Political Nanny : John Edwards

Ugly Teeth on the Campaign Trail

Madeline Holler — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:13:00 GMT

The votes are in. Dentists are not impressed with the Republican nominee's smile.

A recent poll of 400 dentists found John McCain's smile the worst of all the candidates. Only six percent found McCain's smile the best of the lot (Mitt Romney got 45 percent of the vote.) Barack and the other John (Edwards) were nearly tied at 38 and 36 percent.

Mike Huckabee got 10 percent of the vote. While Political Nanny discourages her candidates from competing in the superficial, she can't help but feel that when your smile is judged worse than Mike Huckabee's, it's time to make an appointment with a Beverly Hills cosmetic dentist.

In fact, John McCain's yellowed, aging teeth are attracting attention (and comments) for what they are not: whitened, straight, youthful, lovely.

Alas, some kids, no matter how much their caregivers encourage brushing after meals and regular flossing, develop cavities and a surface patina. Still, we clearly have more work to do at the sink. John, sit please. Political Nanny's getting out a chisel and the Crest Whitestrips.

Thanks Buzzfeed for the tip!

The Edwards Matrix

Madeline Holler — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 11:34:00 GMT

Think of it as the grown-up version of picking a prom date.

An Edwards supporter who doesn't know which box to check on her absentee ballot has come up with a cheat sheet to figure out which candidate she will support. She has posted the Edwards Matrix for all to see.

Problem is, the matrix is inconclusive. The mom who designed it gets all the important stuff -- Iraq, healthcare, experience, hair. But the would-be dates are still in a dead heat.

Political Nanny is looking for something definitive -- a gun to her head, marching orders, whatever you got. Clinton, Obama ... Obama, Clinton. To hell with choice. Could somebody help her decide!

Seems like Republicans are less undecided than Democrats, but there are still plenty who are (but with much less consequence, since McCain seems to be far enough ahead of the others). Apparently, we undecideds are not alone. Salon's Rebecca Traister brilliantly describes how millions of Democratic voters are feeling right this very minute. And this minute. And this one too.

Toys For Political Junkies' Babies

Madeline Holler — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:08:00 GMT

Many of you have privately confessed to Political Nanny how your obsession with this election has cut into your quality parenting time. Days and nights of on-demand newsfeeding. The agony of letting pundits cry it out. You know everything about the remaining candidates, yet you've forgotten your own flesh-and-blood's birth weight and shoe size.

No need to abandon either of your babies. You can rear children and obsess about the nation's future at the same time. There are plenty of activities to bridge these two seemingly opposing interests.

Political Reading for the Whole Family:

Political Nanny already told you about the children's book Why Mommy is a Democrat, wherein loving, kind, Democratic squirrels watch in disbelief as elephants behave rudely. Now the companion, Why Daddy is a Democrat is available to promote a smug satisfaction in progressive voting. In these beautifully illustrated pages, we are told that Democrats support schools (of fish!) and make the earth feel better (it gets sick!) and give police and firefighters the support the need to do their jobs well. Why ever do liberals get accused of having simple, simple minds?

Go interactive with Pat the Politician #2. In the manner of the children's touch and feel classic, Pat the Bunny, this new twist on an old favorite let's kids get in touch -- literally -- with the candidates.

According to the catalog, kids can ... Pull Hillary's purse strings. Fluff John Edwards hair. Scratch John McCain's war rhetoric. And don't forget to wave bye-bye to George Bush. Pat the Politician #2 is perfect for every voter, Democrat or Republican. Features 20 interactive pages with 22 color illustrations.

Role-Play With Political Finger Puppets:

Are your little ones missing the finer points of all this political rhetoric? Act it out in words they understand with these presidential candidate finger puppets. There are five candidates in the set -- Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, George Bush in a dunce cap and, sadly, Fred Thompson. After you exhaust all three minutes of play with the Thompson puppet (mimicking in real time his failed campaign's light scheduling), turn Thompson into Romney with thick crop of black hair (just clip a patch from your child's Webkinz dog and stitch or glue as necessary). Only have white fur? Fine. He'll be Ted Kennedy. Just position him on your thumb so he can be near his new BFF Barack, who is inspiring the rest of the toybox atop your index finger. Alternately, insert ball bearings into Thompson dolls face and play-act an angry John McCain.

Is your child more of an issues voter? Consider the hours of fun with the gay marriage finger puppets (two men, two women and a priest). Are you raising a security toddler? Then go for the five-man axis of evil "Terrorism" set.

So you're a childless cat lady but you read a parenting blog? No judgment here, we promise. And there's something for you and your much-neglected Fluffy too. Political Pet toys. A soft, safe chew toy for the light of your life. Choose from world leaders, presidential candidates and controversial filmmakers (that's Michael Moore, right?).

Go ahead and start watching the Florida returns. Enjoy all two hours of the debates in Los Angeles on Thursday. Tune into Hardball without guilt. That baby you hear crying? She doesn't need you. She's just interviewing fingerpuppet Hillary. And the swearing? Don't worry. That's her playing with post-Florida Rudy.

Barack-tober and 9 More Reasons to Vote for Obama

Madeline Holler — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:19:00 GMT

Political Nanny is absolutely sure -- at least twice every day -- that she's going to vote for Barack Obama in her state's Feb. 5 primary. To her endless frustration, she chews through candidates like bubble gum, reluctantly spitting one out, gleefully unwrapping and enjoying -- if only for a few minutes -- another.

Like a lot of people she talks to, Political Nanny finds she likes Obama most when there's no one else (read: Hillary Clinton) around to distract her and plant the idea that the Republicans will tear him to shreds. Indeed he IS inspiring. His healthcare plan IS a good start. He BEST represents change. And while Clinton IS likeable enough, Obama is likeable likeable. Like, really likeable. Like, we like him like him likeable.

Last night on Letterman, he gave us the Top 10 more reasons to like him like him, including a vice president quite the opposite of evasive, sour, mean, mean Dick Cheney.

(Speaking of, if you're wavering between parties, here's an alarming round of answers from the GOP candidates at last night's debate in Florida. Except for Ron Paul, they all say Iraq has been worth the lives and money. After Paul gets cheers for the smackdown, Huckabee comes back with a comparison of WMD to Easter eggs. What in God's name does he mean?)

Back to Obama ... Political Nanny is going to enjoy the next few minutes of voting certainty, because she feels another round of impending indecision coming on. (Oh, hey, Hillary, hey John ... nothing to see here). We can't wait to learn who all those undecided Dems in South Carolina like the very minute they cast their votes on Saturday.

As read by Mr. More Than Likeable ...

10. To keep the budget balanced, I’ll rent the situation room for sweet sixteens.

9. I will double your tax money at the craps table.

8. Appoint Mitt Romney secretary of lookin’ good.

7. If you bring a gator to the White House, I’ll wrassle it.

6. I’ll put Regis on the nickel.

5. I’ll rename the tenth month of the year “Barack-tober.”

4. I won’t let Apple release the new and improved Ipod the day after you bought the previous model.

3. I’ll find money in the budget to buy Letterman a decent hairpiece.

2. Pronounce the word nuclear, nuclear.

1. Three words: Vice President Oprah.

Anybody else out there stuck with too many to like? Seriously, tell Political Nanny who you're voting for.

