Yes, the president was guilty of hyperbole: although it is unusual for the Court to declare laws unconstitutional (once or twice a year on average), it is not unprecedented, as the president said.
Still, that doesn’t mean a senator should call the President of the United States “stupid.” While microblogging encourages impulsive bursts of misplaced candor/emotion, Grassley could have easily – in 140 characters – noted that the president had exaggerated, or questioned the president’s decision to take on the Court.
I will be interested to see if Grassley notes any of Mitt Romney’s serial exaggerations and distortions, which Dana Milbank nicely sums up in yesterday’s piece “The Facts vs. Mitt Romney.”
Media victim? Seriously? He’s a media victim in the same way that Kim Kardashian is: every dollar they raise/make is due entirely to their shameless exploitation of media fascination with them as opposed to any iota of talent they might possess.
These two peas-in-a-pod exemplify the modern-day media corollary of “If it bleeds, it leads,” which is “If it screams – or has implants – it leads.”
This episode will inevitably help him raise more money from the nutjob base, which helps him. But I don’t know enough about the dynamics of his new district to say whether it hurts him with actual swing voters.
People who talk about him seriously as a VP prospect should immediately report back to the asylum from which they’ve escaped.
They were outmatched, but they came from behind and almost made a game of it.
Time after time in the last 5-6 minutes, they had a shot to pull within five points and really make it a nailbiter (think MI, OH, IL).
And yet, every time they had a shot to get close and throw the outcome into doubt, they blew it – missed layups, errant passes, unforced turnovers.
Kind of like Santorum’s errant foray into contraception before the MI primary, his inability to make the ballot in VA or field full slates in Ohio or Illinois, his inexplicable and time-consuming trip to Puerto Rico in advance of Illinois.
When Kentucky hit the big trey w/ just under a minute to play, it was the nail in the coffin.
You just can’t give a team that’s more talented, deeper, and steadier than you so many chances to put you away. Similarly, tonight was probably the nail in the coffin.
Read the rest of… Jeff Smith: Has Rick Santorum Maxed Out?
They’ve seen the polling – they can read the writing on the wall. Demographics are destiny: young people overwhelmingly (2:1) support gay marriage. Middle-aged people (45-65) and mixed; seniors against.
So the process of generational replacement over the next decade will just continue moving the center further and further left on this issue. (The last issue I can remember with a generational split this stark is polling on interracial marriage around the time of Loving v. Virginia – ’67-68.) Clearly, Republicans are wise to begin what will be a long retreat from their rhetoric around this issue.
And as POLITICO notes this morning, some smart Republicans are also beginning to take the longer view on immigration. Alienating young people and Latinos in a country that will be increasingly dominated by them in coming decades is a huge political loser.
Unfortunately for Republicans, small symbolic steps won’t enough to sway many folks this fall. Undoing the damage from this year’s nasty primary (and the forces that led to it) is a multi-cycle proposition.
It may be the only way to get state officials to act.
The Sanford police chief claims that he has no ability to prosecute based on the “Stand Your Ground” law.
Of course, he’s making huge assumptions without a full investigation of the facts.
Most importantly, “Stand Your Ground” is misapplied in the case of an assailant who has actually pursued a victim; pursuit directly contradicts the notion of self-defense.
And the assailant is caught – on tape, no less – determinedly pursuing the victim even against the specific and unambiguous direction of the police dispatcher.
Agree with Jonathan et al that, left to his own devices, Romney would pick Portman. Nothing screams competence, or boring white guy, louder. The problem is that Romney’s main thrust will be to run against big government/trillion-dollar deficits, and tapping the GWB OMB guy, as Mark notes, isn’t the best way to drive that message. More importantly, since Romney has amply demonstrated over the last 6 years that he’ll do or say absolutely anything to win, I think he’ll listen when his advisers counsel him that Portman doesn’t bring enough pizzazz or oomph to the ticket. As for Jonathan’s claim that Portman is “beloved by the base,” he’s right if we’re talking about the base, circa-1965. This is not your grandfather’s Republican party. It’s not even your big brother’s.
Agree with Mark that Huckabee would be a great pick and would attract the evangelicals who are approximately as excited about Mitt as they would be about a 20-mile barefoot walk across hot coals to get a colonoscopy. Disagree with Mark that a Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe pick is Mitt’s best chance. I think it’s his best chance to spark a third-party style rebellion on his right flank that he can’t contain which could distract him throughout the fall and cripple his chances.
Agree with John Johnson that Nikki Haley has an intriguing profile. Many Americans will also be intrigued when they read about her past controversies, which you can do by simply Googling “Nikki Haley” and seeing what the first suggestion is. Based on the first-hand, published accounts of a couple prominent South Carolina Republican politicos, her exploits could make another Southern Governor, 1992-era Bill Clinton, look like a piker in comparison.
Agree w/ Ron that Allen West has an interesting profile but the last thing gaffe-plagued Mitt needs right now is a loose cannon. Too much of a wildcard.
Agree w/ Artur that Mitt needs to go long. And Condi Rice is sure intriguing on a lot of levels. Disagree that her open pro-choice stance would be a “mini-furor” that would quickly go away. Since the base doesn’t trust that former Planned Parenthood donor Romney is truly pro-life, I can’t imagine them swallowing a pro-choicer as the #2. I think she creates lingering base problems throughout the fall.
Rubio won’t survive a vetting, I don’t think. Not b/c of the Mormon thing or even the possible contradictions in his family narrative, but b/c of his money-grubbing/sketchiness as FL House Speaker and on the way there. Lots of stories bubbling up from friends of mine who served with him in the Leg down there.
I wouldn’t be so quick to rule out Jindal or Martinez, though Romney will surely vet them far more rigorously than Palin was vetted. Martinez lets him check a lot of boxes and potentially helps in at least three swing states, NM, CO, and FL. I’d be interested to see what the vetting on her turns up, and no doubt so will Romney.
I’ve heard Jindal speak twice and was extremely impressed. Since he’s been in public life basically his whole adulthood w/o a whiff of scandal – he ran Louisiana’s hospital system at age 25 (!) – I actually think he may be able to survive a vetting. That’s one upside of having outsized ambitions from a young age: he seems to have lived a very upstanding life. And Mitt would love Jindal’s Bain-esque discipline and “Mr. Fix-It” style. A guy who competently managed 40 percent of a mid-sized state’s budget at age 25 is a Romney wet dream. Also I think Jindal could energize the base and we know Tea Partiers love to be able to say “Look! I’m not racist!” (See, e.g., Herman Cain/Allen West.) Last, he could tap into an awful lot of presently untapped Indian-American donations.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate the 2012 GOP VP: Jeff Smith Salutes
Grassley’s tweet went too far.
Follow Jeff Smith: