Rick and Ted’s Excellent Adventure
Posted: January 19, 2012 Filed under: Obits, Rick Perry 1 Comment »
All day I’ve been working on my concession speech for tonight’s minor domestic squabble regarding the 37th Republican debate of the last four months and the second episode of American Idol, but my plans have now erupted into chaos. Well, maybe. It’s hard to say if all today’s exciting headlines (Perry out in South Carolina! Santorum on top in Iowa — maybe! Newt’s ex spilling the beans on ABC!) will amount to anything remotely substantive on the main stage, but… hey, there are at least more possibilities on the table now than there were 24 hours ago.
“Goodbye, Rick. God bless you“
First time I heard of Perry was a few years ago when his offhand comment about Texas seceding from the union got loads of play on MSNBC (Chris Matthews was relentless in his pummeling). Not so long after which I saw him interviewed both on CNN and “The Daily Show,” and though I don’t remember a single thing he said in either sitting, I do remember coming away from them thinking, wow, there’s someone Obama might need to worry about in 2012. Seriously. At least in the setting of a one on one, Perry communicated whatever folly he was communicating with a fairly irresistible blend of good ol’ boyism and political — what’s that word again? — gravitas. Didn’t work out so well, of course, for three reasons, though at this point I can’t even remember the first two never mind the third.
“When Albaugh showed him video of the debates, he grimaced. It’s worse than I thought ran through his mind. He pledged to do better. “I need to figure out how to get this right,” he said. But as the debates went along and he continued to founder, Perry’s frustration mounted. He started showing up late for prep sessions or cutting them short. Or spending the whole time on his BlackBerry. Or finding excuses to avoid them altogether. “You guys don’t have this together,” he said at one mildly disorganized run-through. “I’m going to shoot some coyote.”
- John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, Game Change, 2008
[Editor's note: Albaugh = Axelrod; Perry = Obama; "shoot some coyote" = "take a nap"]
The Owls Are Exactly What They Seem
Posted: January 12, 2012 Filed under: Herman Cain, Jon Huntsman, Mitt Romney, Newt Newt, Rick Perry, Ron Paul, Santorum, Sarah 1 Comment »Nice Game Change mash-up. I’m always on the lookout for déjà-vu-all-over-again subplots and scenarios in how campaigns play out. When it looked like Rick Perry was about to jump in, I threw out the possibility on the message board that 2012 might turn out to be 1980 all over again: complacent Democrats get trounced when they foolishly convince themselves that the other party’s buffoon will be enough to distract from the economy. (Buffoon from the vantage point of complacent Democrats—I think the idea that Reagan was a buffoon has been pretty much discarded, even by avowed enemies.) It was an excellent analogy…right up to the moment when Rick Perry jumped in. Anyway, I just finished David Pietrusza’s 1960: LBJ vs. JFK vs. Nixon (The Epic Campaign That Forged Three Presidencies), and here’s Mitt Romney 50 years ago, when his name was Stuart Symington: “the most possible of all nominees, but he was also a man lacking any deep and abiding political philosophy…his appeal is largely to the older-line professional politicians, and their hope is that the convention will find objections with each of the other candidates and agree on Symington.” (I’m conflating three different speakers there.)
I hope we didn’t wait too long to get this going, Scott—I worry that we missed all the good stuff. Perry’s “One, two, can I get a lifeline?”, Romney’s “for Pete’s sake” hissy fit, supernova nice-guy Newt (his turn at the top was easily the highlight for me so far—I really think Obama/Gingrich would have been as endlessly entertaining as last time), and just about everything to do with Herman Cain. I still periodically check the Cain Solutions for some guidance and wisdom in these troubled times, but it’s down altogether right now, before it ever got off the ground. I’m shocked and disappointed.
Another problem, believe it or not, is that I don’t despise any of these guys. Not even close, in fact. As I said earlier, Huntsman’s about the worst, but he’s just bland and phony. Ditto the current frontrunner, although I find him more agreeable than Huntsman. I should despise Santorum for some of his caveman ideas, but for some reason—the Jimmy Olsen vibe he gives off?—I don’t. Perry just makes me laugh; he’s the guy I want to have a beer with, just before we get out our shotguns and go shoot up a bunch of stuff. I like Paul, although that requires not thinking about the newsletters (or believing his explanations, which I don’t). And I think I fundamentally, completely get a kick out of Gingrich. Most of the time I find his ideas-guy blather and monumental self-regard engaging, and the other Newt, the reptilian hatchet man, well, I like having a late-model Nixon in our midst. Last time I had Hillary to hate on for the first half, and then someone came along to fill that role beyond my wildest dreams. I need some more of that to bring this thing to life.
Guaranteed to Make You Cry
Posted: January 7, 2012 Filed under: Debates, Rick Perry, Ron Paul Leave a comment »
Dickerson called it pretty early on, sometime within the first round I think. I have no idea who the other tweeter is, I just tried searching for “Ron Paul Rick Perry,” and that one somewhat captures what I thought was one of the more bizarre side squabbles. I’m actually starting to wonder if Perry went home after Iowa, with every intention of quitting, was called up by Mitt, with an offer of VP on the table, “if you take out Paul for me.” Just a theory, and a conspiratorial one at that, but Perry jumped on the guy at least twice, which seems bizarre, especially in light of how he didn’t lay a finger on Romney. Hmmm.
Earlier today, I listened to part of a podcast I’ve come to like some, called “The Majority Report” with Sam Seder. Matt Taibbi was the guest, and he said something about the Republican race being a “sideshow” to the real story, an idea that usually makes me cringe, though I think there’s more than a grain of truth to it this time around, and for me, it feels like an indication of what might actually make this election enervating, thrilling, scary, possibly inspiring, almost certainly a little insane (and yes, very much There’s a Riot Goin’ On — thanks for that one, Phil). It struck me today that whatever I end up doing in this space, it may be less about covering an election than about covering an election year. (In truth, I’m not really here to “cover” anything, just to mess around and hear myself think… but you know what I mean). There was a whole lotta yadda yadda up there on the stage tonight, I find most of it “interesting,” but it doesn’t (yet) feel like the story I think I’ll be following this year (though we’ll see what happens when Obama enters the picture).
Comments