MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
If there were any way to create sympathy for Rick Perry on pure humanitarian grounds, his appearance on CNBC this morning achieved it.
Perry, who was in a remote location(for good reason) and stood in soft focus in front of the American flag was incoherent, uninformed, unprepared and rambling. If Perry actually does have a near average native intelligence, his handlers have so bound him up that he looks like a confused post brain-surgery patient.
On the lead up to Perry's interview I thought the absence of the CNBC first string (that's a stretch) Joe Kiernan meant Perry would be thrown a bucket of soft balls. Instead the second stringers were the ones who were prepared and they completely flummoxed the Texas Governor non-whiz kid. Most importantly, the CNBC interview is child's play compared to what is waiting for Perry when the Eastern Wall St. Establishment and Romney come after him in the Bloomberg hosted debate in New Hampshire in two weeks.
To help lay the Perry ambush at CNBC the entire prior hour was devoted to the Morning's guest, the other Rick, Scott, Governor of Florida. Scott killed Perry softly for an hour before Perry came on the show.
Some of Scotts points: 1). Texas didn't have the housing bubble that Florida had. 2) It's easier to get things done in a state when the Legislature is overwhelmingly Republican 3) He stays in close touch with Cabinet Officials in Washington to work cooperatively with them 4) One of the great assets Florida uses is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers--they are performing deep harbor improvements in Florida to increase exports and create 30K jobs 5) Oh, by the way, Obama's payroll tax cuts would help Florida businesses a lot. Did I mention that in the lastest Florida Republican Primary poll, Perry's lead of 9 points was transformed to a 6 point Romney lead.
After that audience warm-up from Rick Scott, Perry obviously had no way to regroup and it was painful to watch--even given my low regard for the wonder boy from Paint Creek. If Perry cannot handle second stringers from CNBC how can he possible handle a national debate? Perry's remote location proved useful when on the follow-up questions about Social Security--the Ponzi scheme claim and the issue of constitutionality--Perry's camera and microphone plugs were pulled. Even Tyler Matheson caught that--"..this happened right at a very important question."
While Perry was having water splashed in his face, Rick Scott deftly avoided two Social Security questions. When Perry's location recovered, he was led into additional traps about means testing and privatization of Social Security as well as the independence of the Fed.
Until this morning I thought strong Tea Party support and Evangelicals would pull Perry through the primaries. Now I have a major question of whether Perry will make it through all the debates. I think Perry has three options:
1. Fire the top tier of his campaign staff and go completely off the script. Whatever native retail skills he has, they have been completely negated by over prepping. He has to go back to being a bible thumping agrarian huckster, forget the script, forget trying to get the facts right, use the personal approach. Beg for forgiveness.
2. Become the complete populist, especially an anti-bank populist. Despite waffling on the Fed today the one issue on which Perry has not straddled himself is Wall Street greed. After today's ambush Perry can write off whatever Wall St. funds and support he might otherwise have been expecting. That crowd is going for Romney big time. Forget them and do a Howard Dean campaign. I would contribute to him just for the theater of it.
3. Go the third party route. He has a much better chance of losing in a third party race and remaking himself in four years than he does in winning the Presidency now.
The CNBC icing on the cake was to cut-off Perry's last rambling remarks to announce Breaking News--First Time Unemployment Claims dropped to the lowest level since April.
Comments
Instead of options, I would advise Perry to take certain steps.
STEP ONE: Get back to the basics or at least appear to do so. Why not have Perry's next interview take place in Woodlands, Texas. I mean what could be more Eden-like than a place called Woodlands!
STEP TWO: And even though Perry would find himself in Eden (Woodlands) he should have that interview take place on a symbol of strength and power, representing an important part of the energy community. So why not appear at the top of the Anadarko Building?
Anadarko Tower
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. World Headquarters.
FINAL STEP: Once he finds himself atop this grand edifice, I would advise him to jump!
by Richard Day on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:04pm
That's very funny, Dick. He needs a jump start.