Candidates' Cribs: Their Digs, Pre-White House

Madeline Holler — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:10:00 GMT

Readers, rest assured. America's housing market meltdown won't leave any of the candidates without a very, very pleasant roof over their heads. But you're kind for caring. How about we take a peek at those roofs and do a little real estate market analysis, you know, on behalf of those candidates who don't manage the upgrade to something bigger and whiter.

Mother Jones was kind enough to assemble a photo album of many of the top candidates' domiciles and CNBC ran the numbers.

John Edwards, that son of a mill worker, lives in the most expensive house of any of the candidates. His rambling $6 million compound, which he purchased in 2007, has risen in value over 4 percent. Think he went the exotic loan route? Incidentally, the average home value in his North Carolina county is $365,000. He's defintely on the other side of the tracks . And when this Chapel Hill estate won't suffice, he's got his $1.08 million beach home.

Rudy Giuliani lives in a $5.25 million nine-room co-op in Manhattan's Upper East Side, by far the best of all the candidate's cribs, in Political Nanny's opinion. The Manhattan housing market has been quite good to him -- the median price of a Manhattan apartment has risen 14 percent since moving day a few years ago. The average cost of a Manhattan apartment is $1.5 million, which, in local money, is kind of slummy, right?

Next up, John McCain's $3 million Phoenix condo (which, according to MoJo, is actually two condos combined into one). We all know the market in Arizona's cities is tanking. The average home price in Phoenix is $428,000, down 1.8 percent in the last nine months. Now, from the outside, his condo looks like a hospital. But for beauty, he can always go to his $1.1 million 6-acre ranch in Sedona.

A tie between Hillary Clinton's Westchester, N.Y., home price and the home Mitt Romney has in Belmont, Mass. There are others. These houses cost the candidates $1.7 million. Clinton has a slight edge in that her neighborhood's prices are down just 2.8 percent, while the Romney's are watching a 9 percent decrease around them. For the Clintons, the average price in the area is $1.13 million. For Mitt and family, the median home price in Belmont is $680,000. (MoJo pictures his $3 million New Hampshire house on a lake, which should not be confused with his $5.5 million main residence, a former ski resort in Park City, Utah. Yow!)

Barack Obama bought his almost-South-Side Chicago house -- a beauty -- for $1.65 million in 2005 (the height of the market, what was he thinking?!). The average value of a home in his area is $310,315. Overall, prices are up 1 percent, so, he's doing OK and won't likely need to take advantage of Hillary's mortgage bailout plans.

Missing from the market analysis: the stats on Fred Thompson's McClean, Va., home, which set the Thompsons back $3.3 million. With prices dropping in the Northeast, though, we'd hate to see him get upside down on his financing. And also Mike Huckabee's Little Rock McMansion, which he and his wife paid $525,00. Sounds like a steal, but we're guessing it's one of the more pricey homes in Arkansas. Which would explain why they registered for house-warming gifts after they bought it.

Now, for any of the candidates trying to establish some Green credentials, Political Nanny's advice is: install solar panels and change those incandescent bulbs, quick! Most of these rather enormous homes likely have an oversized and embarassing carbon footprint. We're just saying ...

Finally, the ones missing from the collection are two that Political Nanny would have really liked to see and also a pair that could give some perspective: the homes of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Send over the links if you think you have tracked either or both of them down. Is Political Nanny alone in imagining Kucinich's digs might bear some resemblance to Austin Power's pad? No, only her?

Hillary: Send Me to Prison

Madeline Holler — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:33:00 GMT

Hillary Clinton said in an interview that her dream would be to compete on America's Next Top Model. She admits, though, she wouldn't have much of a chance. Now, Political Nanny doesn't like to traffic in the superficial, but, since Hillary brought it up? Yeah, not a chance.

However, the former first lady and presidential hopeful thinks she could go all the way as a contestant on Dancing With the Stars, and we don't see why not. Especially, as she says, if she gets one of the really good pros. (Oh, but not if Barack Obama is one of her competitors. In that competition? He'd be ready to lead his rhumba partner on Day 1.)

Clinton tackled these and other difficult topics with Tyra Banks earlier this week in a taping for Bank's eponymous talk show. Her interview airs Friday (check for local times ... or check in with Political Nanny, who vows to set up the Political Nanny Cam and bring the video to you.)

Other interesting tidbits: Clinton likened the White House to a prison. Some outtakes (thanks L.A. Times Top of the Ticket):

"Do you ever get lonely?" Banks asked the New York senator. "Do you ever sit in your room by yourself sometimes and just feel alone?"....

"I don't feel lonely," Clinton said. "But I do feel sometimes isolated. Because when you are in these positions that I have been in, it can be very isolating. It is one of the reasons I put on the dark glasses and the baseball cap and go out of the White House. President Harry Truman once said that the White House was like the crown jewel of the American penal system because you can feel confined."

The two also talked about what Bill Clinton should be called if he winds up the First Spouse, and whether she -- remember, future Dancing with the Stars hopeful -- does hip hop or knows the Soulja Boy or the Spongebob dance.

Well what did you expect? Oprah?

Elsewhere on Political Nanny's Playground ...

Club Dem Refuses Race Bait, One Calls Bush 'Pathetic', and Island Survival Strategies

The Democratic candidates clobbered not each other in the debates last night but two of the reps from the media. Brian Williams and Tim Russert tried hard to keep racial discord alive in their early round of questions for Clinton and Obama. But the candidates refused to be baited, bragged on the Democratic party, blah, blah. They defended each other, for example, against how their statements had been reported in the media (Barack on Russert's claim that last night's pledge to take troops out of Iraq was a change from earlier refusals to make such a pledge). They offered excuses for insinuating racism and claims of misusing historic icons being brought up in the first place. (Clinton: “We both have exuberant and sometimes uncontrollable supporters ...”)

Sure, the debate was something of a snoozer (though Political Nanny perked up when Hillary Clinton described Bush, on his trip to Saudi Arabia, as "pathetic" and "begging for lower oil prices.") The questions got so banal that toward the end candidates were asked their strengths and weaknesses. Strengths and weaknesses? Even a teenager looking for work at a video store knows how to answer that one. "I refuse to stop working until the job is done" (Clinton gave her version of that) ... I've been told I'm committed to a fault!" (Edward's take on this "weakness" classic.) Political Nanny was fully expecting them to have to tell Russert the one item they'd like to have with them if they were ever stranded on a deserted island. (A book on shipbuilding, of course!) Mercifully, there was a commercial break.

Michigan

Mitt Romney stays in the GOP race, winning 39 percent of the Republican vote in his boyhood state of Michigan. Headlines 'round the nation say this win, Romney's first, and yet another candidate with a first-place finish in these early states, "scrambles the GOP field." McCain came in second with 30 percent of the vote. Political Nanny's glad these candidates will push on for more of the statewide contests.

Also in Michigan, Hillary, the only of the three frontrunners whose name appeared on the ballot, got 55 percent of the Democratic vote. Uncommitted (code for Edwards or Obama) got 40 percent.

'It's OK to be Different': Dems Turn the Page on Race Rant

Madeline Holler — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:04:00 GMT

Political Nanny headed to the bookshelves and pulled out her heaviest hitters to cool down this simmering and saddening race/sex war on the Democratic campaign trail.

For a recent storytime, she assembled her candidates and the Todd Parr "we're all in this together" oeuvre. These colorful children's books starring stick figures of all shapes, sizes and species with the none-too-subtle titles like It's OK to Be Different, This is My Hair, The OK Book, The Feelings Book, ... well, you get the picture ... gave the candidates a chance to remember that nobody owns sadness and suffering more than another and what's truly valued over skin/chromosomes is strength, substance, and a plausible healthcare plan.

Political Nanny thinks they got the picture. (For how things degenerated, a great summary at MSNBC.)

Barack called for an end to the feud. As reported on Politico:

"Obama, too, indicated he wants a truce, saying at a media availability in Reno, Nev., that the campaign “shouldn’t be personal.”

“Bill and Hillary Clinton have historically and consistently been on the right side of the civil rights movement,” Obama said.

Obama also said he didn’t want the campaign "to degenerate into so much tit-for-tat, back and forth that we lose sight of why all of us are doing this."

Hillary stepped up with a statement calling for party unity when it comes to the rights of all Americans.

“We [Clinton and Obama] differ on a lot of things. And it is critical to have the right kind of discussion on where we stand. But when it comes to civil rights and our commitment to diversity, when it comes to our heroes - President John F. Kennedy and Dr. King – Senator Obama and I are on the same side.

“And in that spirit, let's come together, because I want more than anything else to ensure that our family stays together on the front lines of the struggle to expand rights for all Americans.”

Political Nanny has also been reminded that no matter how different we feel that we are from another, there is always, somewhere, common ground and agreement. Which is why Political Nanny finds herself in the unfamiliar position of agreeing with New York Times columnist David Brooks. Not everything (and that's OK), but scroll to the bottom and we get this:

"The final two points I’d make are: First, this whole show seems stale and deranged to the younger set, as Obama and Clinton seemed to recognize when they damped down the feud yesterday afternoon. The interesting split is not between the feminist and civil rights Old Bulls, it’s between the establishments of both movements, who emphasize top-down change, and the younger dissenters, who don’t. Second, this dispute is going to be settled by the rising, and so far ignored, minority group. For all the current fighting, it’ll be Latinos who end up determining who gets the nomination.

At last, a bridge to the 21st century."

Todd Parr, don't you agree?

More in candidate-care ... Two Extra Cookies

Political Nanny is awarding a Clark County (Nev.) judge two extra cookies at snacktime today for ruling that NBC must include Dennis Kucinich in tonight's debates on MSNBC. NBC, who is appealing that ruling, argues only the top three Democratic contenders should be involved. Political Nanny wholeheartedly disagrees. Who cares if Dennis hasn't racked up delegates. He's running for president. He's a national figure. Plus, they invited him!

Everybody Gets a Blue Ribbon!

Our handsome boy Mitt leads in today's Republican primary in Michigan. Political Nanny is secretly crossing her fingers for him to win. He really wants to, it's the state he grew up in. Sure, he's a touch out of touch, promising to rebuild the auto industry when, to put it bluntly, that's quite unlikely. Still. She'd like to see as many candidates stay in the Republican race as long as possible.

Foodie in the House!

This isn't directly related to the presidential elections, but it might be a taste, literally, of what Democratic leadership at the highest levels could bring. Seems House Speak Nancy Pelosi has taken her promise to "green" the House into the cafeteria. Now hungry staffers can dine on healthy stuff, the harvest of which doesn't wreck the environment.

Naturally, the prices have increased considerably and that's not so great. But what's funny and telling are many of the comments, especially those admonishing "Nanny Nancy."

Just imagine what those commenters would say to Babysitter Barack or Househelper Hillary or Meddling Mike -- or any other future president who might actually take the health of the entire nation seriously.

Photo: AP via Politico

Image: Amazon.com

Ultrasound Canceled! It's Still the First Trimester

Madeline Holler — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:20:00 GMT

If only we could hold a sonogram wand against the belly of this election beast, the sex of the next president, and the size of his/her win, could be accurately predicted. But the campaigns are still developing, it's early in the race, and this election has crappy health insurance. We'll have to wait and count votes to see who actually emerges from the mess.

A tough lesson for those in the news business! Pundits and political writers relied on old wives' tales this week to try to predict the details of the nation's first primary before it was even over. They observed whether New Hampshire carried its primary low or high, they peed in glass jars and mixed it with Dran-O, they relied on polls that gave Barack Obama double-digit leads. Then they painted the nursery blue.

Boy, are they pissed. It’s a girl!

Why? How? Where did it all go so wrong?

For your very uncommitted, undecided Political Nanny, this aftermath of the "surprise" "comebacks" (well, maybe for McCain) in the New Hampshire primaries has been more fun than a baby shower with no games AND an open bar. Political Nanny hated all the frenzy and frothing at the mouth that followed Iowa and led up to New Hampshire. She’s hoping, audaciously, for a little more caution going into South Carolina and eventually to Feb. 5, Super Tuesday.

But the fun! The fun! Maureen Dowd, a die-hard Clinton-hater, bawled like a girl after the results and speculated that New Hampshire ladies sopped up Hillary’s tears with sympathy votes. We're laughing so hard we're crying, Maureen.

Others, like Salon’s Rebecca Traister, navigate us through the makings of an anti-Hillary pile-on. The details -- from prologue to postscript – are so compelling, you’ll never take a thing Chris Matthews says seriously again (not that you have for a verrrrrrry long time).

Politico offers this mea culpa and explanation for why journalists got it wrong. It’s refreshing in its candor, delightful in its self-loathing. A sample:

Our own publication, Politico, did its part in promoting several of these flimsy story lines. We used predictive language in stories. We amplified certain trends and muffled the caveat, which perhaps should be printed with every story, like a surgeon general’s warning: “We don’t know what will happen until voters vote.”

And for some nasty fun, watch the blooper videos from Slate. Be patient, Anderson Cooper looks like a total ass in the final clip (and why Gloria Borger keeps trying to make her point, we can only guess). The collection also includes an NBC correspondent's confession that, regarding Obama, it's difficult to be objective. Yikes!

You know, the gestation of an election is supposed to take some time. It’s not supposed to be decided by fewer than 1 million people (just under 800,000 to be more specific) in two different states. How ridiculous would it be to have all but one candidate drop out at this point – before the bulk of the country (remember, the population is over 300 million) could help narrow the field? How fat and swollen and pre-diabetic and endless and post-due would a general election feel in that case? Schedule an induction, STAT!

So, call the lab, cancel the next ultrasound, and have a little fun. Let’s take the presumed advice of an election midwife: eat right and drink plenty of fluids, exercise moderation, avoid polls and negative campaigning. Above all else, give the horse-race analysis a rest and try to enjoy this very special, very magical time that only happens once every four years of your life.

And now, a tribute, to a Political Nanny fave, Bill Richardson. He has withdrawn from his race for president. No, we never thought he’d actually make it to the White House (now THERE’S a prediction even Political Nanny feels was safe to make), but we liked him behind the microphone. In the most recent debate – the one right before the New Hampshire primaries – he was funny, smart, and able to get the discussion back to the issues. Even though he won’t be the Commander in Chief, we get the feeling he’ll nonetheless be moving to D.C. for a job about this time next year. Political Nanny will pack your toys and change of clothes, little Bill, and have them sent to you there.

Finally, this tidbit:

John Kerry has endorsed Barack Obama, not his former play- and running-mate John Edwards. On the one hand, that's sad for Edwards, on the other hand, does a Kerry endorsement have much weight? Hey, Political Nanny is just asking!

