Political Nanny : Rudy Giuliani

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

SPF 50 for Campaign Trail Burns

Madeline Holler — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:50:00 GMT

Political Nanny strongly suspects one of her GOP darlings will get severely burned in Florida on Tuesday. Which is why she is insisting Rudy Giuliani slather himself with a super-high SPF sunscreen before the state’s voters head out to cast their ballots. Rudy has spent all his time and most of his money on selling himself to Florida’s Republicans. But this fast cycle of primaries and caucuses makes those who have won nothing appear as if they’ll never win anything. (John Edwards, you might need to reapply the Coppertone, too.)

While we don’t like predictions, all the polls show Giuliani doing third place at best. It’ll be a shame if he doesn’t stay in long enough for his home state to weigh in on his candidacy, or other big states like California, who might be more sympathetic to his breaks with the party line (see: GOP stance on abortion).

Political Nanny’s Democratic candidates will be less vulnerable to blistering in Florida, since the state party was stripped of its delegates after scheduling primaries before February 5th. Ahhh, but the state may still be in play. Plenty of Democratic voters still cast ballots – Hillary Clinton is their supposed favorite. And Clinton is now talking about having the national party reinstate the delegates. Self-interested? Sure. But we expect nothing less!

Speaking of expectations and blazing hot election moments … wow! Did you hear Barack Obama’s victory speech in South Carolina? Political Nanny showed restraint -- just a few goose bumps during the English translation of the old migrant workers Spanish rallying cry: Si, se puede!/Yes, we can! And a quick melt when he thanked his wife and kids. But then, Obama went and brought up second shifts at the Duncan Donuts (minute 11:55). Duncan Donuts! No teacher should have to shovel cream-filled Munchkins in a decorative box to make ends meet! He's right! And he said it. He said a lot. Truthfully, Political Nanny wasn’t that moved by Obama’s Iowa victory speech. But seriously, you’d have to be a robot (or the coldest of Republicans) to not feel like he said something big, something really big, something Kennedy big Saturday night. Political Nanny isn't just talking about donuts. Obama mentioned other long forgotten notions, like Republicans who might "cross over." (Um, I thought crossing over was for Democrats, Joe Lieberman.) He mentioned black voters supporting a white candidate (ooooh, Bill ... Bill, Bill, Bill.) And ... and! He talked about Latinos and Asians and Native Americans who have got to be feeling left out of this historical year, which has focused mainly on black/white, woman/man, rich/poor, pro/con differences -- not the actual complex shades-of-gray country we live in as individuals.

Anyway, doesn't this election feel so darn big?

Of course, just like Florida, there are severe elements in the forecast for the Super Tuesday states. The rest of us election watchers would be wise to use caution, seek shelter in facts and votes, ignore probablies and percentages, and slather up with whatever's left of Rudy’s Florida sunscreen. Because the only thing any of us do know, is that this year? You just never know.

Now Casting 'Election 2008: The Movie'

Madeline Holler — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:36:00 GMT

Eventually, the 2008 Election is going to make a great epic movie. Sure, we don't yet know the ending. And yeah, so far the story centers mostly on the campaign and surprise Iowa win for a bi-racial Senator, and a pretty decent tearful plot-twist, courtesy of the ambitious, conniving, first woman to do anything important in this country ... ever! There's also the tension building over a New Hampshire comeback for the aging Republican stalwart. Comic relief/hints of horror from the fundamentalist Christian with populist appeal threatening the hopes and dreams of a Morman businessman with daddy issues. There's the 9-11 Mayor, the stinking rich son of a South Carolina mill worker and a second-rate actor on a ubiquitous television franchise to squeeze in there too.

You couldn't write this stuff! But somebody will. Though it's a bit early to be drafting a script -- and hiring a script doctor to come in and punch up those debate scenes (let's be honest, Monday night was 10 minutes of rancor surrounded by 100 minutes of the usual) -- we can start thinking about other ways to get this project greenlighted. Help Political Nanny cast the lead roles:

Slate has made a solid case for Reese Witherspoon as Hillary Clinton in this very amusing video that cuts several Hillary moments with those of another Witherspoon role, Tracy Flick in the 1999 movie "Election." The anger at a lifelong ambition suddenly under threat. The singular focus on winning. The tears. (If it gets on your nerves the first time, go back to it later and watch it again. Eventually, you'll love it.)

