralized the experience argument. Obama seemed to be cool and disciplined under the circumstances and came to the debates well-prepared, held his own and looked the part--Presidential. On the other hand, McCain looked impulsive and weak as a leader: the Senate Democrats said they already had an agreement without him, he didn't articulate a strong position at the White House meeting, and he really didn't have a plan to mediate the differences between the House Republicans and the Senate majority.

McCain also came to the debates perhaps overconfident and underprepared, given the fact as he repeatedly pointed out, Obama was ducking him in joint townhall appearances. He didn't seem familiar with some of Obama's more nuanced positions (e.g., capital gains tax for small businesses); he was far too predictable (any major league slugger is going to own the pitcher if he knows what and where the next pitch will be). For example, McCain went on a predictable rant on earmarks, and Obama quickly slammed back that the total amount of earmarks was a very tiny percentage of the federal budget. When McCain raised, as widely expected, the Bill Ayers question, Obama quickly dismissed his contact to a handful of joint appearances with other people, hardly Palin's charge of "palling around with terrorists". McCain was left with Hillary Clinton's prior argument that Obama needed to disclose everything about the relationship. Obama's responses were entirely predictable, but McCain appeared befuddled. In fact, if you watch the debates, Obama frequently flashes a grin at McCain's rhetoric, as if McCain was following a script prepared by Obama's debate team.

The bottom line is that Obama only needed to play for a tie, to look calm, cool and collected ("Presidential") and look like he was a plausible alternative to McCain; McCain lacked Obama's resources, he was too tightly linked to a highly unpopular Bush's positions on taxes, Iraq, and other policies, and economic downturns often favor the candidate in the party out of power (e.g., 1932, 1980, 1992, and 2000). 

In probably one of the weirdest swerves I've ever seen in politics, when McCain famously retorted if Obama wanted to run against Bush, he should have run for the White House in 2004, the Obama campaign, not the flatfooted McCain campaign, seized the initiative by rushing a "yes, but" commercial.

Having wrapped up the nomination early, McCain ran a quixotic campaign, initially promising to run a battle across all 50 states, returning to Iraq, conceding no voting group, not even minorities. He ran more Ayers ads than health care ads during the final weeks of the campaign, although Obama was mischaracterizing McCain's health care plan and health care was among the top 2 or 3 issues affecting voters. Initially there was no response to heavy Obama spending in battleground states like Florida, where McCain once held a two-digit lead. Yet even when the selection of Palin seemed to fire up the conservative base, and despite Obama's recanting his earlier promise to accept public financing of the general campaign, McCain was willing to keep his word and settle for public financing, knowing that this provided Obama with the advantage from the outset. Nobody would have blamed for McCain for backing off his public financing commitment given Obama's politically expedient breach of his own promise. Granted, McCain was no match for the Obama fund raising machine. But Obama's superior fundraising and organization not only kept McCain from launching a counterattack in the blue states, but could run McCain ragged playing defense simply by announcing ad buys, for example, in McCain's own home state.

Here are some of the lessons I see coming from the 2008 Presidential election:

• The choice of Vice President matters. I realize that Sarah Palin has a hardcore group of followers among certain Republican groups, including a new anti-Obama sticker saying, "Don't blame me--I voted for Palin." I have written several critical posts against Sarah Palin, and I won't repeat those arguments here. I simply note this: When a 72-year-old Presidential candidate chooses a Vice President, and he has been running a campaign based on his experience advantage over Obama, it is not smart to pick a 2-year governor, never mind one under suspicion for abusing her power to fire a public official over personal reasons. Her media interviews were a public relations disaster, made her a laughing stock on late-night shows and SNL and put John McCain's own decisionmaking process into question. In addition, Sarah Palin was chosen at a time people were still smarting over $4/gallon gasoline, but when the financial tsunami hit, she brought nothing to the table. Romney is well-vetted, has extensive business experience, is highly articulate, and has a strong following among media conservatives. Now, we don't know what's going to happen over the next 3 years, but Romney would have to be regarded as the frontrunner. However, he needs to develop a more positive campaign message than he did in 2008. If he maintains his conservative social views, they will be seen as less politically expedient.
• In a change election, bring fresh ideas to the table. To a large extent, John McCain was selling himself to the American people: his judgment on Iraq, his 26 years in Washington and expertise on military and defense policy, his bipartisan record, and his reform credentials. However, 26 years in the federal legislature can be seen as more of a problem than a benefit in a change election, because it reinforces the view you are part of the status quo, the problem. To a certain point, the maverick image helps, but it also tends to detract from being a leader at the table with the Dems and saying he can deliver the GOP vote. True, McCain could show a number of differences with Bush, but during the election he was still pushing a lot of the same ideas promoted by Bush: stay the course in Iraq, Bush's tax cuts made permanent, private accounts for social security, extending tax benefits for health insurance for all Americans, etc. One way was to focus on fiscal conservatism and of using the veto more than Bush did. However, McCain could have focused on other ideas as well, e.g., getting out of the business of nation building (after the Iraqi debacle) and scaling back our extensive international commitments (which we can scarcely afford given huge twin deficits); a growing risk to our economy in terms of structural dependencies on foreign suppliers, China owning a disproportionate amount of American debt, foreign-developed energy supplies, etc., meaning finding a way to make American manufacturing and resource development vs. offshoring financially attractive; updating our laws to accommodate the legal and ethical dilemmas associated with new technologies, including advances in cloning, and new, unregulated financial products and services; noting that medical bills are the leading reason for household bankruptcies and focusing more on spreading the risk of catastrophic expenses; etc. John McCain seemed more intent on demonstrating the risks of Obama's approach than "more of the same".
• Provide a more positive view of conservatism. Some people are afraid of seeing their doctors or dentists for fearing of hearing bad news; similarly, voters are often put off by a negative-sounding politician or campaign. Ronald Reagan's optimistic conservatism, i.e., "it's morning in America...", and good humor reached the mainstream more than Barry Goldwater's dogmatic approach. Towards the end of the campaign in particular, we saw more of an anti-Obama focus (with his worrisome associates), than a pro-conservative standpoint. McCain should have focused like a laser beam on maximizing growth by opening new markets (free trade), providing less of an uncompetitive tax burden on business to grow domestically, etc. It is true McCain promoted his business tax plan, but part of the problem was that he didn't contrast investing inbusinesses to grow job demand vs. Obama's counterproductive approach of punishing successful businesses (e.g., windfall profits taxes) or those pruning unprofitable operations.
• Do not cede a structural advantage to your opponents. I mentioned the fact that McCain stuck to public financing, which left Obama a free hand to raise money for heavily outspending McCain in battleground states and for paid workers, as well as volunteers, to get out the vote. McCain repeated Hillary Clinton's mistake of not building up a competitive organization across the states, even though he had several months of a head start on Obama. I do not think the McCain camp wanted this by design; Obama simply tapped into the imagination of idealist youth and others in a way Hillary Clinton and McCain couldn't. In large part, that's because Obama did not have a substantive track record of votes to defend on national issues. But the Obama campaign strategically beat the McCain across the board, not just in manpower and voter registration, but in information technology as well.  If the McCain campaign had a strategy to meet the Obama challenge, it wasn't obvious. Other than a futile attempt to wrestle Pennsylvania from Obama, for the most part the McCain campaign was on the defensive, with the Obama campaign seemingly launching attacks at will, even within red states, leaving McCain only very limited and improbable paths to victory.
• Do not let key attacks or positions go unanswered. Well, the McCain campaign did have a "rapid response" team. I'm referring to things like Obama's harping on the fact that his tax plan left the vast majority of voters better off in terms of tax burden/benefits; McCain really never responded to the 95% charge or even pointed out that a large percentage of Obama's 95% in fact didn't pay federal income tax at all. It wasn't until the sheer coincidence of Obama meeting an Ohio plumber intending to take an ownership interest in a plumbing company that Obama made an unforced error, talking about how good it is to spread the wealth around. The fact was that any due diligence in analyzing Obama's long-hyped tax plan would have made the point far before Joe the Plumber served up the issue to the McCain campaign on a silver platter.  I've also noted how the McCain campaign all but ignored the health insurance issue, even when the Obama campaign falsely claimed that many (if not most) current employees holding health insurance through their jobs would find themselves paying more taxes under the McCain program. 

And the Blago goes to...

Well, it's not Oscar season, and I seriously doubt the film industry is anxiously waiting for the opinions of someone whose idea of a night at the movies is the latest mailing from Netflix. I've decided to invent the Ronalds; a Ronald award, plus $4, will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. The Ronald awards are not determined by when a movie is released, but when I watch it; it is based purely on the judgment of someone without ties to the entertainment field.