Photo: BBC.co.uk

Primary's Baby: N.H. Girl Stalks the Candidates

Madeline Holler — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:47:00 GMT

You can tell a lot about a presidential candidate by the way s/he holds a baby. OK, not really. But we're going to deeply analyze it anyway. Why? Because it's fun, because it's naughty, because Political Nanny wishes SHE would have thought of doing what this forward-thinking and shameless contributor to Slate has done.

Darren Garnick, a New Hampshire resident, hauled his five-week-old daughter Dahlia to campaign events around his home state, handing her over to candidates and capturing the moment in a stillshot. The results? Fabulous! The slide show is at once a marvelous demonstration of parenting at its least protective and political coverage at its weakest. In other words, refreshing!

First up is Barack Obama, who winds up holding Dahlia on two different occasions -- the first time in a sweet (and completely competent) traditional infant cradle hold, the second time while Dahlia wears a "Black Power" bib at a rally. Let's look at the cradle hold: Obama is clearly a man who put in the hours with his own kids. He's got two, but they're young and there's not a lot of distance between daily baby-holding and this picture. (We need to keep that in mind when we look at the pics of some campaign trail parents whose own days of second-nature infant handling (the floppy necks!) are decades behind them.) At the rally, Garnick reports that Obama kissed Dahlia's forehead (melt) and then held her up for cheers.

Next up, Rudy Giuliani is stuck with the screeching girl in a fleece pumpkin costume. He looks like he's going to drop her, but he hangs on tight. He was at a disadvantage -- how do you securely snuggle with a squirmy winter vegetable? Let's not judge Rudy too harshly.

Then there's John McCain, who launches the beginning of a curious trend in the baby holds: he's circled his thumb and four fingers around one of Dahlia's legs. Political Nanny doesn't recall doing this with her babes. Perhaps it's an older generation male thing? Because Edwards, Kucinich and (look closely) Romney are doing it too. Political Nanny is not saying it's harmful, just curious. Did they learn this in a Kissing the Baby workshop at Let's Play President summer camp?

What you really want to know, though, is something about Hillary Clinton's baby snuggling chops. Well, hold your "cold-heart" comments, she does just fine with Dahlia, who gazes right into the mother-of-one's eyes. Sure, there's a bit of stiffness in the hold, but Hillary's kid is pushing 30. Maybe it's been awhile. Please note, however, that Hillary is doing that protective palm-around-the-shoulders upper hand thing, which Political Nanny always appreciates when strangers hold her little ones.

In addition to the leg-grip, Mitt Romney does the fingers-around-the-neck upright baby display so competently, he'd make any OB/Gyn proud (except maybe Ron Paul). Garnick notes that the picture, which includes Romney's wife, looks like the New Hampshire father is giving up Dahlia for adoption to a rich white couple. Agreed!

Finally, we see Huckabee and Chuck Norris in a horizontal split-screen shot. Huckabee's doing the hands-under-armpits-with-dangling legs hold (baby facing outward), while Chuck Norris has turned his arm into a seat, allowing Dahlia to rest against his chest. He lays a hand -- it's a registered weapon! -- protectively against her chest. Well done, Chuck, well done!

Garnick didn't get Dahlia into the arms of Fred Thompson (who didn't do much in New Hampshire) or Duncan Hunter (what a relief!) or Ron Paul (coulda shown Mitt a thing or two). And he admits Mike Gravel freaks him out, so he didn't stand a chance. But Political Nanny is grateful for the slideshow and its insight. How will the candidates handle Iraq? Who cares! How are they going to cuddle the nation?

Photo: Slate.com

Candidates Play Musical Chairs

Madeline Holler — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:22:00 GMT

When election officials pressed pause and the candidates scrambled to their seats last night, the line-up in that round of musical chairs reshuffled. Hillary Clinton moved from third in Iowa to first in New Hampshire. Edwards dropped from second last week to third last night. Obama's second-place finish in the primary was a letdown after his first-place finish in the caucuses. (See above for best disappointing-returns photo ever. Is that couple real or what?! Ahem, back to the results.) So far in this round for Democrats, no one will follow Chris Dodd and Joe Biden in leaving the game. A good thing.

Over with the GOP, only Mitt Romney landed in the same chair he started out in, while John McCain scrambled to get the empty first-place one. Huckabee settled for third, which sets him back a bit since his first-round win last week in Iowa.

The other candidates -- Bill Richardson, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, all the rest -- continue to try to connect with voters, register with the media and gather support for better finishes.

What does it all mean? Did the tears work for Hillary? (Shame on you, NYTimes and Maureen Dowd for today's column headlined "Can Hillary Clinton Cry Her Way Back Into the White House?") Or was it the case she laid out in the debate two nights before? Are those truly independent voters buying the maverick message of John McCain? Was the media's infatuation with Barack Obama not enough to entice New Hampshire voters to cast ballots for him? Or was it the weather? The lack of college students? The speeches? The promises?

New Hampshire is another small state with a big early influence on the elections. So Political Nanny is glad to see the shake-up. She'd like all the candidates to stay in the race for another month. There's more to be said of the bigger ideas to the broader audiences. Iowa and New Hampshire were practice rounds. On Jan. 15, Hillary Clinton runs against herself and the "uncommitted" votes protesting the fact that their favorite candidates are not on the ballot. After that, the Nevada caucuses and South Carolina primarie on Jan. 19. Ten days after that, big Florida. We're all waiting anxiously for the music to pause, again and again and again. Because there's nothing quite as exhilirating as play musical chairs with closely matched peers.

Photo: NYTimes.com

Sensory Overload During N.H. Primary

Madeline Holler — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:07:00 GMT

Seriously, Political Nanny is just waiting for a nationwide media meltdown. Reporters laying face down on the ground. Photographers throwing their equipment across the room. Candidates pounding their fists and bawling like babies. (That may have begun to happen already.) There's just so much going on, so much to say, so many ways to look at today's primaries in New Hampshire.

Let's start with the crying:

Hillary Clinton got emotional yesterday when she was talking to a small group of voters in New Hampshire. She teared up. She visibly suppressed a lump in her throat. And she set off a fit of commentary on what the tears meant, whether they were geniune, were they a part of a new post-Iowa campaign makeover, and why did she wait so long.

Today, Fox News reported that uber campaign strategists James Carville and Paul Begala would be riding in to rescue Hillary campaign. Which must have given die-hard Clintonistas a bit of relief. However, were now reading that, no, no, no, it's not true. You're kidding. Fox got it wrong? But there are likely changes coming for her campaign staff. Political Nanny has been waiting for that announcement for a couple of weeks. Oh, and in case you'd like to put Political Nanny on retainer, she'll give you her first nugget of advice for free, Hillary, release Chelsea from the grips of your protective motherly instincts! Let her talk! Let her be interviewed! Help her help you!

Free ride:

The other Clinton, Bill, accuses the media of giving Barack Obama and John Edwards a free ride. Naturally, the media doesn't believe it. Let's be honest, though. Obama is simply interesting, which doesn't necessarily make him a better president, just a better news story. So, while Political Nanny wouldn't call it a free ride, she would call the media's handling of Obama a comfortable ride at a nice price.

Now, Political Nanny would be remiss in not sharing the fact that (1) when doing Google searches for pictures of her candidates, it's much easier to find authoritative yet friendly, strong yet sensitive, handsome yet intelligent pictures of John Edwards and Barack Obama than it is of Hillary Clinton. Look at this picture on CNN.com today of Obama. Why not just Photoshop in a halo? They've got pixie dust flaking off his head! Just saying ...

