Political Nanny : Republican

Ralph Nader: Hey, Guys, I'm Back!

Madeline Holler — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:17:00 GMT

Everybody's favorite election spoiler, Ralph Nader, has officially come back for more.

He announced on Meet the Press this morning that he will be launching his third third-party candidacy and running a campaign based on his anti-corporation message. Of course, Dems aren't happy, but even he -- Ralph Nader, jouster of windmills -- had this to about whether he expects to win:

“Not a chance,” he said. “If the Democrats can’t landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just pack up, close down, and re-emerge in a different form.”

Hillary's not exactly excited. The GOP, on the other hand, is likely loving it. As for Obama, we're pretty sure he's not terribly concerned.

Be Mine: Partisan Valentines

Madeline Holler — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:37:00 GMT

Only one day left to show that you love your dearest Democrat or Republican as much as politics. Will roses do the trick? Of course they won't. But one of these partisan Valentines just might.

You love healthcare. You hate war. You want change. You need something besides politics and passion as usual. What you want is to Barack that certain someone's world.

Your support for Hillary doesn't waver with the lastest exit polls. Your love for her -- and for your own first lady -- is heartfelt. Tell her in heart and felt. (If you're hearting Huckabee, or behaving like a lovesick fool around John McCain, don't worry. These hearts are fickle. You can get them in Republicans' names too.)

God damned liberals, you say! No don't say that, say this:

Or for all the knee-jerk conservatives/romantics there's this:

Or perhaps you're ready to reach across the aisle, in which case you'll want to join in with Hillary Clinton and send your registered sweetheart this:

Check out the rest at GOP.com. [Thanks, Brian, over at DailyScanner for the tip!]

Too late to send anything? Dim the lights, fire up the laptop and watch this political valentine montage from Politichill.

Mighty Heartin' Huckabee

Madeline Holler — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:31:00 GMT

How is it that Mike Huckabee continues to enchant voters and carry whole states in these primary elections and caucuses? It can't just be his freaky ideas about Jesusing-up the Constitution. Can it?

Political Nanny thinks it has everything thing to do with the guy's persona, speaking style and ability to sound completely plugged in and relevant. The crazy talk gets lost in the one-liners. From The Caucus, the NYTimes political blog, we get these gems from a Chesapeake primary day breakfast with journalists:

On running for the United States Senate if this presidential thing doesn’t work out: “It’s more likely I’ll dye my hair green, get a bunch of tattoos and go on tour with Amy Winehouse.” He said "Amy Winehouse"! Does McCain know about Amy Winehouse?

On the recent flood of endorsements of Mr. McCain, now that he is close to securing the nomination: “What are these people saying – that they were for him all along but just forgot to tell him?” Ouch!

On why Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton seems to be struggling right now: “She does not have the personality of her husband. Very few people do.” See, he sounds completely reasonable -- not at all mean.

On why he stays in the race, despite the long political and mathematical odds: “The path to victory is a complicated one for me. The path to defeat is easy – I could just quit.” Thanks coach. Let's hit the showers!

Come on. Don't you heart Huckabee just a little? Maybe ... this much?

Scrapbooking the Election: Candidates' Kids

Madeline Holler — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 22:29:00 GMT

Remember when this presidential campaign looked more like a Disney On Ice tour, what with all the little, little kids running around getting their pictures taken with the stars of the show? Even Grampa Mitt, whose own children are now five strapping grown men, hauled his willing grandson around to mug it up and sway the minds of undecided voters.

Unlike a fairy tale, election Neverneverland takes some serious funding and voter approval to return to again and again. One-by-one, daddies have packed up their Iowa rental homes or emptied their already empty campaign schedules or headed back to the North Carolina compound.

The youngest campaign kids -- and our final hope ... yes, hope! ... at hearing the pitter-patter of little feet in the White House -- are Barack Obama's 6- and 9-year-old girls, Sasha and Malia (pictured above). The rest of this election's second generation aren't as cute as the Obamas. Still, Political Nanny thinks we should familiarize ourselves with who could be calling Mr./Madame President "Mom" or "Dad" next year:

John McCain has a multi-layered family tree -- some of his offspring are way grown-up kids from a first marriage, some way grown-up kids from a second marriage and some thrown in later for good measure. His daughter, Meghan, is very visibly involved in his campaign (she's traveling with him and blogging about it ... and also offering make-up tips). McCain's youngest daughter is Bridget, who you may remember is the daughter he adopted from Bangladesh that some sleazy South Carolina Bush operatives used to undermine McCain's values credibility back in 2000.

McCain: Bridget, 16 and Meghan, 23

Hillary Clinton finally took the muzzle off of Chelsea last month, following the senator's New Hampshire win. Now we not only see Chelsea at all her mom's rallies and debates, we also get to see video of her talking to younger voters.

Clinton: Chelsea, 27

Mike Huckabee is the father of three grown children, a daughter and two sons. His daughter works on his campaign (watch her here ... she has a fantastically rich Arkansas accent) and clearly has it together. Political Nanny doesn't think Huckabee will be the next president ... but Sarah? Well, seems like we'll be nannying her a couple of decades from now.

Huckabee: Sarah, 24

One of Huckabee's sons, David, might be the former governor of Arkansas' skeleton in the closet. In 1998, when the boy was 17, he was involved in the hanging of a dog at a Boy Scout camp. What makes this a problem for Huckabee is that he appears to have fired the director of the state's police force for not helping him out with the problem.

Huckabee: David, 27

Mitt Romney has all five of his sons working hard on his campaign. They've got a website with personal blogs (a few of which need some updating, Ben!). And these guys, what with there being five of them, are all over the campaign trail riding bikes and shaking hands and flashing their big white teeth at the cameras. (Any chance at least one of these guys is gay or liberal or pro-choice or deeply in debt or unmarried or infertile or atheist or anything interesting like that?)

Romney: Tagg, 37

Matt, 36

Josh, 32

Ben, 29

Craig, 26

Ron Paul's "kids," Ronnie, Lori, Rand, Robert, and Joy, are all way grown and parents and some of them are even grandparents. Pictures of them are hard to find. But here's one with Ron and some of his grandkids. To see Paul's two daughters go here.

That sure is one big happy Family Campaign photo album! Awwww, aren't they all so cute?

Who Loves You, Campaign Baby? (Rambo, Porn Stars and Writers, That's Who)

Madeline Holler — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:23:00 GMT

Running for president is not a popularity contest. Oh, wait, it is! And just like high school this competition hinges on the backing of other popular kids. This year's election has been a veritable Endorsement Bonanza. Everybody is getting in on it, no matter what their relevance levels, which for most, in Political Nanny's estimation, peaked somewhere between 1983-1989.

So for every Maya Angelou that steps up to stump for Hillary Clinton, there's a Toni Morrison who thinks you should vote for Barack Obama. Mike Huckabee's campaign took off after Chuck Norris promised to kick campaign butt. Now Hulk Hogan is throwing his weight around to encourage support for Obama. Rounding out the Aging Muscle-Man endorsements is Ric Flair, also for Huckabee, and Sylvester Stallone, a McCain man, naturally (this endorsement suspiciously coincided with the release of Stallone's latest Rambo movie).

This year's backers come in all shapes, sizes and professions. Here are a few more:

Vampirist Anne Rice and barrister-cum-crime-novelist John Grisham heart Clinton.

Porn star and writer of "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star" Jenna Jameson would like to tell you how to vote like a porn star -- casting a ballot for Hillary Clinton. She has her reasons. Of course, Porn Stars are not a monolith. Savanna Samson wanted to toss her lot to Rudy Giuliani, but his campaign climaxed prematurely and made a huge mess. Equally deflated is King of Porn, Hustler's Larry Flynt, who made his sweet love for Dennis Kucinich well known. Now, all Flynt has left are a few good memories of what might have been.

There was, of course, the Grande Dame of endorsers -- Oprah for Obama. Here are some other celebrity endorsements (a couple of which are even 21st-Century relevant)

Kevin Bacon - John Edwards
Donnie and Marie Osmond - Mitt Romney (Political Nanny KNEW he'd have someone!)
Lance Armstrong - John Edwards
John Mayer - Ron Paul (that body of thought is a wonderland)
Jeff Gordon - Rudy Giuliani
Bo Derek - Rudy Giuliani (eh. 7.5)
50 Cent - Hillary Clinton (word?)
Adam Sandler - Rudy Giuliani
Martha Stewart - Hillary Clinton (you OK with that, Hillary?)
George Clooney - Barack Obama (double swoon)
Harry Belafonte - John Edwards (daylight come and he went home ...)
Wilford Brimley - John McCain (dinosaurs, unite!)
Scarlett Johansson - Barack Obama

You're relevant to Political Nanny no matter when you peaked. Whose endorsement are you endorsing? Whose endorsement do you find stunning?

Thanks to BuzzFeed

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.

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

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

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!

Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe: Undecided Iowans, You're Welcome (Now Vote!)

Madeline Holler — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:49:00 GMT

Incredibly (or maybe not), Iowa voters from both parties are still mostly undecided. (So is Political Nanny, but she's not voting NEXT WEEK!)

So for her Iowa readers, and those in New Hampshire and South Carolina who are also scratching their heads, a simple yet thorough quiz that promises to match you with a suitable candidate. Your only job is to show up at the caucus and be counted. (Or, further east, wait your turn for a voting machine.)

But make up your mind, already! And for goodness sake, go caucus or vote. Your silly states fought hard for this early voting privilege and the rest of us are dying to know who you like and just how much.

It's Not a Toy: Please Take Away GOP's Cell Phones

Madeline Holler — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:46:00 GMT

Political Nanny rolled her eyes during Giuliani's short-lived gimmicky phase of taking phone calls from his wife at public-speaking events. But this well-timed phone call at a 2004 GOP fundraiser to Mike Huckabee -- from God -- just makes her cringe. Would it be too draconian to insist the GOP hand over their cell phones? Because Political Nanny is dreading the moment when Fred Thompson takes a call from Sam Waterston while making the primary rounds in California.

In any case, here's Huckabee's chat with the Lord Almighty. (Thanks to ThinkProgress via Huffington Post for digging it up.)

Debate Summary: God and Guns Good; Taxes and Immigrants Bad; Families and Kids ... Huh?

Madeline Holler — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:00 GMT

The CNN/YouTube Republican debate last night was not a win for parents and families. But what involving Republicans ever is? (Oh, settle down, Political Nanny’s just feeling cranky.)

Only one question came close to being directly related to families and children, and it's not even one of the top concerns reported in the Parents magazine survey that Political Nanny has posted about a few times. The family-ish question?

Lead in toys. That’s right! Lead and toy recalls! A YouTube mom, flanked by her two beauties, wanted to know what each candidate would do about keeping toys with lead from being sold in U.S. stores. Duncan Hunter said we should only buy American-made toys (suuuuuure. That’s doable! We’ll start sewing our own clothes and building our own laptops too!). Others said blah, blah, blah. You know, none of the answers gave Political Nanny any confidence that at some point she won’t have to chuck the entire contents of her daughters’ room, which, incidentally, isn't half has filled with shit as the question-asking woman's playroom appeared to be. In any case, screw lead-filled Thomas, we're fighting a war!

Demographics of YouTubers: there were not a lot of females in the mix, a few African-Americans (none of whom had their very direct questions satisfactorily answered), loads of Jesus loving from YouTube and the candidates, some gun rights battles, and bizarrely some kid asking the candidates to comment on a Confederate Flag hanging in his bedroom. (Seriously, how did a producer win the argument to run THAT question?). Oh, and immigration, immigration, immigration. A real knock-down, drag-out fight over who hates immigrants more. It was a draw, except Mike Huckabee hates them, loves their kids (more on that in a second).

No questions on the economy (though some on Social Security and the national debt). Super-nothing on the mortgage crisis/housing market meltdown, and zero, zero, extra-zero on education. Seriously? Not one question on schools? Giuliani and Romney did mention schools in answering a question about black-on-black violence, but it's not like they mentioned plans or, heaven forbid, funding.

There was one question on college tuition, but it was a disguised accusation that Huckabee loves illegal immigrants' kids more than the children of military personnel, because he wanted to give them scholarships to go to college. Naturally, he denied having a preference. Also, nothing about gas prices, nothing about healthcare and nothing about the environment (nothing! And these are all things, we don't care how conservative the pickings, the next president is going to have to deal with).

Oh, and guess who should have been disqualified from asking a question but wasn't? Grover Norquist – whose bad facial hair mixed with low-quality video and my computer screen (had to watch online while eating dinner – West Coast time) made me think it was some guy trying to look like Hitler! Go look! Anyway, how unfair is it that he got to ask a question but not "professional bloggers"? There were rules! Whatever. The super-right wing guy wanted to know whether the candidates would sign a pledge not to raise taxes and oh, yes, yes, yes, they’d all sign. That is, until Fred Thompson got to answer and he said he wouldn’t raise taxes but he makes his agreements between himself and the American people and not between himself and Grover Norquist. Take THAT, sneaky, sneaky Grover.

The questions were clearly picked to see where on the spectrum – from center, to right, to Tancredo – each of the candidates' positions (and beliefs … it’s all about their beliefs!) are. So, no wonky policy, just scrambling to appear conservative, while hoping not to get busted with evidence of a more centrist past (tough going, eh, Mitt and Rudy?). Good times.

One more thing, Political Nanny would like to humbly apologize to CNN for incorrectly presuming they would not ask a couple of questions that, indeed, were asked(!): the one about jail time for abortion doctors and what’s so wrong with gays in the military. Political Nanny likes to believe great minds think alike so, CNN, keep it up and you’ll get to hang out with the gifted kids someday. (Incidentally, the answers on jailtime and abortions -- ahhbahhbahh, I know, the states would decide! The states would decide!; answers to gays in the military ranged from it's unfair that someone with strong Christian values should have to serve alongside such sinners (Hunter) to don't-ask-don't-tell is working (McCain -- saying this despite the fact that the question-asker, there in Florida at the event, said gobs of gays are discharged from the shorthanded U.S. military simply for telling or getting caught or whatever.)

The New York Times political blog has all the questions that were asked, if you’re curious, and CNN has plenty of blather about rancor and out-takes of the "debates" themselves.

How Candidates Like to Do It: Sex-Ed Positions

Madeline Holler — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:10:00 GMT

Although abstinence-only sex education programs flunk every study done on their effectiveness, they continue to be the sex education of choice for most of the Republican presidential candidates (oh, Rudy! Another tough one! Welcome to the inside of the chastity beltway!).

The fact that at least $1 billion dollars has been spent on these ineffective programs makes us wonder why so many are still in favor of them. That would make a fabulous question for the Republican candidates during tonight’s CNN/YouTube debate (8 p.m. EST). Think it’ll get asked?

We doubt it, too. In the meantime, here’s where both parties’ candidates stand on sex-education.

Go here for more details. “Abstinence-plus” mentions abstinence in the broader context of safe-sex. Abstinence-only emphasizes chastity and provides no information about birth control or STD prevention (except to say "don't do it.").

Democrats

Joe Biden: "age-appropriate" and comprehensive sex education (but voted to fund some abstinence programs).

Hillary Clinton: abstinence-plus.

Chris Dodd: "appalled" by the Bush administration's abstinence-only programs.

John Edwards: comprehensive sex education.

Mike Gravel: comprehensive sex education.

Dennis Kucinich: co-sponsor of the Responsible Education About Life Act that emphasizes comprehensive programs.

Barack Obama: respects abstinence as a choice but also advocates age-appropriate comprehensive sex education.

Bill Richardson: abstinence-plus.

Republicans

Rudi Giuliani: avoids the topic. He talks about increasing adoptions and decreasing abortions but is mum on sex education. As New York City mayor for eight years, he presided over a major free condom distribution campaign that included public schools.

John McCain: abstinence-only, but previously promoted comprehensive sex education.

Mitt Romney: promoted abstinence education in Massachusetts classrooms as governor of that state from 2003 to 2007. Romney mentioned this in the May South Carolina debates to show his credentials as a "clear and consistent conservative." Alex Burgos, a campaign staffer, said Romney believes schools should "promote abstinence as part of their health curriculum and teach that marriage comes before babies." Romney, however, checked a box saying he supported comprehensive sex education in a 2002 Planned Parenthood candidate survey.

Fred Thompson: abstinence education.

Duncan Hunter: "equal emphasis" on abstinence. He wants to give abstinence the same amount of teaching as the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases.

Mike Huckabee: favors abstinence-only and opposes abstinence-plus. In response to a question asking whether his religious beliefs would allow him to support AIDS prevention in Africa that might include contraception, the Arkansas governor compared it with domestic violence and said compromising on either issue is not an option. "We don't say that a little domestic violence is OK, just cut it down a little, just don't hit quite as hard," says the former Arkansas governor. "We say it's wrong."

Ron Paul: abstinence-only programs.

Tom Tancredo: abstinence-only programs.

The Debate Questions CNN Won't Bother Asking

Madeline Holler — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:02:00 GMT

Political Nanny has zero confidence that tonight's CNN/YouTube Republican debate will leave viewer-voters with a deeper understanding of the Republican presidential candidates. And that has nothing to do with YouTube or the questions submitted in the online video format.

If Anderson Cooper's promo of the event, or this Situation Room chat between Josh Levs and Suzanne Malveaux, are any indication of the broadcasters' interest in tackling tough issues, we are in for more of what we saw in Las Vegas with the Democrats: the network's inability to deal with the real Americans they find so fascinating.

So if you see a lot of space aliens or controversial snowmen or (as Anderson Cooper was rather obsessed with) poorly composed video shots in the question-posing part of the debate tonight, know that, once again, CNN went for show not substance.

There were some really great questions submitted to YouTube -- direct, serious, relevant, specific in a way that would make Malveaux's head spin. Here are some Political Nanny hopes will be chosen: jail time and abortions; serving alongside gay soldiers; gay marriage concerns of a young guy; gay marriage concerns of an older woman; (we went a little gay crazy, but since it's such a rallying cry for Republicans, why not?); No Child Left Behind unfunded; federally sponsored childcare (yes!!!!); and stem-cell research bans from self-described Reaganites.

The questioners aren't hostile or confrontational or insulting. Just smart, concerned and looking for answers.

Rudy, Fred and Johnny Happy to Kiss Your Boo-Boos

Madeline Holler — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:21:00 GMT

Three of the top GOP candidates have proposed healthcare plans that wouldn’t even cover their own cancer-surviving asses.

The LA Times looked at research on the proposed healthcare plans of Fred Thompson, a lymphoma survivor, Rudy Giuliani, who battled prostate cancer, and John McCain, who beat melanoma. None of these guys would be guaranteed coverage by their own plans. That is, if they needed their own plans for coverage, which, don’t worry, none of them does.

The market-based GOP plans' weakness, according to researchers comparing the proposals, is that they rely on the private market, which loses money on cancer patients’ and their expensive treatments.

One policy researcher tested 22 insurance companies to determine whether any would cover a hypothetical breast cancer survivor five years after successful treatment.

“Eleven companies said they would deny coverage, and six said they would issue a policy at standard rates. One company said it would charge double the usual premium. Another said it would issue a policy but exclude future cancer treatment. Three insurers did not respond.”

An expert insider said most companies wouldn’t consider a cancer survivor for 10 years and would only issue a policy at a higher premium.

"For example, a person treated for a small, localized melanoma could be covered after five years at a higher premium. But if the tumor were larger or deeper, that person would have to wait 10 years. For prostate cancer, a man with a less severe form of the disease could be covered after five years of being cancer-free, at a 40% higher premium.”

Political Nanny is fairly certain a tax break couldn’t begin to make up for that. What's left? A boo-boo kiss? Spiderman Band-Aids?

Independent Considers Joining the Race (and We’re Not Talking About Nader)

Madeline Holler — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:27:00 GMT

Make room in the sandbox, kids, because there’s another rich white guy who's thinking about joining the race.

Though New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg brushes off talk of a run for the White House, his aides have been looking at what it might take for him to launch a bid as an independent. Which means he's thinking about it. Billionaire Bloomberg could do it too, since he's loaded and could easily finance his own campaign in this “billion dollar” presidential election.

There’s speculation that if he were to run, he’d wait until after the March primaries in Texas to make the decision/announcement. He’d have to get on the ballot in all 50 states, but Ross Perot did it in four months, so why couldn’t he?

Some speculate that he'd be an appealing centrist candidate for those in the South, particularly if the general election were between the other New Yorkers, Clinton and Giuliani.

What do you think? The more the merrier? Can we survive yet another election with an Independent candidate skimming votes from one side or the other? What's Bloomberg's take on family issues? New Yorkers, we're asking you!

Who's Your GOP Daddy?

Madeline Holler — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 22:40:00 GMT

A tiny focus group of Virginia GOP voters predictably named Fred Thompson as Granddaddy in an exercise asking them to assign family roles to each of the Republican candidates.

Guess who they chose as father?

Rudy Giuliani! Mind-boggling, I know. I think of him more as a brash older cousin who brings a different girlfriend (or is it wife?) every year to Thanksgiving. Are the paternal pickings really so slim for conservatives?

The twelve members of the focus group tagged Romney an uncle. (Or a long-lost relative, as one member remarked.) No filial associations from the focus group for the rest of the candidates, which, when you're John McCain, doesn't that just hurt?

Here, let me give it a try: Trancredo and Hunter (who? I know) are the Montana cousins you never see and always forget about. And McCain? He's like the bitter, defensive great-uncle, who mumbles stories from 'Nam while the rest of the family ignores him.

Now let's play house with some Democrats. Bill Richardson is the cranky grandpa who sits in front of the TV all day yelling back at newscasters. Obama is the high-achieving older brother who secretly smokes in the garage. Joe Biden divorced your sister 10 years ago but still calls Mom on holidays and special occasions (thank God for caller ID). And when Hillary Clinton won't give you the keys to the Prius (and she never does), you go and ask Kucinich, because he'll give them to you every time. Gravel is your aunt's brother-in-law (or is he your dad's second-cousin? I forget), who shows up for Christmas dinner once a decade, eats and leaves.

Where do Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul fit on this dysfunctional family tree?