Touching Piece on the Gore Family

A touching piece in Sunday’s The New York Times about the man who helped inspired me (and many others) into public service; but more importantly, has set a standard for post-politics that should be a model for us all, regardless of party. (Oh, and best yet, Al Gore is quoted using the phrase “recovering politician”): [The Grey Lady]

John Y’s Musings from the Middle: Wireless Carriers

Can you say this about your wireless carrier?

I figure that I spend at least 100 minutes a month “pretending” to be talking on my cell phone.

I’m not really talking to anyone but only pretending to in order to slip out of a crowded event or avoid talking to someone when I just don’t feel like talking.

And hoping that my phone doesn’t ring while pretending to be talking to a dead line.

And my wireless carrier doesn’t charge me a penny for this 100 hour monthly usage.

One more reason I am sticking with my carrier.

The RP’s Weekly Web Gems: The Politics of Media

The Politics of Media

Time Warner continues to look for ways to bring CNN back to life — at least make it respectably competitive with the other cable nets. [NYT]

The departing public editor at the New York Times wrote in his final column that the paper’s “progressivism” sometimes “bleeds through” in the paper’s reporting. [Column] NYT Executive Editor Jill Abramson sharply rebutted the charges of liberal bias to POLITICO. [Rebuttal]

Barry Diller’s IAC is buying About.com for $300 million. [Forbes]

The death of the homepage: Direct links have many news consumers “coming in the side door,” meaning bypassing the homepages of many news Web sites. [Nieman Journalism Lab]

Twitter paves its path into the future with corporate media partnerships (NBC) and the breaking down of old ones (Instagram and Tumblr). [Gigaom]

The RP: A Solemn and Urgent Plea to the RP Nation

For the past year and a half, I have used my platform at The Recovering Politician to share my opinions on a wide variety of issues, from politics to sports to pop culture.  One consistent theme is that I have always respected — indeed invited — dissent and disagreement, in a civil dialogue, of course.

But now, I have come to the conclusion that on one matter, there is no room for even the smallest disagreement.  You must not only concur with my opinion, but I urge you — in fact, I beg you — to join me in this essential pledge:

BREAKING BAD IS THE BEST TELEVISION PROGRAM IN HISTORY.  YOU MUST WATCH IT!

For those of you who are fellow Walt-heads (OK, maybe that’s not the best expression), you already know what I am talking about.

But I know there are thousands of you who’ve never watched the program, or may have seen an early episode and dismissed it as an uber-violent slice of Americana you’d rather hide in the proverbial cellar.  That’s what I thought for five years — I always preferred shows that I could relate to — the ad men of Mad Men, the Jewish geeks of Seinfeld, the poker-playing mobsters of The Sopranos, etc., etc.

But once I subscribed to Netflix, and paced myself through the first half season, I was as hooked as many of the protagonist Walter White’s clientele.  By the time the third season rolled around, I recognized it was a masterpiece.  But this weekend, when I finished the 4th season finale, I couldn’t sleep  — it was the most extraordinary writing, plotting, narrative, and most of all, acting, that I have ever witnessed.  I haven’t even begun watching this year’s 5th season, and I’m met with brutally conflicting emotions — I want to savor the series’ final 16 episodes, knowing that thee will never be another show like it, but I live in a constant fear that some malevolent reporter or tweeter will spoil the plot developments before I get a chance to enjoy them.

I realize that you, like me, might not identify with a struggling chemistry teacher, struck with lung cancer, who turns to cooking meth to pay the hospital bills. But if you care about politics, or philosophy, or religion, or psychology; there is no book, novel, film or opera that better illustrates the human condition — particularly the moral decisions that each of us struggle with every day — than Breaking Bad.  And there’s no better primer on why seeking revenge is the most self-destructive act a person can take. (Sure, I like Revenge, but c’mon…)

So, I insist, RP Nation.  Sign up for Netflix today.  Or if you don’t want to make Reed Hastings any richer, click here to buy the box sets of the first 4 seasons.

STOP READING, STOP PLAYING OUTSIDE, TURN ON THE TV AND WATCH IT NOW.

We will now return to our regular programming…

Jeff Smith: What’s the Matter with Missouri?

In the early 1990s, Democrats dominated both houses of the Missouri Legislature. State Senator Danny Stapleswas a typical member of the majority party: an old-school pro-gun, pro-life Democrat from southeast Missouri who operated a resort on the Jack’s Fork River. He hailed from Eminence (pop. 600) and explained his aggressive political style thusly: “Ya don’t get nuthin from the Sears catalog ‘less ya ask for it.”

But in 1992, Missouri voters passed a law limiting legislators to eight years in each chamber. Current legislators weren’t grandfathered, and so incumbents’ days were numbered.

Rodney Jetton didn’t vote on the term limits law. In 1992, he was a 24-year-old Marine stationed in the Middle East. The son of a Baptist preacher in rural Marble Hill (pop. 1,502), he hoped to seek office upon returning stateside. In 2000 — the year that the full impact of term limits kicked in — the ambitious young firebrand won a seat in the House. More than half the representatives elected that year were freshmen, and most were Republicans. After nearly 50 years in the wilderness, Republicans had a shot to regain the majority.

Jetton wasn’t your typical freshman. He boarded the bus for the ritual freshman state tour with a 100-page document in his hand that he immediately presented to Minority Leader Catherine Hanaway. It was a plan to retake the majority. He forecast which districts were winnable and which weren’t. He broke down how much money it would take to win them. And he offered a roadmap for how to do it: emphasize guns and abortion to woo socially conservative Democrats like those who had long supported Sen. Staples, and use tort reform to dry up corporate contributions to Democrats (and eventually, to drain the coffers of trial attorneys). Hanaway, no dummy, recognized native political talent when she saw it. She put Jetton in charge of candidate recruitment and training.

Jetton recognized something very important: The old-line Democrats like Staples were respected in their communities. These were communities in Northeast and Southeast Missouri full of people like Staples: farmers and small businessmen, laborers and tradesmen, mostly descended from the hardscrabble Virginians who had trekked across the hills long ago. They were Democrats because that’s what you were if you lived in Virginia before the Civil War. These yellow-dog Democrats coalesced with Democrats from St. Louis and Kansas City to provide durable statewide majorities for most of the 20th century, with Republican strength concentrated in the Bible Belt counties in Southwest Missouri.

The more retrograde the political debate, the more progressives left or never came in the first place. And the more progressives left or stayed away, the more conservative the electorate became, and the more reactionary the debate.

But by 2000, times were changing. As many scholars and journalists have chronicled, the national Democratic Party had, since the mid-1960s, increasingly lost touch with the old-line Democrats, who continued supporting local Democrats but had long since stopped backing them at the national level. Jetton intuitively understood that the way to these men’s political hearts was through their gun racks. And he knew that the way to their wives’ hearts’ was through the local preacher — that’s where the life issue came in. He established a clear partisan cleavage on cultural issues that, until then, had existed only in federal and statewide elections. In just two years, he went from minority-party backbencher to speaker pro tem.

In order to solidify this new cleavage, Jetton needed interest groups like the NRA, Missouri Right to Life (MRL), and the Missouri Family Network. They helped, but their support did not come cheap. The NRA, for instance, first demanded passage of concealed-carry legislation. But that proved insufficient, and the group ultimately spearheaded passage of a so-called “castle law” that even allows drivers to shoot (and kill) anyone who reaches into their vehicle.

MRL wanted to ban the procedure conservatives call partial-birth abortion. Then they wanted parental consent, and worked to make it so cumbersome for abortion clinics to operate that nearly every one in the state had to close. Missouri soon had some of the strictest abortion laws in the nation. Still not satisfied, MRL sought to criminalize scientific research on stem cells.

No hot-button cultural issue escaped attention. Laws prohibiting gay marriage were now deemed insufficient, so Republicans demanded a redundant constitutional amendment (which garnered 72 percent of the vote). It wasn’t enough to crack down on undocumented immigrants in the workplace. Republicans demanded a constitutional amendment making English the state’s official language, though there was no evidence anyone had ever conducted state business in any other language (until, of course, the day I filibustered that proposed amendment in French).

Read the rest of…
Jeff Smith: What’s the Matter with Missouri?

Artur Davis on CNN Host Roland Martin’s Podcast

April Ryan, of the Roland Martin Podcast, talks with contributing RP Artur Davis, former Democrat and Obama supporter who is now a Republican and is backing Mitt Romney supporter in the 2012 presidential election.

Davis details his upcoming address at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, FL as well as his disappointment with the last four years. Plus, Davis discusses if Republicans will address important issues that impact the African-American community.

Click here to listen in.

John Y’s Musings from the Middle: Most Important Political TV Debate

What do you believe is the most significant exchange in a TV political debate show over the last 25 years?

As for me, there are a whole lot of answers that come to mind. Serious–in fact, grave–points being made by serous leaders. Important policy being heatedly debated by brilliant minds, new ideas breaking through and the like.

But I would select a very different moment that called out the most popular debate show of this period for what it –and copycat shows like it —really are: much more tv theater playing for ratings than genuine debate seeking out the truth. And the guest did so in a very human and effective way.

I spent a good chunk of my young life voraciously absorbing these tv political debate battles. But eventually I began to tire of them and feel a similar disappointment to when my grandmother explained to me at age 7 that tv wrestling wasn’t all real. I didn’t feel deceived. But did feel disappointed that I was manipulated and didn’t know it.

Give me Firing Line with William F Buckley, Jr. Give me Charlie Rose. Give me Dick Cavett. Give me—a conversation with a friend or family member over coffee that isn’t measured in decibels but is instead an honest exploring of an idea without fear of it leading to a conclusion that is inconsistent with the political narrative I embrace. Give me a conversation in which I learn something new rather than reinforce a comfortable but mundane position I don’t even fully embrace if I were honest with myself.

Give me, in short, an honest moment. Like the video clip below.

And please don’t let Jon Stewart’s politics cause you to miss the non-partisan point he makes. Yes, he does revert to some low brow tactics, but he brilliantly and successfully makes as important a point as any that face our citizenry today, in my view.

We are a divided nation today in part for substantive political policy ideas we disagree on– but also, I believe, in part because we all mimic what we see and have adopted the belief that to engage in political dialogue means we musta eviscerate our “opponents” arguments at all costs–including personal insults and clever debating tactics in order to “win” at any cost. But I can’t help believe that we are all really losing something more valuable as we engage in this corrosive pastime.

This is my choice for most important tv political debate moment in the past 25 years:

RP Michael Steele Criticizes GOP Platform

Appearing on Tampa’s NewsChannel 8, former Republican Party chairman Michael Steele referred to his party’s convention plank on abortion as “way outside” the country’s mainstream thought on that matter. This comes in the wake of a Republican backlash against Rep. Todd Akin after controversial comments on abortion last week. [POLITICO]

The RP’s Weekly Web Gems: The Politics of The Screen

The Politics of The Screen

MGM is preparing for an initial public offering that could be propelled by the studio’s newest James Bond film. [Financial Times]

Martin Scorsese is being sued for breach of contract for a film he allegedly agreed to direct, but didn’t. [The Hollywood Report]

Making movies with excess everything was Tony Scott’s modus operandi. [NYT]

California appears poised to make a law requiring individuals working in the entertainment industry who would have unsupervised access to minors pass a criminal background check. [LA Times]

Jason Grill: The Paul Ryan Pick

The Recovering Politician Bookstore

     

The RP on The Daily Show