Also, we know a lot about Obama's good work -- South Side Chicago, the international travel, fun with hard drugs, that kind of thing. And for Edwards? Well, he reminds us of his life's story every time he gets to a mic. (And it's a good story, don't get me wrong!). But for Hillary? We get to hear about her cheating husband. I mean, for god's sake, she's the first woman to really have a shot at becoming president of the U.S. She's got more of a backstory than woman done wrong, no?

Whew! That nearly triggered a Political Nanny meltdown! Back to New Hampshire ...

What hinges on McCain's outcome:

John McCain needs to do very well in New Hampshire to keep his campaing going. What's amazing is that he actually has a chance. He's been getting more support -- Iowa notwithstanding -- and the campaign we were all willing to write off over the summer has survived (but isn't survival what McCain is all about?). Political Nanny wants to see McCain stay in the race. He adds to the tension among the GOP candidates, which reminds the rest of them to behave. Plus, he's got a nasty streak that's quite entertaining.

Oh, man, Mitt needs to rally!:

Last week in Iowa, Huckabee stole the thunder that was a Mitt Romney win and eventual nomination. And now, everybody's looking at McCain. What does this mean for Mitt? A second-place finish, while not the worst possible outcome, it's also not what he expected. And for the GOP in N.H., second-place is the new also-ran, since Huckabee hasn't really bothered much with a campaign there.

Running low on ballots:

Perhaps the most aggravating news that comes out today is that some counties in the state are running low on ballots. My goodness, aren't we just screwing up elections year after year in the United States? Here's hoping the ballot supply lasts until the last voter goes home. If not -- if this primary gets contested or yields inconclusive results by tomorrow morning -- well, that's when Political Nanny promises you SHE'LL throw a tantrum.

So amidst the crying, the surging, the polling, the voting, try to stay calm, dear candidates. Try to stay calm.

Break Out the Diapers: Candidates Demand a Change!

Madeline Holler — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:35:00 GMT

Candidates from both parties are beginning to sound like a room full of neglected toddlers wearing sagging, saturated diapers. "Change, change, change," they all yelled, screamed, demanded, whimpered during a weekend of debates in New Hampshire. "I'm here for change!"

Well, hold on a second, Mitt and Hillary and John McCain. Just last week you were bragging about your experience and training and ability to, if elected, go on the potty starting from Day 1!

But Political Nanny understands. You're all wetting your pants after the Iowa Caucus when the new kids Barack and Mike got most of the attention and a whole lot of love -- love and support you had hoped (expected?) would mostly be yours. Since everyone is reading these not-totally-surprising-but-still-very-notable wins as Americans wanting change, well, that's what you'll all give them: change!

In Saturday's Facebook/ABC News back-to-back Republican and Democratic debates and again on Fox for Republicans on Sunday, the talk was about change. Change in immigration. Change in healthcare. Change in Iraq. Change in foreign relations. Change in the status quo. Change in monetary systems. Change in leadership style. Change in change.

The Republicans:

On Saturday, Fred Thompson sounded like he was BSing, a lot, let Political Nanny just get that out there. He seemed caught off-guard. John McCain was ready with a zinger for Romney at nearly every turn. Giuliani got in a couple as well. It was kind of a Mitt Romney pile on. Interestingly, Mike Huckabee sat back a bit. Answered his questions. Stayed out of the fray. Safe.

Side note: perhaps Political Nanny is starting to identify with her captors, and some kind of mainstream media Stockholm Syndrome is clouding her judgment, but Saturday's debates were the best so far for both parties. There was no schtick to upstage the candidates (like videos or planned questions from the audience), and Charlie Gibson allowed the candidates to talk and ignore the clock a bunch.

Even better, Gibson followed up on a couple of points Political Nanny has been curious about: He pressed Republican candidates, who say tax credits are the way to get more Americans insured, by crunching the numbers -- basically laying out how $15,000 in annual premiums (which is essentially what employers are paying for a family) can't possibly be written off the taxes of families with incomes of $60,000. They would only be able to write off something like $3,000. (This is the same problem I see with health savings accounts (Guiliani's healthcare strategy). How do you build up enough to cover ongoing health checkups -- particularly for families who have young kids (well baby checkups must add up to a fortune) and need those expensive immunizations and still have something left over for a catastrophe or, say, minor surgery?)

So Charlie crunched the numbers for them, which no one responded directly to, but that's about when John McCain jumped in and said the trick is to control inflation, so that healthcare won't cost $15,000. Riiiiiight. Huckabee said we have a "disease care system," and not a health care system and wanted to shift to prevention and, of course, control costs (yet have it remain a free-market enterprise. Hmmm.). Romney wants the states to handle it how their governors see fit. But he wants to give support (and money?) at the federal level.

The Democrats:

There was some fun sparring to watch, especially as Barack Obama and John Edwards hooked harms and took on Hillary Clinton, later pointed about by moderator Gibson and getting a laugh from Clinton, "you noticed?" Overall, Clinton wanted voters to believe that she doesn't have to convince them that she's a candidate for change (see? "change!"), since she's been about change her whole life. Then she cited a few things that she's changed, particularly getting healthcare for children in Arkansas. And said, as the first woman president, she would quite distinctly embody change.

Edwards wanted us to know that he has lived through the struggles facing American families and that his desire for change is personal. And possible: he claims he has never taken money from lobbyists or PACs and that he wouldn't allow lobbyists in the White House and, therefore, would be beholden to no one but Americans.

Obama defended his ability to inspire as an important catalyst for change, that inspiring Americans builds momentum and support for change.

Bill Richardson said, "I love change," after also defending experience, a notion that has taken a beating as of late. "What's wrong with experience? We want to change this country, but we have to know how to do it." (Political Nanny detected a defense on behalf of Hillary. So kind.)

Speaking of Richardson, Political Nanny would like to hug him. He provided just the right kind of levity the debate needed to ease the tension and pull the rhetoric back a little to remind everyone they were talking about real issues, actual events, and American lives.

Next up ... the New Hampshire Primaries tomorrow (Tuesday, Jan. 8).

Iowans Play Favorites. Political Nanny Still Doesn't

Madeline Holler — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:34:00 GMT

Well, that was that. The candidates stepped out and tested the cold, cold waters of voter approval last night in Iowa. Political Nanny stood at the side, waiting with towels and hot drinks and, for some, a soft hankie to cry in.

Her boys Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama swam confidently to shore, winning their parties' races by about 9 percentage points each. Obama won most of the female vote and most of the younger voters' support too.

Her tough fighters Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, and recently challenged Mitt Romney, flapped their arms and gasped and fought their way to finish in respectable positions and not terribly far behind the winners. Each of them vowed to continue fighting. Each of them is ready to regroup and start again. In five days. Whew!

But quite a few of Political Nanny's babes sank to the bottom. Fred Thompson, John McCain, and Ron Paul made it to the double digits. Joe Biden, Rudy Giuliani and Bill Richardson, and especially Duncan Hunter and Chris Dodd, wellllll, they did their best. But it wasn't great. In fact, Political Nanny will spend the day packing up Chris's bag, gathering his toys, taking down his pretty pictures, and telling him good-bye. He has decided he won't be needing Political Nanny's care any longer. His little friend Joe Biden -- God, remember how hard it was to tell them apart? -- is leaving Political Nanny too.

Down to 13 monkeys jumping on the bed. Time to pack for New Hampshire.