How about the rest?

For obvious physical reasons, Mike Huckabee should be played by Kevin Spacey. We're sure Spacey's already brushing up on Scripture, guitar chords and radical weightloss techniques in anticipation of this film (think Spacey will go fat suit or real weight-gain for background scenes as a tax-hiking governor of Arkansas?). It's so the role he was born for, not that Bobby Darin disaster he got a little too into a few years ago.

Fred Thompson could play himself. And he could play himself playing himself on Law & Order and it could get a little Being John Malkovich only with Southern aphorisms and lots of scheduled naps.

Political Nanny feels like Mitt Romney could be played by Tom Cruise (in lifts), what with them both being Scientologists ... or Mormons ... or whatever. Same difference. If Cruise refuses the height-enhancing orthotics, his hair could land him the Edwards role, which leaves Romney open for ... suggestions? A young Charlton Heston?

Joe Biden's role would be too small for the talents of Alec Baldwin, but we'd like to see him do it anyway. The two come so easily unhinged that we feel, just like the real Biden, Baldwin will steal the few scenes he's actually in.

Only Tommy Lee Jones and a box of jawbreaker candy could do the role of John McCain any justice. Which leaves Robert Duvall to play Rudy Giuliani (mmmhmmm, good one, huh?! And we know Duvall would say yes!). But Chris Dodd? We'll have to have open casting for him unless you've got some ideas.

Barack Obama has said he'd like Denzel Washington to play him in the movies but thinks his ears make Will Smith a better fit. Fine, but Political Nanny likes any excuse to watch Denzel so he's got her vote.

Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Mike Gravel can be played by extras. After all, this film's got a budget.

And Dennis Kucinich. Dennis, Dennis, Dennis. Now, keep an open mind on this one. Political Nanny sees Mike Myers channeling a little Austin Powers channeling the comeback role of a lifetime. Think it'll work? (Julianne Moore gets to be the hot Mrs.K!)

Political Nanny also hears Ralph Nader is thinking about getting in the race. Who's going to play him? Jim Carey? John Turturro? Alan Alda? The talented and versatile Fred Thompson? Fred's got time to rehearse and he'll be available since, well, he called it quits Tuesday and will only appear in the first 20 minutes of this politico-historical epic.

That leaves squeaky Ron Paul, sweet Bill Richardson and gasbag Chris Matthews, who would no doubt want to play himself. Any suggestions? We're looking for an Oscars sweep.

Photo: Wonkette.com

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

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.

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!

Political Nanny Drops Her Cynicism for One Candidate's Christmas Message

Madeline Holler — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:24:00 GMT

Political Nanny has spent a bit of time watching all her candidates' Christmas ads, the craven, the wee bit cringe-y, the creepy. She's got a cynical eye, your Political Nanny, always noting signs of pandering, never allowing her heartstrings to be tugged, knowing experts have manipulated every nano-second of the campaign ad "viewing experience" to maximize her affection for each.

So imagine Political Nanny's surprise when she found herself tearing up and sinking into an emotionally charged holiday message from one of her more low-key guys. Little Freddy -- lazy, laid-back, low-energy Fred Thompson -- brought her this little craft project, a snowflake that drips with glitter glue and glass beads and what she hopes is genuine deference to real people acting on the orders of a failed leader and his advisors.

Political Nanny's opinions of the military and the war in Iraq are complicated. And using armed forces and separated families and young people dying to make her like a candidate a little bit more should raise the hair on her neck and get her wagging a finger and setting up the Naughty Chair. But this doesn't. Political Nanny's fine with it. Maybe it's the noticeable lack of Jesus talk (which she prefers). Or the clever way he avoids campaign issues (which is so Fred). Or the general feelings of melancholy and a weakened resolve to push away sentimentality that she gets this time of year. Who knows. But Political Nanny can appreciate Fred Thompson's Christmas Card more than most.