The 2008 "Best Picture" Ronald goes to "The Bucket List", a 2007 Rob Reiner film starring Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman. Nicholson plays Edward Cole, a wealthy hospital-acquiring magnate, whom imposes a number of cost-saving measures, such as two patients per room, no exceptions. Morgan Freeman is Carter Chambers, a Trivial Pursuit genius and auto mechanic. Chambers becomes a cancer patient and ends up in one of Cole's hospitals.  Cole, a healthy gentleman all his life, coughs up blood at a board meeting and ends up sharing Chamber's room, also diagnosed with terminal cancer.

Cole, a womanizing atheist, and Chambers, a married man of deep faith, make an unlikely pair. Chambers' obsession with details leads to the creation of a "bucket list", i.e., a list of unique challenges to do before "kicking the bucket". Cole is intrigued and starts adding items of his own, e.g., skydiving. Cole offers to bankroll both of them completing the list together. Mrs. Chambers hates Cole, accusing him as wasting away her husband's remaining moments on a wild goose chase instead of being home with his family.

The movie has powerful moments which are deftly directed by Rob Reiner. My favorite moments: Chambers' reaction when a beautiful young woman, sharing his interests, offers to spend the night with him; the eulogy delivered by the survivor at the funeral of the first man to die; and (my favorite) what motivates Cole to scratch out the bucket item "kiss the most beautiful girl in the world" (sic). [But fair warning: my heart melted when Julie Roberts in Notting Hill pleads to Hugh Grant, "I'm just a girl loving a boy asking him to love me." Or when Renee Zellweger exuberantly declares her love for Jerry McGuire (Tom Cruise) as (unknown to Zellweger) a stunned Cruise listens in disbelief. And whoever created the Jerry McGuire mix of Bruce Springsteen's "Secret Garden" with the movie's signature quotes is sheer genius.]

The "holiday" Ronald goes to "Joyeux Noel", a 2005 foreign film about the famous 1914 Christmas Eve truce in World War I, when particpants in trench warfare for a few hours fraternized with the opposing side and what happens to the soldiers. War is tragic, and sometimes courage is defined by taking the initiative to make peace, even in a small way, not knowing if the other side will reciprocate or how one's own supervisors will respond to something that just isn't done. This is one of the few movies I've rented, watched once and knew I needed to buy a copy.

The Blagos

I had to initiate a new type of award: the political counterpart to Hollywood's Razzies. I've decided to call them the Blagos after our favorite corruption-tainted Illinois politician. So many in Hollywood are already eligible for Hall of Fame membership based on their existing works of propaganda: Michael Moore,  Al Gore, Oliver Stone, etc.

My award this year goes to Ronnie Howard, sitcom actor and movie director whom produced a spot capitalizing on his involvement with the Andy Griffith Show and Happy Days. Apparently Ronnie Howard drank too much of the Koolaid while acting in the series, and this shows in the series' shameless promotion of Obama:

ANDY GRIFFITH, ACTOR: Hey, Ope. You look like you got something on your mind, son.

HOWARD: Pa, why are people so set on staying on the same road that's been messing us up for so long?

GRIFFITH: Well, Ope, people are funny. Sometimes, change scares them, and they would rather keep doing the same old thing that's been messing them up than change to the thing that can help them.

HOWARD: Oh, gee, Fonz, I sure hope our country gets itself back on track.

HENRY WINKLER, ACTOR: You know, I will tell you something. Eight years ago, I thought to myself, OK, we have got these president of the United States, Cheney, Bush, we should give them a shot. Was I wr-I was so wr...

HOWARD: You were wrong, Fonz?

WINKLER: OK. That's the word.

Miscellany: 12/15/08

Will McCain Support Palin in 2008?

McCain made clear on ABC-TV's This Week that Sarah Palin could not count on his support for the 2012 Republican nomination. Many social and media conservatives, who never were sold on McCain because of his maverick stands on various issues, were delighted with the Palin pick and made it clear she was their favorite. Furious at what they regard the unchivalrous treatment of Palin by McCain campaign staffers, particularly the unflattering post-election leaks. they have made McCain the target of their contempt, knowing any critical McCain comments regarding Palin would be a double-edged sword, putting his own judgment into question for picking her.