Photo: MSNBC.com

Election Milestone: Candidates Take First Steps In Iowa (Quick, Get the Camera!)

Madeline Holler — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:38:00 GMT

Political Nanny is sitting on pins and needles, at once excited, deliriously proud of and terrified for her candidates. Today, the 15 reach such an important milestone: the Iowa caucuses. They look so grown up! It seems like just yesterday ...! It's all happening so fast (well, not really.)

As the unruly group of them toddles around on stages, grabbing at microphones, saying "cheese" for the camera, and slobbering all over Iowans one last time in hopes of charming each and every one of these Midwesterners to go out tonight and be counted at the caucus (and chances are, they won't), Political Nanny is watching and trying to remember Iowa is not the final word. It's the first, only the first. We caregivers -- those of us experienced with cadidate-children -- know that the early walker in Iowa will not acurrately predict who gets to sit in the White House highchair. (Remember little guy Dick Gephardt?) See, there's time to catch up.

In the meantime, Political Nanny will be watching her babes today as they smile and shake hands and talk pretty and learn their numbers (polls and precinct percentages are the new flashcards!). She'll be watching tonight as the reports come in. Tomorrow, she'll usher the remaining ones over to New Hampshire for primaries there next week.

Those little buggers never could sit still.

Group Hug! Candidates Endorsing Candidates

Madeline Holler — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 19:30:00 GMT

Political Nanny's pet presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich made a surprising demi-endorsement just a day and a half before Iowans kick off the voters' portion of the 2008 election program.

He told his supporters to back Barack Obama if they can't gather enough Kucinich delegates to meet a minimum percent of those gathered. As we discussed before, Iowans have a built-in back-up plan when it comes to determining their state parties' favorite candidates. If a candidate can't gather enough support, those caucusers are allowed to regroup with their second-choice candidate. Kucinich hopes his would-be supporters will gather under the Obama sign.

Naturally, he'd like New Hampshire's Democratic primary support to go all and only to him.

"This is obviously an 'Iowa-only' recommendation, as Sen. Obama and I are competing in the New Hampshire primary next Tuesday, where I want to be the first choice of New Hampshire voters."

Obama's response?

“He and I have been fighting for a number of the same priorities — including an end to the war in Iraq that we both opposed from the start, reforming Washington and creating a better life for America’s working families. I encourage all Iowans to take part in the caucuses this Thursday — not because it will be good for any one candidate, but because it will be good for our party and the future of our country.”

Political Nanny feels certain that Kucinich's suggestions for second-best presents an interesting dilemma for more than one lefty Iowan, since Ralph Nader also recently made an endorsement of his own: he told the press he's backing John Edwards.

Those Democrats -- it's just one big group hug after the next. (Hey, John, quit pinching Hillary!)

Guess Who Ralph Nader Just Endorsed!

Madeline Holler — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:33:00 GMT

Who cares what the governor of New Hampshire thinks, right? Or the editor of Iowa's largest daily. Or, sorry to say, Sean Penn. Political Nanny listens to Political Nanny when it comes to who she'll vote for in the primaries.

Endorsements, with a couple of exceptions, just haven't been that interesting. Until now ...

Public citizen, consumer advocate, sometimes presidential candidate, one-time election spoiler, and Babble "Timeout" subject Ralph Nader made an endorsement, just in time for the Iowa caucuses. He's throwing his support to John Edwards.

We're no experts, so who knows whether Ralph is a good or bad playmate for John. But Political Nanny adores Ralph and respects his opinion. His support feels like a gut-check: she's long suspected John really means what he says and contrarians like Ralph are the first to smell the BS, yet he thinks John, for the most part, is the real deal.

From Politico:

Nader said he has watched Edwards from afar and sees his more pugilistic brand of populism as a "glimmer of hope."

"It's the only time I've heard a Democrat talk that way in a long time," Nader said, acknowledging what was, for him, a rare moment of praise for a Democratic leader.

"Iowa should decide which candidate stands for us," he added. "Edwards is at least highlighting day after day that the issue is who controls our country, big business or the people."

Not the most unflinching of endorsements -- indeed, he's used the endorsement mostly as a way to criticize Hillary for being too Republican. But what's notable is that it's not himself that he's endorsing. Can we assume he won't be making a bid? Or does that depend on whether John Edwards gets the Democratic nomination?

In any case, Political Nanny is excited that Ralph Nader has come out to play.

Candidates, Political Nanny Loves You. Now Change!

Madeline Holler — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Over the past three months, Political Nanny has grown to love her lot of disagreeable, argumentative, name-calling, cackling, power-praying little presidential candidates. They're approaching the first of many back-to-back primary election milestones -- only three days until Iowa! -- but have already blossomed into tough and sturdy and, how shall we put this, flexible campaigners.

But could they be better? Oh, couldn't we all. In the spirit of starting anew, Political Nanny has made some resolutions for the campaigning men and woman of 2008.

Over at the Democrats' favorite playground ...

Barack Obama: resolve to inspire (again … and, alone!). What happened to the guy who swept us all off of our feet nearly four years ago? This sparkling source of hope has gotten dull from so much positioning and polling and over-wrought handling. Get back to the basics -- make change feel possible! Make it feel inevitable! If the old caucusing biddies in Iowa (or New Hampshire or South Carolina) weren’t going to vote for you months ago, they’re not going to vote for you now. Indeed, one person can change the world. We just don't want Oprah to think it's her!

Hillary Clinton: tear down that wall! This distance you keep from the voting public reminds us of a certain guy president and no, we’re especially not talking about your husband! So let us in. Let us ask questions – any question! Not pre-approved ones! Trust us! We’ll do the right thing! Trust yourself! You've got the answers!

Joe Biden: Keep on keeping on. You know everything, you really do. You probably even know you don’t have a chance to win. But the candidates need you – America needs you. In government and in this campaign. You turn meta-answers into concrete plans, Joe. You say what we need to hear, not what we want to hear.

Chris Dodd: Be (even more) like Joe. With two of you, oh, how the front-runners won’t get away with pandering to the polls!

John Edwards: John, sweetheart, listen. You have got to expand your message to the middle and upper middle class (who look more like the lower- and middle-class you're talking about, everyday). Here's the deal: the mortgage industry is handing you talking points for these people who, to be honest, you might sorta be alienanting with your anti-corporate talk (you see, that’s where they work!). But with housing, ohhhhh, housing. Just bring up housing, foreclosures, bubbles, all of it -- and they’re listening. They're listening to you.

Bill Richardson: Keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the vice presidential stars.

Dennis Kucinich: Don’t go changing to try to please Political Nanny. She loves you just the way you are.

Mike Gravel: Come here and give Political Nanny a hug, you silly guy.

Now back at Camp GOP ...

Rudy Giuliani: Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. So much to love. So much to loathe. Political Nanny would like you to be your own guy. She knows that Republicans often get bullied by big scary Christians who claim to be friends. But would real friends ask you to be someone you’re not?

John McCain: Resolve to stay tough. And be strong. You keep hope alive for conservatives who don't necessarily think the church and state are one and the same. Oh, and next time a supporter mentions The Bitch, show some sac, dear John, and don't be so quick to laugh.

Mike Huckabee: Michael! That's enough! You, my boy, are a man of faith. But you must also resolve to be a man of respect. If all you have to offer Americans are platitudes and religious references, please reconsider your leadership goals and run for president of the Southern Baptists. Because Political Nanny likes her America inclusive, cohesive and as plural as it can get.