Rudolph, With Your Campaign (Not So) Bright

Madeline Holler — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:36:00 GMT

Political Nanny loves all her charges unequally, she really does. But it’s not what you think. She doesn’t love her boys and girl based on family background or affluence or which color figure they choose for Candyland or which side of the gameboard they like to sit on, right or left. She loves them for who they are.

Which is why she’s in a bit of a panic for one of her secret favorites:

Her fake conservative Rudy.

Reports about his struggling campaign have made Political Nanny’s heart heavy. The fact that some are making it seem like he could drop out of the race stirs her viciously protective side. No, it can’t be, not the little fighter (and obviously skilled lover!) Rudy. This election season will be so worse off without him.

He is a joy to look after on so many levels: his personal life is a blast, his missteps even blastier. There’s something so dirty-politics about the guy, and Political Nanny is not stranger to dirt.

Rudy got roundly criticized during some of the GOP debates but Political Nanny thought he was a gem (and let’s face it, the dullness of the others made this little diamond-in-the-rough sparkle madly). Political Nanny was tense, yes she was, during the nitpicky “did not, did so!” kinds of tussles over sanctuaries with another of her desperate GOP charges, Mitt. And she cringed when Rudy tried to quickly recall Bible details discussed during catechism so many years ago. But he needs to stick around. He has to.

Because here’s the deal with Rudy: he and Political Nanny (and, perhaps even you) share a nudge-nudge, wink-wink thing over games his GOP playgroup forces him to play. If someone has to go home now, she’d really rather let go of one of her gay-hating, woman-hating, immigrant-hating, healthcare-hating, ozone-hating, Mormon-hating (or Muslim-hating, ahem!) guys. Because Rudy doesn’t hate. He loves. He loves a lot (if you know what I’m saying). And he makes the others show their love just a little bit more. Problem is, Rudy’s loves includes most of all himself. Like a two-year-old, he is his own favorite person. And it shows. It shows a lot – in his face, in his words, in the paperwork.

He’s not the only one, of course. But he’s the one who keeps getting caught. And any kid will tell you, everybody’s breaking the rules, but only the ones who get caught get punished. It's too early for such drastic punishment for kid who is so fun to watch, so helpful in steering the others to love more.

Don’t go, Rudy. Don’t.

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)?

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.

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.

Out of the Mouths of Candidates

Madeline Holler — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 19:22:00 GMT

Can you really say this with a straight face?

From TPM Election Central:

Rudy Giuliani said in an interview with the Weekly Standard that he voted for McGovern, but actually preferred Nixon.

"'I had traditionally been a Democrat," Giuliani told me in a recent interview in Las Vegas. "It was almost like a reflex mode. I actually remember saying to myself, 'If I was a person really deciding who should be president right now, I'd probably vote for Nixon, because I think the country would be safer with Nixon.'"

The magazine goes on to question Giuliani's party switch the GOP in 1980 as a less ideological move and more career strategy and positioning for a Reagan administration appointment.

Oh, the challenge of explaining the past. Political Nanny sees nothing wrong with changing one's mind, but she prefers a more straightforward explanation.

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?

Giuliani Gets an Amen!

Madeline Holler — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 20:56:00 GMT

We didn’t see this coming! Pro-gay rights, pro-choice, pro-broken marriages, pro-pre-marital everything Giuliani received a rather stunning endorsement from a rather anti-anything-fun kind of guy.

Pat Robertson, of the 700 Club and founder of the Christian Coalition, announced he’d be backing Giuliani for president. While Robertson called for this unexpected “Amen!” I’m sure more than one of his followers responded with “what the …?”

Giuliani gladly accepted the endorsement. But why? How? Some say this shows that the former NYC mayor’s tough talk on terrorism is important enough to outweigh the 700 Club and Christian Coalition members’ concerns about abortion and finding a pro-life candidate to support.

A New York Times reporter on the campaign trail in Iowa analyzed the unexpected partnership this way:

“The endorsement helps them quiet talk the talk that had bubbled up among Christian conservative leaders about supporting a third-party candidate if Mr. Giuliani, a supporter of abortion rights is the nominee, and bolstering his advisers’ contention that he can compete among Christian conservative voters who are dominant in early voting states like South Carolina and Iowa.”

Still. Of course nobody expected Robertson to back Satan, right?

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?