I've already discussed my judgment of Palin elsewhere, and I really think it was Palin's anti-corruption, reformist, bipartisan credentials, not her gender or baby Trig, that sold McCain on Palin. In my own posts, I considered gender to be a relevant factor, but I was looking at more experienced women like Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson.  But just as Dan Quayle wasn't the second most qualified person to be President after George H.W. Bush, and Clarence Thomas wasn't the most brilliant and experienced jurist available for the Supreme Court opening during the first Bush term, Sarah Palin, with no federal, foreign policy, or military experience, little grasp of the issues underlying the financial tsunami, and just 2 years of governing one of the least-populated states, is a hard sell as a legitimate Presidential contender on her own merits and would be unable to hold her own against a highly articulate Mitt Romney or Bobby Jindal. And even if she decided to pursue the dubious privilege of taking on an incumbent Harvard-trained Barack Obama, her primary opponents would almost certainly bring up the embarrassing Wasilla earmarks, Palin's deliberate mischaracterization of her  involvement with the Gravina Island bridge (the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere"), and her embarrassing interview clips summarized in earlier posts.

McCain, by pointing out a stable of highly-capable GOP governors, was essentially damning Palin with faint praise, although he acknowledged her positive contributions as a running mate. But he was aware that she had a net unfavorable rating and cost him a number of independent and moderate voters (like Republican Colin Powell). Many of these votes were initially positive towards Palin, but she lost them with her performances.  I'm not saying Palin cost McCain the election; I think the financial tsunami and Obama's financial ability to outspend McCain in each battleground state had more to do with the outcome. (I have a special post outlining a number of factors contributing to McCain's loss.)

Mexican Playboy Robed Maria

A currently licensed version of Playboy in Mexico shows model Maria Florencia Onori, nude but covered with a white robe except for a partial glimpse of her left breast. Published days before the Immaculate Conception holy day of obligation for Catholics and days later by the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the robe, the model's name and the phrase "Te adoramus, Maria", the magazine was intentionally provocative, and Playboy issued a gratuitous apology, claiming no intent to evoke the memory of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, saying they were sorry if any Christian was offended. As a Catholic, I reject the "apology"; this was a deliberate attempt to sell a men's magazine by creating a controversy.

 

RNC Raising Obama-Blagojevich Questions

US Attorney Fitzgerald made it clear that has been no evidence to date that disgraced Illinois Democratic Governor Blagojevich found any willingness of the Obama team to cut a deal over Obama's former Senate seat. The RNC should avoid any appearance it's trying to politically exploit the charges against the governor. Democrats, never mind Republicans, were looking for ways to get rid of Blagojevich months before the governor's arrest last week.

Obama New Cabinet Picks

Obama continues his eclectic combination of choices for his upcoming cabinet and administration, including another senator (Ken Salazar, D-CO) as Secretary of the Interior, a government Nobel-winning scientist, Steven Chu, as Secretary of Energy, and Carol Browner, another Clinton administration retread (former EPA chief), as energy czar. I'm not sure how running a national lab translates to the political nature of running a cabinet level post, but Chu, well-known in the field of alternative energy, seems, at least on the surface, to shake things up a bit. I'm not happy that the Obama team is underplaying the need for offshore oil exploration, is raising unrealistic expectations for the rapid implementation of solar energy and alternative fuels and is ignoring the need to ramp up nuclear power plants as part of our power mix.

SNL's Bad Taste of Humor

Fred Armisen's mockery of NY Democratic Governor Paterson's blindness established a new benchmark of bad taste. This is different than, say, Chevy Chase's bumbling portrayal of President Gerald Ford, whom among other things did have a reputation for stumbling and doing things like eating a tamale with its corn husk still attached. I am unaware of the governor being known for doing the types of things portrayed in the skit. This is hardly a First Amendment issue. I can hear people swear on the street every day; I don't need to pay money for some journeyman comedian to "shock" me with bad language. Even if the First Amendment permits you the right to act as if you were an obnoxious  fourth-grader doesn't mean you should. I suspect Governor Paterson and I disagree on a number of political issues, but I'm very appreciative of his ability to reestablish the honor of the office after the disgraceful actions of former Governor Spitzer and for his living proof and example of how people overcome physical disabilities and contribute to the well-being of society.

Blagojevich: Why Did It Take Others So Long?

I never had doubts about Rod Blagojevich. In 2002 I voted for Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan over Congressman Blagojevich in the Illinois gubernatorial election. But there's no doubt Jim Ryan was hurt by being the GOP candidate in the aftermath of the emerging corruption scandal involving outgoing Governor George Ryan (not to mention the bad luck of sharing the same last name).

George Ryan, probably best known nationally for his late-term moratorium on and crusade against enforcement of the death penalty in Illinois, was prosecuted by the same U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald for a number of offenses spanning his service as Secretary of State and Governor, most notoriously for stonewalling and lying to the FBI about the investigation of the commercial driver licenses for bribes scandal in Illinois.  The licenses for bribes scandal broke out in the aftermath of allegedly licensed trucker Ricardo Guzman's accident in Wisconsin with the Willis family minivan, causing all 6 children (the youngest at 6 weeks) to burn to death. Ryan was also prosecuted for improperly steering state contracts to a lobbyist, Lawrence Warner,  and illegally disbursing campaign money to relatives.

Blagojevich in 2002, looking to politically exploit the George Ryan scandal, ran on an anti-corruption platform, touting his experience as a former state criminal prosecutor. In my judgment, this is a particularly salient point that most current news stories have bypassed. The liberal media and feminist groups during the Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky scandals silently ignored the fact that Bill Clinton had managerial status over the two women and hence was subject to sexual harassment policies. It is impossible that Clinton, a Yale-trained lawyer, was unaware of such policies and their applicability to his circumstances, even in the case of Lewinsky, where there was mutual consent (it has to do with perceived special access or treatment for non-job-related behavior). Similarly, Blagojevich, as a former prosecutor and veteran politician, cannot plead ignorance that the act of putting Obama's Senate seat up for sale to the highest bidder of money, position or favor was illegal.

The election of Obama must be especially bittersweet to Blagojevich, whom, according to state Rep. Joe Lyons (D), in 2002 had a 6-year plan, including his 2006 reelection, to launch his own bid for the Presidential nomination. Blagojevich, however, has a more combative (vs. Obama's non-confrontational) personal style, and by his second year in office, he was already clashing with other state or local Democrats, and rumors of corruption were already spreading. One particular conflict of note has been between Blagojevich and House Speaker Mike Madigan, father of Attorney General Lisa Madigan, long rumored to be candidate for the 2010 Democratic gubernatorial nomination (along with current lieutenant governor Pat Quinn and others).

Blagojevich won a reelection battle of attrition against the GOP's last statewide officeholder, state Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka. He bet his political future on a state health care program initiative, despite chronic state pension funding issues and other spending priorities. The legislative special sessions and public tax-and-spending feuds with Democratic officeholders soon shrank his approval rate to 13% in October (nearly half of George Ryan's ratings at the end of his gubernatorial term), and he was still banking that the health care initiative and fragmentation of the anti-Blagojevich vote in the 2010 primary might still sneak him forward to a third term (in what I prefer to think of as emulating corruption-charged Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson's 2006 election strategy). Over the past week following the announcement of the Obama Senate seat corruption charges, the Chicago Tribune reported his job approval plummeted to a record low of 8%.

One issue which particularly irked me was the revelation that Blagojevich had decided not to move his family into the governor's mansion in Springfield and decided to commute to Springfield from Chicago--via a state plane, at a cost multiple times over seats on commercial airflights. (Perhaps he should talk to fellow Governor Sarah Palin, whom famously initially listed her state plane on eBay!) Given the budget problems Illinois has been going through, it seems arrogant and unconscionable that Blagojevich was spending thousands of dollars of the state's budget in unnecessary travel expenses when the state already provided accommodations for his family in Springfield.

With unpaid legal bills running to a reported $500,000 and a tenuous political future, Blagojevich was probably hoping to capitalize off Obama's successful White Houston bid. Why not? After all, Obama and Blagojevich were both Chicago area politicians, both of them knew Rezko and other political cronies, Obama undoubtedly has been in contact with Blagojevich during his U.S. Senate tenure, and Obama had supported Blagojevich's gubernatorial campaigns. And obviously Obama has already named a couple of Democratic governors to his cabinet (i.e., Bill Richardson (D-NM) and Janet Napolitano (D-AZ)). No doubt that Blagojevich, touting his signature healthcare initiative, envisioned himself as a no-brainer leading choice for the Health and Human Services Secretary, and the selection of former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who has written a relevant public policy book, was a bitter pill to swallow.