Fred Thompson: Sit down, honey, let’s talk. Political Nanny thinks you don’t actually want to run for president. And you know what? That’s perfectly fine. No shame in “spending time with the family.” So, whenever you’re ready to call it quits, know that millions of others are ready for it too.

Duncan Hunter: Still more are ready to see you go, Duncan. So, Political Nanny would like to see even less of you in the new year, young man. You can use the extra down time for painting murals on your very special wall.

Mitt Romney: Political Nanny thinks you’re a good boy, Mitt, she really does. But you want your buddies to like you so much that you’ve changed your mind, mainly by closing it. You say such damaging things to millions of families in the U.S. and completely dismiss millions of others. Political Nanny wants to see you be the truest, most honest version of yourself in 2008.

Ron Paul: You're doing something right, Ron Paul. Look at all those people giving you money! But that doesn't make you perfect, not by any means. In the new year, Political Nanny would like you to work on (1) living in reality, (2) increasing your dosage of paranoia-tempering thorazine and (3) smiling.

And last but not least, a New Year's resolution for her GOP debate interloper and possible candidate (please, please, please) Alan Keyes: Just. Do. It.

Happy New Year, kids! And Happy New Year, voters! Let's resolve to get together everyday for a little election downtime with Political Nanny!

Settle Down and Use Your Indoor Voice

Madeline Holler — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 00:02:00 GMT

Tantrums get attention. So do screaming, sobbing and hand gestures that proclaim, "he did it first!" Those sorts of actions don't give caregivers and innocent bystanders the warm-fuzzies. Instead, they make everyone in the room shake their heads, utter lame excuses and leave.

So it goes with politicians who move into the realm of speech-stump meltdowns. We all watch while candidates go after each other -- both overtly and in coded messages. But it's hardly endearing. Voters say they don't like it when candidates turn negative, such as when debate topics devolve into name-calling and verbal rock-throwing. So the candidate who appears to rise above this childish behavior -- speaking with an indoor voice in campaign ads, using their words during debates -- may be doing themselves a favor in the long run in terms of getting voters' respect and support.

Who seems to be turning the other cheek, pasting on a happy smile and delivering a positive, plan-studded message the most? Which of Political Nanny's charges appears to be explaining positions more than tearing down opponents? According to this New York Times/CBS News poll it is the once-inevitable-and-now-fighting-like-the-rest candidate, Hillary Clinton. Of the registered Democratic primary voters polled, seven out of 10 think Clinton is running a positive campaign. Four out of ten think the opposite.

(Sidenote: Political Nanny thinks this is great. Because she has been standing by for years with her shovel, ready to bury that all too prevalent sentiment that strong, argumentative women are being shrill and/or bitchy.)

Back to the poll:

Six in 10 Democrats said Barack Obama used his words to explain, not attack. But a quarter thought he has been going the 2-year-old route and throwing political fits to get his way.

And bad news for John Edwards, if perceived attacks don’t turn into votes. Because 45 percent said he spent more time explaining his positions (that’s fewer than half!) and 29 percent said he has spent more time speaking negatively. Political Nanny finds this surprising, since she feels like she has a better understanding of John Edwards' positions and his plans for the country under his leadership. Though he has seemed a little negative lately.

For Republicans, 53 percent said Mike Huckabee has been explaining more and 9 percent said he has been attacking more. Apparently the rest of those polled had no opinion. Wha …? Republicans, it's OK to talk about your feelings! You're talking to a pollster, you're safe.

As for Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, more than half of the Republicans polled said both spent more time explaining than attacking (and yes, this poll was after the YouTube/CNN "sanctuary mansion/sanctuary city" debate). Four in 10 said John McCain and Fred Thompson did more explaining. Again, many expressed no opinion.

More results from this poll of 1,133 registered primary voters will be posted later tonight and tomorrow morning here.

John Edwards Accidentally Promises His Kids a Crappy Xmas

Madeline Holler — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:02:00 GMT

Oh, John Edwards, how Political Nanny thought you knew everything! She was just shouting to the world how you’re her secret favorite, what with your smarts and common sense and that way that you really understand the lives of reg’lar folks. But you went and did it. You showed a lack of awareness. A blindspot. A weakness. You came across stunningly out-of-touch and a wee bit snobby (though Political Nanny thinks you just didn’t know any better).

During Tuesday's NPR Democratic debate in Iowa, candidates were asked to talk about trade with China and safety standards for all those goods we import. Michele Norris, NPR host, asked you candidates with young kids whether your children would get Chinese-made gifts for Christmas. You said, emphatically, no. Then you went on: "I can guarantee it! I promise you!" They won't, they won't, they won't.

John, I suppose it is possible that you CAN guarantee that – because you’re loaded and your Santa can swing all-wood, hand-crafted Dutch imports and fancy Swiss Caran D’ache colored pencils. But the rest of America – the America that’s looking at you as a mill workers son! A man who knows poverty! Who knows what it's like! – can’t. Their kids are getting lead-covered crap and some dazzling choking hazards, probably something that could sever a finger or unexpectedly blast out their eardrums. All cheap. All from China. Because, didn't you know this, John? That's what you get when you shop at Target. Like middle-class Americans do. You DO shop at Target, don't you?

So be careful. Don’t let Emma Claire take her new Webkinz out in public. And tell Jack to leave the LeapPad at home. From now on, they're going to have to sneak around with the fun Chinese imports, 'cuz Dad went and promised the world they wouldn't have any! And listen, don't kick yourself if you get busted. It's just impossible to have kids and not own Chinese imports. It can't be done. We all know that.

A mockingly pandering Chris Dodd knew the right answer and insisted all his kids' toys (and holiday food, and everything!) will come from Iowa. Iowa, Iowa, Iowa! We laughed. I cried. John? Maybe nobody else noticed.

In other debate news, Political Nanny is now crushing hard on Joe Biden. What an overlooked, straight-talking, worldly smarty pants he is! It is obvious from his answers on China and Iran that this guy (Chris Dodd, too) is a foreign policy expert. No sound bites or strategic answers for him. Just history, Bush policy, and what needs to get done. As the country and this campaign get whipped up over immigration, well, Biden knows what's worth talking about too. For example, when Hillary Clinton responded to a listener question that was rather hostile toward non-English-speaking people living in the U.S., she talked about getting more funding and help for teaching immigrants English. When it was Biden's turn to respond, he quite correctly said (Political Nanny will paraphrase here), don't worry. Who cares if mama y papa learn English, the next generation will and always has. It’s just how large-wave immigration works.

Swoon.

Political Nanny Can't Help But Play Favorites

Madeline Holler — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:09:00 GMT

Political Nanny truly adores most of her charges, those rascally politicians begging for everybody’s attention and keys to the White House. Like any caregiver, each has earned her affections in different ways.

She is moved by the unselfconscious determination of Hillary; loves the charm and ease of Mike H., Joe, Chris and Barack; delights in the unpolished edges of Rudy and Dennis; winces at the grit and anger of John M.; and appreciates the attempt to be earnest by Mitt, Ron, Bill and Fred. Her Mike G. gets a little lost in the shuffle. Duncan and Tom get on her nerves (she quietly blames their parents).