It was hilarious on CNBC. I wondered why they kept saying Perry was going to speak from a remote location and wondered if they might have devised some cue cards for him out of camera range and I half expected they would cut him off if he got in trouble. Then when it happened as they followed up two questions he ducked, I really did have a laugh.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:18pm
As a way to get him to jump, just put a shark in front of him. Don't ask for genuine courage though, use a hyper-inflated blow-up shark and guarantee a leap.
by A Guy Called LULU on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:32pm
Or how about a blow-up lovable dolphin?
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:38pm
I wish I had seen the interview
Was Perry, a member of the Tea Party Jihadist, sporting a long beard, speaking from a remote location; appearing to be inside a cave?
Maybe the cue cards were in Arabic?
by Resistance on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 6:17pm
It was a weird setup and he looked extremely uncomfortable. Of course Scott was in the studio and had rapport going for him. Perry looked like he was being beamed in from outer Mongolia.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:07pm
Do you recall Bush at first debate with Kerry in 2004? He still won. 21st memory sinkholes are quick and deep.
by EmmaZahn on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:32pm
I like "21st memory sinkholes". The period between 2000-2008.
No I wouldn't completely count him out. And I don't know how widespread this performance will be seen or talked about. It's my impression that a great deal of the donor class have CNBC on ,at least in the background, and they are the ones who I think are writing Perry off in favor of Romney. But Perry's handlers need to let him be himself. In fact, isn't that what they said about Bush after his first debate with Kerry--or was it Gore.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:50pm
Well, it was supposed to be 21st century memory sinkholes. Have no idea what happened to century.
You must be thinking of the debate with Gore. Even Bush's handlers would not want him repeating his performance with Kerry. I think maybe he took a few too many beta-blockers or something.
by EmmaZahn on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 4:43pm
Funny, that's the way I read and quoted it.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:04pm
Florida: The Army Corps of Engineers has been working in the state since Bush fixing the Everglades and all the other mistakes they made in the 1950's. They started working in the ports when Chris was in office. Scott turned down the high speed rail project that was shovel ready. It had been in serious planning for years. Talk about job killing. Scott is full of crap.
by trkingmomoe on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:35pm
Thanks. I agree with you he is full of it. His speech is like a Valley Girl's, each sentence ending in an up pitch. Like, you get what I'm sayin'? But he was Einstein this morning when compared to Perry.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:03pm
by trkingmomoe on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 10:13pm
IMO Perry was always a joke candidate. Just like Bachmann. Just like Trump. I think there's a big emotional investment in the idea that Obama's decisions won't be politically deadly because against a teabagger ... you'd have to be crazy not to vote for him. In such a formulation, of course, the ever-powerful tea party (who's power and popularity has thwarted a popular Democratic president's every stated objective) obviously *must* dominate the Republican primary process ... after all, they ARE the very heart of what it means to be a Republican.
IMO, that's just not true. You've got to know a few yourself. Republicans want to have a reasonably stable society and workable business environment just like everyone else. To use an example I'm most familiar with, that's why Harry Reid won - he's delivered for us, like, forever and Angle was a total dipshit who voted against the interests of Nevada business for stupid ideological reasons countless times in her state career.
The Nevada Republican primary was decided entirely on parochial intra-party conflicts at the state level carried over from 2008. That isn't the dynamic in a national primary. If you are looking at a contextual analogy this is far more Reid-Angle than Lowden-Angle ... with Romney cast as Reid and Fringe-candidate-X cast as Angle. A huge difference being that Romney doesn't have the overwhelming negatives across nearly the same cross-section of the voting pool. This really should be a slam-dunk for Romney unless he makes a big, big mistake. Then we're looking at Huntsman or - at the outside - Gingrich.
Y'all keep dreaming of a tea-party challenger. But if you want to win, you'd better start preparing to take on Romney. Looks like they are dangling glittery objects for you and the media to bat at and protecting their fighter for the big show. Dollars to doughnuts he comes in to the general slightly left of Obama while calling it conservative ... attacking Obama not as a liberal, but simply a failure.
by kgb999 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:10pm
I agree with you that Obama better be looking at facing Romney who, a la McCain and Palin, will have alongside the social conservative V.P. picked by Pawlenty.
I think one place where your theory about how Romney would run is correct is in the gaping hole which Obama is leaving open for Romney on housing, particularly on the refinance front. Obama and Geithner have done very little to impact housing and it would be a logical attack line for Romney, with a great deal of populist appeal. By the same token it seems to be a chance for Perry in the fight against Romney.
It just seems that one of Perry's strongest shots against Romney is the Bain Capital angle, putting people out of work, but he hasn't used it.
Also, I think it would be hard for Obama to run simultaneously against Romney and a "do nothing Congress" as Romney is mostly absolved from the transgressions of the Congress.
Having said all of that, I think the hard core base of the Republican Party, particularly the Evangelicals, will have a hard time being satisfied with Romney. The Southern Baptists think Mormonism is a cult. That's not an easy thing to paper over. Of course that could be achieved with "Palin" as the running mate again.
by Oxy Mora on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:36pm
When the time comes, the message will be the same as it is for independents and progressives ....... "Anybody but Obama"
"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"
Obama should have done more to help the homeowners. We'll see how he likes losing his "White" house.
by Resistance on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 10:14pm
Would you prefer Perry to Obama? This is a serious question.
And, wtf, with putting "white" in quotes? I'm having a hard time not seeing that as racist, so maybe you can explain to me something I'm missing… I'll be extremely happy if I find out that I've interpreted your quotes wrong!
by Verified Atheist on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 7:30am
So, who do you think might serve as his "Palin?"
by kgb999 on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 5:02am
Good question. Certainly not one of the usual suspects.
by Oxy Mora on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 8:22am
Ha! Okay, but the "Usual Suspects" reference gave me a chuckle because my immediate visual was a police line-up of the current GOP presidential contenders, a la the "Usual Suspects" movie poster.
I think I will be playing with Photoshop today.
by Jeni Decker on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:29am
Thanks for commenting, Jeni. And I'm pretty much of a rookie around here, but I hope you will continue to participate.
I read the Amazon reviews and will definitely be getting a copy of the book. In the interest of self promotion and bouncing along the "line up" idea, I don't know if you caught my juxtaposition of candidates as "dates" in a blog I called, "Republican candidates no good in bed." Also referenced therein is a blog Genghis did some time back that is hilarious. (plus the Catherine Tate(sounds like a kindred spirit) video, "I'm just not drunk enough".)
by Oxy Mora on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:56am
Well OxyMora, Kat and I thank you! Do let us know if you enjoy it and feel free to post a review on Amazon once you read it. (no matter what you think of the book, honesty is always appreciated. )
You had me at "good in bed". I'll check out that post right now!
This site looks like a fun bag of mixed nuts, based on what I've read so far, so I will continue to lurk a bit and toss in my 2 cents here and there (which translates to approximately .000001 cents, legal tender.)
Jeni
http://closetspacemusings.blogspot.com
by Jeni Decker on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:06pm
The spouse recommended the Newsweek cover story on Romney to me. I thought it was pretty good "horse race" opining & analysis and suspect you might appreciate it as well or at least find some bits here and there of use, like the things about his father's influence, or lack of it.
They also have this shorter piece on Romney vs. Perry which I found interesting, too:
by artappraiser on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:33pm
Those were terrific articles. Thanks much.
I really liked the comparison of Obama and Romney along the "conscientious" spectrum. They are certainly very alike and I think the ultimate choice would be to go with the one you know.
I was watching the Charlie Rose discussion tonight on the speculation about Christie, et. al. Rose asked his panel why Romney wasn't the right man at the right time. The general answer again was that lack of connection on a personal level. Matthew Dowd of course went back to his theme du jour about "passion ". The Republicans want someone who will take Obama to the "woodshed" My hunch is that Republican vengeance will lead them in a direction which will turn off Independents, giving Obama his best opportunity.
I thought the psychological trait analysis was really fascinating and want to re-read the articles.
If Christie does get into the race, the whole thing gets turned on its ear.
by Oxy Mora on Sat, 10/01/2011 - 12:14am