My Vicarious Campaign

Since I began this blog (some might say "Mission Statement"). I've been asked the same question by many. "Why didn't you get into politics?"

That question is easy to answer. It's because I was an unmotivated, defocused adolescent into my mid-20's, until my wife straightened out my meandering road to nowhere. By the mid-20's, most successful pols of the future have been officers in their college fraternities, and lost their first race for local assemblyman. Already by the age of 25, these motivated, focused individuals have been steeped in the painful lessons of excessive hubris. You can ask all my college friends for a laundry list of the other reasons I've chosen not to subject myself to the inevitable scrutiny of headlining a campaign. So I chose the sidelines.

The question about past dreams has raised for me a new question about future public ambitions...but not my ambitions. "Do I want Marra to catch the bug and enter the world of politics in her adulthood?" That's a tough question. At age 11, she couldn't use my excuse that her past choices and decisions could come back to haunt her (how can you accuse a 6th grader of flip-flopping?). So the door of opportunity is still wide open. Her kindergarten teacher once told her mother and me that Marra was very bright, but "a little chatty, and a little bossy." Sounds like a prototype politician so far. Of course, the world is her oyster and the possibilities in her life are literally endless at this point (although I admit that I told her to scratch Olympic gymnast and Olympic figure skater off the short list). But the question wasn't could Marra enter politics later in life. She could. The question was would I want her to pursue that career option.

Even asking such a question makes me think of Don Corleone in The Godfather talking to his son, Michael, about his career choices. "I never wanted this for you, Michael. I always dreamed it would be Senator Corleone."

I'll try not to be simplistic and leave you with "I just want her to be happy, and do what she loves." It's more than that. I want her to pursue a life that enriches not only herself and her family, but the lives of others and their families. There are lots of vocations that would help her achieve this end, a lot of noble professions. And if Marra could make people believe in a political career as a noble profession again, a profession driven by an honest passion for service and a disdain for the money game that turns politicians into pawns, I say run, Marra, run.

And with the inevitable law degree that all good government leaders must have, she could support Cherie and me when we're old. Bonus!

JS

Ode to George

I miss George magazine. Some of you may remember the JFK, Jr. run project that celebrated the marriage of politics and entertainment with glossy photos from A-list parties and essays on the state of national security. John-John correctly bet that politics in the post-Reagan years would become a state-sponsored sitcom starring one bad actor after another, vying for center stage. Too bad George was too far ahead of its time, and the magazine folded 2 years after JFK, Jr.'s death, and a short 6 year run.

George would have had a field day with the possible general election combinations available in 2008. Policy positions aside, here are some of the races that I would like to see. Remember, I would like to see these candidate face-off not because either would lead the country in the direction I want. It's purely for entertainment value.

Huckabee vs. Richardson: This would be the meeting of the 2 most humorous candidates in the field. Their self-deprecating styles would make for a hilarious servings of humble pie. I could see these 2 debating on SNL.

Ron Paul vs. Mike Gravel: Both Paul and Gravel represent a stream in American political thought, but it sure ain't the Mainstream. The best part would be watching every lobbyist on K Street posting their resumes on Monster.com, looking for new careers. These two would spend equal time debating one another and alienating members of their own parties.

Fred Thompson vs. Dennis Kucinich: Just to see pictures of their wives on TV and in People magazine for 6 months straight.

John McCain vs. Barack Obama: This campaign would be an ethical dream come true. Both have staked their reputations on being above the partisan rancor that has owned Washington for the past...forever..., and both would inspire each other to maintain the high road throughout the competition. I think this match up would bring us the cleanest debate of ideas.

Hillary Clinton vs. Al Gore: OK, I know they're both Democrats, and I know Gore isn't running. But can't a TV junkie fantasize about the Republicans nominating no one (since the GOP concedes they can't win in '08), so Gore offers to run as an Independent. What a steel cage match that would be. Gore has the new "I've got nothing to lose, so I'll just be me" attitude, while Hillary has the "Clubber Lang"-type focus to want to not only win against Gore, but destroy him in order to vindicate her husband's legacy. Circulation of tabloid magazines would hit all-time records. It would be a train wreck, but how could anyone turn away?

Hillary Clinton vs. Newt Gingrich: I know Newt is undeclared, but Hollywood loves a sequel.

Chris Dodd vs. Mitt Romney: Two politicians representing Connecticut and Massachusetts, debating what we should do about grazing rights in Wyoming and ethanol subsidies in Iowa. Could we get 2 people further removed from Middle America? Oh, that reminds me. I haven't mention Guiliani.