But little John E. has to be Political Nanny’s favorite, always saying the right thing, always trying his best. He, too, is charming and determined. And kind. So kind. He seems to know what’s important, what the country needs now (or at least what Political Nanny needs now), how to help, what has to change. Perhaps he’s too earnest, too helpful, too smart. Or perhaps Political Nanny is just that gullible -- or old-fashioned, praising the actions and words of yet another white rich guy who wants to be head of the class. Maybe kind and topical just doesn't cut it -- maybe that shouldn't cut it!

It doesn't matter, actually, since John E. hasn’t managed to get most of anybody’s attention, even Political Nanny’s, and it doesn’t look likely that he’ll get enough of anybody’s support, even hers. Political Nanny wishes there was a little more of John E. in each of her other charges. Which would make picking a president just that much easier. If that were the case, she’d like the rest even more.

Here’s the latest endearment to come out of her little John E.’s mouth (she could do without the background music) that speaks to Political Nanny in just the right way. He doesn't just make a promise of healthcare for all, he makes an honest (if quick) assertion of who and what is in the way of accomplishing exactly that. Who else is pointing fingers (at the problem, not each other)?

Stand-off at Clinton's NH Campaign Office Ends in Arrest [UPDATE]

Madeline Holler — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 20:14:00 GMT

UPDATE: The man who walked into Hillary Clinton's Rochester, N.H., campaign office with a bomb strapped to his chest was arrested after a five-hour stand-off. No one was harmed in the situation, which involved several hostages, two of whom were releasted after two hours.

Negotiators were able to gain trust of the man, a local known to suffer from mental illness, conceding to his requests for soda, cigarettes and alcohol, according to reports.

"(The negotiator) continued to gain his confidence and basically talked him out by saying that we would be able to help him," officials said.

Friday afternoon, a man in his mid-forties entered the offices and opened his shirt to show what looked like bombs strapped to his chest, according to reports. He ordered the campaign workers in the office down to the ground, while releasing a woman and her infant. The released woman ran into a nearby shop and quickly explained the situation. Police and SWAT teams evacuated the area, surrounded the buildings and are currently negotiating with the armed man.

Two of the campaign workers were released unharmed after two hours. And authorities worked to negotiate with the man as two more workers were still inside. Around 5:30 p.m., another hostage was released and then over an hour later the last hostage was set free. Shortly after the last hostage emerged safely from the building, authorities moved in to arrest the man.

Clinton was not in New Hampshire on Friday, but canceled her planned address at the Democratic National Committee Meeting after learning of the hostage situation. Howard Dean, DNC chairman, announced the reason for Clinton's canceled appearance to the group who had gathered in Virginia.

Barack Obama's and John Edward's campaign offices were also evacuated and area schools were in what officials called a "soft lockdown." The candidates have, according to reports, been in contact with each other regarding the situation.

The man is well-known in the area and has a history of mental illness. His son-in-law reported that his father told him to watch the news today and that earlier he had asked where to buy flares.

Photo: CNN.com

Campaign Like a Pregnant Woman: Let's See Those Presidential Birth Plans!

Madeline Holler — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:05:00 GMT

Political Nanny, like a good many Americans, has truly yet to make up her mind about whom she’ll vote for in February (when her state’s primary elections will be held). She’s been a solid supporter of many of the candidates in alternating five-minute intervals since, what feels like, the dawn of time. Her vote is still up for grabs. So know that she’s not secretly stumping for one certain candidate when she says this:

John Edwards seems to be the only Democrat who’s actually backing up talk about issues with plans. Fred Thompson seems to be the only Republican doing the same. Like a couple of well-researched, control-freaks mid-pregnancy, these two candidates have started recording details of what they'd like to accomplish and what they will tolerate during the arduous labor of a four-year presidential term. Sort of like a birth plan. And we find that helpful.

No, sure, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (and Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani) are answering a lot of questions – lately those not asked but implied in the form of attacks on each other. We feel certain we know what they think about some of the biggies – Iraq, mostly, and healthcare. Oh, and maybe a little global warming for the Democrats and immigration for the Republicans? But their discussion of these issues feel general. In the modern birthing paradigm, they're saying more "I want a natural birth" than clarifying their wishes with details like "no epidural, intermittent fetal monitoring, unlimited use of a birthing ball, pre-mixed Enya loop only at a volume not above 6" in their quest for a healthy presidency.

Since you're reading Political Nanny, you’ve likely got more specific kinds of demands too – education, safety, college, the housing/mortgage crisis, price of gas, secure retirement, those kinds of things.

You might even care about sad stuff that doesn’t necessarily affect you directly, but makes you feel like crap knowing your child lives in a world where it’s tolerated: things like hunger in the U.S., or our weirdly segregated cities, or the fact that people charge their utility bills to credit cards, or can’t go to college despite stellar grades but because of a lack of citizenship or money or both. Or New Orleans. Does anybody think people should STILL be living in FEMA trailers in New Orleans?

And childcare! No one talks about childcare, yet Political Nanny believes that if the U.S. slayed the childcare beast, then problems like stagnate wages; retirement, college, and regular old savings; education woes like school readiness for all and achievement gaps; and work-life balance issues for moms and dads would kind of simmer down for a while.

John Edwards is going there. And Fred Thompson too. Not on all of these issues, but, for example, just before Thanksgiving, Edwards's campaign launched “One Can Change America,” which is supposed to not only get our votes but spur us to action regarding hunger in the U.S. He also put out a plan for how he’d make home heating fuel available to more Americans. (If the elections really were like giving birth, John Edwards would sooooo hire a midwife-doula team, don't you think?)

Fred Thompson has released plans for reforming Social Security and taxes -- not exactly social causes in Political Nanny's mind, but hey! They're actual plans! (Thompson would, in birthing terms, take the epidural in the parking lot and check out 12 hours after having his baby. He's not, metaphorically speaking, about transformational experiences and the empowerment of birth, right?)

What we mean is, these two candidates are talking nuts and bolts of presidency – what they'd like to accomplish and how. Which, sure, where’s the money going to come from? Won’t you need support from Congress? What makes Edwards, for example, think he can do what no one else has managed to?

But it’s exciting when the leading candidates drop some of the positioning and careful talk and planted questioners and I’m-more-qualified-than-her/him statements (because, judging from the last seven years, you’re all qualified! Now move on.) and just talk about life in the U.S., what they know about it, and how they’d like to see it changed.

Oh, and even more exciting is when they break through the news machine and actually get these plans written and/or talked about. Because we suspect there are more plans out there. We just need to find them. Political Nanny is looking. But like the L & D nurse who just came on shift, Political Nanny has to figure out which of her patients requested the anethesiologist and when the hell she can ask the woman in Room 36 to get out of the birthing tub. She's only got a few scribbled notes attached to a clipboard to go on.

Nanny Cam: Dems' S.C. Ads More Southern Than Sweetened Iced-Tea

Madeline Holler — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 16:11:00 GMT

Democrats John Edwards and Barack Obama began airing new television ads in South Carolina today. Neither begins to compete with these ads in terms of humorous fun. However, Political Nanny does love to look for the bits and pieces meant to connect with the changed demographics and both ads are working the Southern angle.

Edwards sticks with the jobs/economy theme of his Iowa/New Hampshire ads, but reminds the locals he's one of them (is it Political Nanny's imagination, or is Edwards' sweet, molasses accent extra thick in this 30-second spot?).

Barack Obama talks about his work as a civil rights attorney years ago and shows pictures of his youthful, hopeful self (Political Nanny loves old photos of candidates).

Watch them both: