MANY PEOPLES PARENTS! Darryl Fears and Katherine Seelye flesh out key advice from Obama: // link // print // previous // next //
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2008
OLD YELLER: Good news! Restorative processes have made Chris Matthews a glorious bottle blonde once again. Enjoy our subject-lines word-play, then ask yourself this: Does Chris Matthews know who he is?
Rachel Maddow replies: Chris Matthews has always been wonderfully generous in sharing his tips about hair care.
RULES NEVER DIE: In this mornings Post, Richard Cohen presents a thoughtful column about John McCain and Hamasand Obama. (Headline: McCain in the Mud.) It would be a good thing if cable yellers built a discussion or two out of Cohens frameworks. What exactly does McCain mean when he says he would be the scourge of Hamas? What exactly would McCain do? Granted, these questions arent as consuming as those concerning bowling scores, flag pins or orange juice intake. But our public discussion might advance if our talkers lingered there for a while.
But alas! In the process, Cohen shows us that rules never change. Heres the way his column begins. Note: In this column, Cohen is principally going to batter McCain for getting down into the mud:
McCain has been throwing mud at Obama, Cohen says in the column. But we think you know the rules of this game; even when you discuss McCains lack of integrity, you have to praise his integrity first! I continue to admire McCain for this quality, Cohen says as he starts. And then, after discussing the ways McCain has thrown mud at Obama, Cohen closes like this:
McCain has behaved in a distinctly ugly way, Cohen says. But even so, the pundit goes out of his way to praise his integrity once again.
Weve discussed this Hard Pundit Law before, sometimes with reference to columns by Cohen. For what its worth, the pundit explains this odd conduct at the start of this mornings piece. Lets cut-and-paste him again: In 2000, I boarded John McCain's campaign bus, the Straight Talk Express, and, in a metaphorical sense, never got off. Actually, Cohen boarded the bus in the fall of 1999, along with the rest of his small, puzzling mafia. And when he did, he accepted a Hard Pundit Law: When you discuss McCains lack of integrity, youre required to praise himfor his integrity.
THE BIRTH OF AN INTERPRETIVE STANDARD: McCain has integrityeven when he doesnt! This basic Pundit Interpretive Rule was best expressed by Jonathan Alter back in the fall of 1999, when Cohen first got on that bus. Note how McCain just cant go wrong by these interpretive standards:
In that middle paragraph, Alter ran through a parade of horribles. But so what? [E]ven his failures just seem to deepen the character lines, he then judged. Yes, you can defend Alters technical logic here. But you can also say something like this: By these Pundit Interpretive Rules, John McCain is honorable when hes honorableand even when he isnt!
As Cohen helps us see this morning, some pundits never quite got off that bus. In a metaphorical sense.
Shortly after South Carolina, Fears wrote a report intended to summarize the anger aimed at the Clinton campaign for allegedly playing the race card. Frankly, we thought he had to struggle a bit to work up a list of examples (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 1/28/08). On Saturday, Fears wrote an intriguing companion piece in the Post (Black Community Is Increasingly Protective of Obama). In it, he detailed the reaction to some prominent people when members of the black community felt that they werent supporting Obama enough, or being sufficiently respectful.
Once again, we felt that Fears had to struggle a bit to explain some complaints. Check, for example, the attempt to explain the problem with Bill Clintons fairy tale comment. For ourselves, we thought Clintons case was weak that day, but it wasnt non-existentand most of his (unwise) anger was directed at the press corps. We thought it was hard to make this a racial offenseand in last weekends report, Fears didnt push his complaining witness to do so. Too bad: This would have been a more valuable piece if hed made her explain in more detail.
But we thought Fears produced an important moment when he interviewed Indiana Universitys Valerie Grim, who spoke about her parents. I have parents who are still living, she said. This is a nugget to dream on:
For our money, Fears and Grim produced a memorable moment there. (Of course, it all comes back to the decency of Grims parentsand of so many like them.) As we noted a few months ago: Tim Russerts Irish Catholic family stood in line, thrilled by the opportunity to vote for Dear Jack in 1960. (He described this deeply human episode in his book, Big Russ & Me.) Now, Grims parents are in that line too. Of course, African Americans have waited much longer, in much more difficult circumstances.
That was a darn good moment from Fears. That said, we also thought that Katherine Seelye captured a moment in yesterdays Times. (We drop the nickname at moments like these.) Seelye watched Clinton in West Virginiaon Mothers Day, no less. When we read this passage, we thought of what Fears had written just one day before. This is Clinton on the trail, campaigning with her daughter:
Were glad that Grims parents will get the chance to stand in that line and cast that vote. But were glad that those women got to cheer too. Obama has made a core suggestionand we think its very good one. He has suggested that we should learn to see ourselves in others.
TOMORROW: In todays Post, Kevin Merida writes a valuable piece about (some) voters and race.