Rudy Guiliani vs. the Boston Red Sox: Wait, we've already seen that campaign, haven't we?

Mitt Romney vs. John Edwards: The battle that we've all considered - Wet vs. Dry. I can see the NY Post headline on the day after the election: "______ Wins By a Hair".

Joe Biden, Unopposed: Just to see if he would still say something off color in the heat of the moment that torpedoes his own campaign.

Sam Brownback vs. Al Sharpton: The Religious Right vs the Religious Left. I think in that race, even Ralph Nadar would have a chance as a write-in.

So Marra and I will be in New Hampshire in less than one month now. Let the games begin!

JS

Fred Heads Unite

Fred Thompson officially joined the race for the Republican nomination last week, the culmination of months of anticipation and boredom. Now that he is in, I turn my attention to what little I know about Fred and his candidacy, and I evaluate his chances for winning the nomination. I will use my impressions without foundation and my lack of knowledge of his positions. In essence, I'll look at Fred the way most of America will.

Actually, that's unfair at best. I have never watched Law and Order, the long running NBC crime show he has starred in for XX number of years. I don't think he has won any Emmy awards for his performance over the years, so this reflects poorly on his ability to pretend to look "Presidential". I do remember Fred from Die Hard II (the tough cop who supports the Bruce Willis character, John McClain - not to be confused with primary opponent, John McCain...). I could see this tough cop character leading the fight in Iraq. His signature role for me, however, was as a carrier commander in The Hunt for Red October. That kind of Cold War military experience should give him bragging rights among the other contenders in the race. He's been on the front line, and he knows how to pretend to lead an elite fighting force using the latest weapons. Big advantage.

What else do we know about Fred? He was a Senator from Tennessee for one or two terms. His tenure was undistinguished. I read somewhere that he left the Senate because he was sick of the Washington political scene, and his inability to "get things done". He must have had a difficult time getting things done, since he isn't remembered for any meaningful legislation or as a champion of any specific cause. Maybe being a Senator proved to be more challenging than pretending to be a Senator in the movies. Just conjecture.

Fred announced his entry into the race on Jay Leno's Tonight Show, right about the same time that Republican candidates were actively debating real issues on a stage in New Hampshire. Debating ideas with the experts in your own party and taking public stands on important positions in front of an educated audience of would be primary voters must have been a consideration for the evening's plans, but hey - we are talking Leno. The same Jay Leno who asks the probing, thought-provoking questions that reveal the true candidate to the American electorate. Maybe I'm thinking of Tim Russert? Well, anyway, Fred missed the debate, but there's plenty of time for all that real world issue stuff.

I hear that Fred is conservative, like Reagan. Yes, Ronald Reagan, the other actor. Fred Heads like to remind the public about that "synergy". Too bad Fred Grandy (former Congressman and former Love Boat Gopher) wasn't inclined to run, too. Perhaps the candidate debates could have been sponsored by TV Land.

So welcome, Fred, we look forward to basking in your immense talents as a performer. We also look forward to the other Republicans piercing the Fourth Wall so we can all get a look at what you are really all about - manufactured conservative or real leader. Vote now using your Nielsen ratings button.

JS

General Petraeus' War

Marra and I will be on the ground in New Hampshire in 30 days, talking about the problems facing our nation and the candidates' proposals to solve those problems. There is no problem more important this election cycle, none more prominent, than the war in Iraq, and I don't know how to discuss the issue with my 11 year old.

Like many New Millennium Parents (a phrase I just invented for myself - makes me sound young), I have sheltered my child from all kinds of scary real world situations. She is not allowed in the front seat of the car until she's 100 pounds. The passenger side air bag might deploy and injure her. She'll wear a bike helmet for the rest of her cycling life. We have to protect her from falling and hitting her head. I don't typically allow her to watch the nightly news. She might see a report on the latest sexual deviant attacking an innocent young girl. She's my baby, and we have to keep her safe and innocent for as long as possible, and maybe even longer than that.

Now when I was a kid, I learned about the ugly side of mankind a little sooner. I remember watching the news before going to grammar school, and the last report before the top of the hour each morning was the Vietnam War body count for the previous day. It would appear on the screen like the scores from yesterday's ballgames: Viet Cong: 241, USA 4. Every day, the body count differential was dramatically in favor of the USA, to the point when I finally had to ask, "If we keep killing all those Vietnamese, why aren't we winning?" Pretty good question, I thought. Of course, now I know the answer. We weren't winning because the "body count" numbers were propaganda (lies), and the war wasn't winnable.

So here I am today. Marra knows about the Iraq War, insofar as there is one happening, and it is in the Middle East. But the time is rapidly coming when I will shatter her innocence about the safety and security of her world, and her confidence in adults always doing the right thing and telling the truth. When we talk about the war, everything will get more complex, and more scary. There are no easy answers, and the truth is ugly.

Tonight, it got worse. W staged a televised addressed to the nation about the war for the 8th time, and he seemed even further detached from reality than ever. He was so detached, I believe that he thinks the American people have no capacity for storing thoughts beyond what we were just told. I am hoping we are not collectively that stupid.

Let's look at what W said:

We are in Iraq with 36 other countries, fighting terrorism. 36 other countries? You are kidding, right? Is there anyone on either the Right or Left that believes that our soldiers are shoulder to shoulder with an international coalition of fighters?

We have turned Anbar completely around, and now the population there feels safe. In fact, W says they no longer fear being beheaded. He then proceeds to tell viewers that the sheik who was most instrumental in supporting our efforts in that province was murdered this morning. At least he wasn't beheaded, which apparently in W's world means improvement.

Things are so good in Iraq, we'll be bringing troops home! Of course, the number we bring home will get the troop levels back to where they were before the surge began, no less. Honestly, does he think we're stupid? And they'll be home for Christmas...photo op time, soldiers at the White House, singing Christian carols with Cheney and W. I'm getting mad...

Do you know why W says we need to stay in Iraq? Because leaving is worse. That is a far cry from Colin Powell's 1991 preconditions for starting military action - a clear mission, overwhelming force and a clear way out. Plus, W adds, the Iraqi government wants us there. Well, no kidding, W, we installed this government and we are propping up this government, so it shouldn't be a badge of honor that they have decided that we should stay and protect them a bit longer.

Finally, W abdicated his role as Commander in Chief to Gen. Petraeus. Whatever Petraeus says, that's what we'll do. Well, Petraeus testified that the solution in Iraq will not be achieved militarily - he said it will be achieved politically. Maybe we should focus there for awhile.

So I return to my dilemma. How do I explain all this to Marra, when it doesn't make any sense? As of today, my plan is to present Iraq as a series of choices, none of which are good. Then I'll try to temper my outrage at the marketing of this war to the silent masses, who were told in October of 2001 that if we shop at the malls, then we defeat the terrorists. If only it were so.

JS

The Audacity of Running for President

I am famous for starting books that I will never finish. I fall in love with the title, get 50+ pages into the subject matter, and then Adult ADHD takes over. Next book, please. Part of the problem is that the majority of my reading material comes from the public library these days, and the folks at the library are pretty particular about me returning books in a timely fashion. Another factor is that most books, once opened, do not match the excitement of their titles. Anticipation is better than the real event. Occasionally, though, a book comes along that begs to be finished. Sometimes, the author speaks to me and I feel a twinge of guilt for not hearing him out. I am driven by a sense that the best part of the book might yet come. This week, I am reading The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama.

Let me first say that I read 50+ pages of his first book, Dreams of My Father, before the library police caught up to me. That book did not speak to me (perhaps because I had just finished The Pursuit of Happyness, a decidedly more dramatic, powerful story), but the writing was beautiful. I'll say that again - if this guy loses the nomination, he has a stellar career as a writer waiting. He can really capsulize a thought, an image, a moment, and relate it to a larger concept with poetic ease. Regardless of the election results, I hope he continues to publish.

He has this chapter on Values, and how the values debate is framed in the political world. He ends the section with this summation of the difference between values and ideology: "Values are faithfully applied to the facts before us, while ideology overrides whatever facts call theory into question."

He illustrates this point with a story from his Illinois Senate days, when a colleague argued against providing school lunches for 5 year olds because it would "crush their spirit of self-reliance." I think it is clear that ideology trumped logic in that instance.

So far in the book, he speaks to me of the commonality of American opinion, not the dichotomy of views so often emphasized in the press. Commonalities aren't interesting (unless we're talking about multiple birth couples), but differences? Makes for great TV.

About a year ago, I jotted down some of my positions on issues:

I do not believe in capital punishment - it is not a deterrent and it is arbitrarily enforced. There are cases, however, of serial murder and crimes against the most vulnerable (children and the elderly) where it is in the best interest of society to impose the ultimate punishment.

Pro-environmental policy can and should be seen as pro-business policy. I do not accept that these positions are mutually exclusive.

I do not believe that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of all Americans to have any type of firearm without reasonable restrictions. More guns do not make us safer.

Just because an idea is popular in Europe doesn't automatically mean it is bad for America, but we should also be confident to make American decisions that may run counter to world opinion.

I believe that there is legal immigration and illegal immigration, and that too often, the political rhetoric of our day combines the two groups to move an anti-foreigner agenda.

I believe that real life issues are solved in the middle.

I hear Obama echoing my sentiments in his book, at least the first 50+ pages. This might be a book I finish.

JS

Republican Cage Match

Sharpen your elbows, everyone, it's the fall campaign season! The Fair and Balanced Fox network sponsored a Q&A with the Republican candidates Tuesday night in New Hampshire, and we started to see some policy differences come into focus between the old white men of the GOP (this group is not exactly a poster for diversity, is it?). Here are some tidbits that you can use at cocktail parties, if you like to pretend you were watching the debate:

Ron Paul, everyone's favorite Libertarian rabble rouser, and Mike Huckabee, the media's 'Person of Interest' in the race this month, momentarily squared off in what was an actual debate - mano-a mano, addressing each other directly on the issue of the Iraq War. Their exchange crystallized the national debate on the war. On the one side, Huckabee represented the pragmatists. "We broke it, we bought it", so we have to finish the job in Iraq (whatever that means). Paul spoke for the millions in this country who believe that victory is ill defined, and that our continuing presence only serves to perpetuate the original mistake of going to war. Both were respectful yet forceful in expressing his opinion. Neither won the debate point, and we are still fighting in Iraq.

John McCain has begun to make his move. Post debate reactions were universally positive on his performance. Don't be surprised if he accepts the GOP nomination in 2008. At this point, he represents the Republicans' best chance versus the Democrats, in spite of his pro-surge stance. Good luck trying to smear this guy's reputation (Keating Five role, notwithstanding). Half the men on the stage Tuesday night practically endorsed him. Guiliani is praising him in the hopes of winning his supporters once McCain drops out. Look out, Rudy, that might not happen the way you planned...

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo continued to embody every negative stereotype the public has of a mean spirited, insensitive, hawk Republican. Example: Hunter was asked a hypothetical about an elevated threat from Iran, and he launches into his first 5 proposed military steps - including his plan for ground troops. That guy is a loose cannon (pardon the pun).

You REALLY want change? Vote for Ron Paul this year and hold on to your hats! He'd be an interesting candidate, if we were starting a country from scratch. Unfortunately, we have this pesky 240 year history of world involvement. Can't just stop tomorrow, lock the doors, and say, "My bad."

The Fair Tax was raised again, and Huckabee is a big proponent. The Fair Tax, as I understand it, is a 23% national sales tax, in place of the income tax. The theory is that we should tax consumption, not earnings. I'd like to hear an entire 90 minute debate on the tax code, frankly. Most candidates continue to use the tax code as their personal social engineering petrie dish, and perhaps it's time we stop that nonsense.

Fred Thompson wasn't there. He was in Hollywood, preening for Leno. So what?

Newt Gingrich will decide whether to join the race by the end of the month. Now that could be fun.

JS

Baseball, Apple Pie and Politics

Marra and I attended the Nationals-San Francisco Giants game last night in DC. This was the eighth time in the past 3 years that she has accompanied me to a major league game. She enjoys the drama, the shared crowd experience, and the one-on-one time with her dad. I enjoy the the drama, the shared crowd experience, and the one-on-one time with her. She's a great date for a ball game. Her attention span is long, and her appetite for stadium junk food is limited. She asks good questions, and doesn't ask to leave early. I believe that she is developing an interest in baseball that will survive into her teen and adult years. I couldn't be happier about it.

Last night, she leaned over to tell me that she understands the game much better this season. She explained that playing wiffle ball this summer with her cousins during our beach trip helped her better appreciate what she was seeing in the pro game. The progression of players from one base to the next, the fly ball outs, the counting of runs - it all made more sense after living it herself, and she enjoys the game more. She knows where to focus her eyes on the field of play.

This is all a good example of classic teaching: tell, show, do, review. I've told her about baseball and its rules. I've shown her games live. She did play herself this summer. Now all we need is review - more trips to the ballpark with daddy.

In 41 days, Marra and I will travel to New Hampshire as part of her political training. I've told her about the candidates. I've told her about the issues. I have shown her the candidates on TV, engaged in active debate on the issues. I've shown her their websites and we've looked at some of their videos. In 41 days, we begin the "do" phase - we will be active participants in the process, meeting and speaking to the volunteers, the activists, and hopefully the candidates themselves.

After our trip, I hope that Marra will lean over to me and say, "Daddy, I understand the game much better now."

Home run!

JS