Blagojevich was, to be blunt, delusional. There was no way on earth Obama, whose personal style is one of consensus and inclusion, was going to put a  combative loose cannon like Blagojevich into his cabinet--and that was before even considering how Blagojevich, whom had racked up hundreds of thousands in legal bills, could ever survive a vetting process, never mind a Senate confirmation process.

What led to the FBI tapping Blagojevich's phones? Blagojevich had opposed, with Senate Democratic President Emil Jones, an ethics bill intended to weaken the influence of money in Illinois politics, and Blagojevich vetoed the bill. Obama, who had touted his own role for U.S. Senate ethics and lobbying reform, called Jones, his political mentor, to ask for Jones' help in overriding the veto. Jones reversed course, and the bill was unanimously overridden. Blagojevich, of course, realized that the bill would become law at the start of the coming year and hence had a limited time interval to press for campaign contributions under the old system, which resulted in the approved wiretaps.

Why did Blagojevich think he could get away with it? You might as well ask why Clinton thought he could get away with the Lewinsky affair; Clinton never thought Monica Lewinsky would have  kept her soiled blue dress unlaundered, and the public would view rumors of an affair as a "he said, she said" situation. No one would ever believe the delusional rants of a political groupie. I think Blagojevich probably felt if the Feds really had anything on him, they would have played their hand before now. 

But I also suspect that Blagojevich simply saw the Senate seat as an extension of political patronage in the rough-and-tumble world of Chicago politics and no different than, say, Delaware's governor nominating a Biden loyalist placeholder for the VP-elect's Senate seat until Biden's son is back from Middle East service to run in the 2010 special election. Blagojevich, of course, could have probably named himself to the seat himself, but he would have to run for reelection in 2010 and no doubt would face political repercussions for his self-serving appointment and strong challenges from the likes of Congressman Jackson. He could have nominated state Attorney General Lisa Madigan and thus eliminate one of his top contenders for the 2010 nomination. But with less than a 50% approval record from state Democrats before the arrest, Blagojevich would have attracted strong opposition either for reelection or the Senate.

I have continued to keep on eye on Illinois' politics since I moved to Maryland in mid-2004. I have watched the GOP struggle to regain its footing in the land of Lincoln after the George Ryan debacle.  What Gov. Blagojevich has done is a tragedy, particularly for a person whom probably started his political career as an idealist, wanting to change the world for the better. It then deteriorated into a zero-sum game, even against members of his own party, and a fight for political survival. I have no doubt that Blagojevich resents that the less-experienced Obama got the political prize he had always wanted for himself. That Blagojevich would take the one political prize under his control accruing from the Obama election and use it as a quid pro quo for his own personal gain is sad but not surprising.

Obama's initial response implying that there had been no contact between his staff and the governor about his seat clearly was misleading and unfortunate. This is clear from the wiretap discussion where Blagojevich remarks with disdain about how far the Obama staff''s good wishes goes. My guess is that Obama was worried more about whether his staff failed to report to the Feds any improper requests from Blagojevich. Congressman Jackson's angry, defensive statement denying any authorized favor in exchange for consideration of a Senate appointment was similarly motivated by reported wiretaps involving his own candidacy.

Blagojevich at this point has been effectively stripped of the power to nominate Obama's successor to the seat. The US Senate would refuse to seat him if he nominated himself; an appointment of anyone else at this point would no doubt be their political kiss of death, with speculation over what Blagojevich got in the process and a likely refusal of the Senate to seat him or her.

I suspect Blagojevich will resign over the coming week. I don't think Lisa Madigan's attempt to have the Illinois Supreme Court rule Blagojevich unfit to serve is a legitimate exercise of  the law's intent for cases like a severe physical disability (like a stroke). But Blagojevich has no hope of surviving an Illinois impeachment, and he has no political support in the legislature. The Democrats cannot afford to have Blagojevich fight on, but they have few weapons to compel him to resign in the short term. The reason I think Blagojevich might resign is the likelihood that the legislature in special session will strip him of the power to appoint Obama's successor. I don't think Blagojevich's pride will allow the diminution of his authority; he would rather resign than allow that humiliation.

Illinois deserves better; America deserves better. It's time for Blagojevich to resign.

George W. Bush: No TARP for the Big Three!

If someone asked me in August who would initiate probably the most significant government intervention in American history, I would have said, "Barack Obama." Never did I foresee, under the "compassionate conservative" Presidency of George W. Bush, the bewildering sequence of bankruptcies, government takeovers, the Troubled Assets Relief Program, the shift from an intent to purchase troubled mortgages to sometimes unrequested, undesired government investments in nationwide banks, and now even what appears to be possibly doing an end-run around Congress for propping up the failing Big Three. Even the TARP legislation itself, where the administration initially proposed sweeping authority to Treasury Secretary Paulson without oversight to spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer money and purposefully kept the House Republicans out of the process, was uncharacteristic of a conservative President.

President Bush, are you kidding me? The Big Three need a different kind of intervention, a reality check. It's called a date with the bankruptcy courts. The domestic auto industry starts off with approximately a $1500 health care and pension cost per vehicle disadvantage from the get-go; we have seen muted reaction by Big Three management to the fact they need fewer incentives to sell more fuel-efficient models; foreign manufacturers seem to enjoy higher repeat customer purchases and tend to dominate the highest price-retention ratings; we still see some productivity and reliability advantages for vehicles from certain foreign producers like Toyota and Honda. Consumer Reports listed only one domestic vehicle (a Chevy pickup truck) among its top 2008 models.

I certainly don't think that we need a government car czar micromanaging product decisions, or the Congress using their lender status to force certain product changes (e.g., CAFE standards) demanded by environmental special-interest groups. This is not to say I think the Big Three management has done a good job; the fact that I'm willing to let the companies go into bankruptcy is a testament to that. But Big Labor is in a state of denial; I think there's no way politically they can concede the structural compensation issues without the bankruptcy courts forcing it on them. The respite from high fuel costs is an artifact of the global recession, but the Big Three never made a truly competitive fuel-efficient alternative to the popular hybrid Toyota Prius, despite the fact that Consumer Reports has listed it as a top model for the past 4 years.

Big Labor is living in a fantasy world if it thinks the domestic auto industry is viable in the long term without making the necessary concessions now; it apparently hasn't noticed UAW membership has declined nearly 70% over the last 3 decades. I heard UAW President Gettelfinger politically attack the GOP over the recent scuttling of the bridge loan legislation in the Senate saying the unions were being asked to make "all the sacrifices" (let me see: how does the market valuate automaker debt and share price? Did labor rates decline like the other stakeholders' interests did?), but all he's trying to do is to postpone the day of reckoning--at the expense of the American taxpayer. 

If President Bush decides to use the TARP to fund something that the Congress just refused to do, I will consider it an abuse of his power. The TARP was never intended for the President to pick winners and losers in the marketplace based on the greater political power of a particular special interest group, like the UAW. The erosion of domestic market share for the Big Three has not happened overnight. The American consumer/voter has already made choices in the marketplace.

The President should not make the U.S. government a codependent of the Big Three's dysfunctional business model and its structurally uncompetitive contracts with the UAW. It's not clear how the President reconciles his view with economic liberalism; it's almost as if his sole intent is to prevent the Big Three going into bankruptcy on his watch.

Colin Powell vs. Rush Limbaugh

In an upcoming CNN weekend show interview with Fareed Zakaria, Gen. Colin Powell condemned Rush Limbaugh as well as other media conservatives (e.g., Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Laura Ingraham). He basically argues that Rush's rhetoric can be polarizing and narrow-minded, relying more on fear and suspicion than a positive, more inclusive message and agenda.

I have an earlier post, attacking Colin Powell's rationale in publicly endorsing Barack Obama. I stand by those criticisms, but I believe Colin Powell is fundamentally correct here. There is no doubt that John McCain's losing a third of Bush's 2004 Hispanic support was largely due to an anti-GOP backlash following the 2007 Immigration Bill failure, due to hysterical attacks by media conservatives, even though Bush and McCain were strong proponents of immigration reform. We saw similar backlashes in Pete Wilson's divisive final campaign for governor of California; with the exception of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose appeal is based more on his celebrity than his party credentials, Republicans are having a hard time winning statewide elections.

We have departed from those ideals Emma Lazarus immortalized in her poem, "The New Colossus": 

Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

As a pro-business Republican, I am appalled by xenophobic rhetoric, broken foreign worker programs, lax border security, dysfunctional employer verification systems, and chained (vs. merit-based) migration. The status quo is not acceptable; according to a 2005 Pew Hispanic Center study, somewhere in the neighborhood of up to 40% of illegal Mexican immigrants are out of work for a month or longer, and some 82% live with relatives. (At least some illegal immigrants are eligible for  path to citizenship because of chained migration but may be backlogged because of annual quotas.) There is no doubt that the status quo without a defined process for criminal background and health care checks (i.e., contagious, ill immigrants) is a national security concern. The 2007 Immigration Bill was not perfect but a good compromise. The media conservatives vehemently objected to it, not only alienating new generations of immigrant Americans whom see the objections implicitly directed at them, but thwarting our attempts to focus on higher-knowledge/skilled immigrants whom bring entrepreneurial aspirations or fulfill in-demand skill shortages (e.g., nurses).

Colin Powell, who reasserted his GOP membership, is fundamentally correct. Rush Limbaugh and his media conservative colleagues aim at excommunicating those not conforming to their configuration of neo-Reaganite policies.  This is a prescription for GOP suicide. Already we now have a situation where New England has no GOP Congressmen. States which once regularly had GOP senators or governors, like California and Illinois, are now voting solidly Democrat. Barack Obama co-opted the middle-class tax issue from John McCain and threw in some sweeteners, including for those not making enough to pay income taxes. The GOP has almost nothing in its arsenal to motivate those voters beyond half-hearted attempts to providing private school or charter school vouchers, largely squashed by opposition from teacher unions.

First of all, we need to bridge to minority communities. One good hint comes from California Proposition 8, reinstating the traditional concept of marriage between a man and woman, which passed with 70% of the black vote, heavily motivated by the national candidacy of Barack Obama. The concept of family and traditional cultural values are particularly relevant to Hispanics. We need to address an agenda that touches on everyday struggles in urban neighborhoods, including law-and-order issues, employment/training, underserved consumer needs (e.g., supermarkets, loans, and transportation) and entrepreneurship. Note that Barack Obama is willing to accept skyrocketing utility bills that will hit the poor and middle-class hard in order to pay environmentalists back for their political support, e.g., cap-and-trade. We also need to provide higher profiles for GOP minority members; for example, naming someone like Colin Powell, Condi Rice, or Michael Steele as head of the RNC.

Second, we need to reassert our commitment to limited government and government spending, establish more of a problem-solving, pragmatic approach to resolving national problems, including putting all options on the table, and focus on streamlining government, improving taxpayer services and responsiveness, and emphasizing managerial competence.

Third, just as Barack Obama and the Democrats have tried to co-opt bread-and-butter issues like middle-class tax cuts (easy to do when the liberal mass media only pay lip service to the issue of how you can do that while increasing spending), the GOP needs to co-opt social welfare programs (e.g., flatten middle management while maintaining/improving end user services).

Fourth, the GOP needs to explicitly support the legitimacy and respectful expression and acceptance of a diversity of opinions, including social issues like abortion. I have strong pro-life views, and I am intolerant of politically expedient rationales, e.g., "I'm personally opposed to abortion, but I don't believe in imposing my religious beliefs on others." But I can understand why some on principle would resist government interference in medical decisions.

Fifth, the Republicans need to commit themselves to solving and not simply window-dressing or passing off to future legislatures fundamental public policy issues, like imminent funding crises for Medicare and social security, a crumbling infrastructure, and catastrophic health spending.

Sixth, unlike the Democrats who largely won the economic battle of 2008 by default simply not by being Bush, the GOP must provide a constructive opposition with bipartisan vehicles. It's not enough to simply dissent or to attack Democrats on a personal level; we need to provide a comprehensive proposal with market-based, limited-government solutions. There is no doubt that the Republicans will benefit if the legislative and executive branches under Democratic control bomb on the economy over the coming 2-year cycle; the United States cannot afford for the GOP to stand back and watch the Democrats drive a recession into a depression and fervently pray for a global war to bring our economy back up or run up the bill on our grandchildren with ineffectual make-work projects and government giveaways.

Finally, the Republicans need to freshen up policy ideas. Pushing tax cuts when 40% of the voting public doesn't pay income taxes is not enough (although skyrocketing food and energy costs are pernicious side-effects to counterproductive Democratic policies). Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America" was an inspiration for the 1994 campaign. Former Speaker Gingrich has suggested updated issues for the 21st century (americansolutions.com), and Congressman Paul Ryan (WI-R) has proposed a competing agenda for America's future (americanroadmap.org).