They think you're stupid

Well-meaning pundits often presume that you, dear readers, are idiots. In his latest column, The Atlantic's Clive Crook asks: "Romney or Obama: Who Loses More From the Crisis in Egypt and Libya?" Okay, wait. Don't tell me. Lemme think. Damn, this is so hard, dude. OK, OK -- I got it: Romney loses. It's obvious, right? Wrong, says Crook.

Crook writes: "The administration's posture of calm, cool confidence on foreign policy is going to need, let's say, tweaking. The power of leading from behind, quietly delivering such excellent results in Egypt and Libya, is no longer an achievement in the bank. If he had a semi-capable opponent, these events would have been seriously bad news for the president. He doesn't, I grant you. Nonetheless, it's too soon to know who'll sustain the greater damage."

My initial reaction was, Clive, you gotta be kidding me, man. Romney figuratively shot himself in the head. The "greater damage" is plain to see. Moreover, you'd need to be dense indeed to buy Crook's arguments. And people, especially Atlantic readers, aren't as dumb or as ill-informed as he evidently thinks they are. Then I got mad.

First, Crook comes within a hair's breadth of calling Obama "uppity" for his winning and nuanced stoicism. Second, he lazily repeats the fiction that Obama is "leading from behind." The charge is misleading and wholly inaccurate. Third, he suggests that a swaggering Obama promised to deliver "excellent results in Egypt and Libya." He did no such thing. In fact, Obama promised the opposite late last year: "We’re under no illusions -- Libya will travel a long and winding road to full democracy. There will be difficult days ahead." Yesterday was such a day, was it not? Fourth, Crook takes it as an article of faith that Obama is winning only because he is facing a political dolt (i.e., Romney). And that a more capable challenger would have had the abracadabra to cut Obama down to size. Right. And the moon is made of cheese.

So on the basis of these thin reeds, Crook concludes Obama can still make a hash of things, thereby giving Romney a shot at winning. Ergo, the proverbial jury is still out. But this conceit only works if one bends the truth, ignores the facts and refuses to see what is in front of one's own nose. Simply stated: Romney got his clock cleaned, and he won't be snatching victory from the jaws of defeat any time soon. Most folks get that without the tiresome equivocations.

Another fine mess

THE WHEELS have not yet come off the wobbling Romney campaign, but the bolts attaching them are getting awfully loose. Yesterday, in front of god and everybody, Mitt Romney showcased his own incompetence on foreign policy by questioning Obama's competence in these matters. Give the man credit. That's a neat trick, and a novel twist on the pot calling the kettle black. As the whole world knows by now, Romney chastised Obama for supposedly "apologizing" for American values as attacks against US embassy personnel broke out in Benghazi (where our ambassador was killed) and Cairo. Obama did no such thing. So Romney was either lying or just making shit up. And now everyone knows it. More ominous for Mr. Romney: even Republicans are questioning his fitness for the Oval Office. Worse, that narrative is taking hold in the news media. Talk about "another fine mess," as Hardy would put it. That sound you hear might be the life draining from the Romney campaign.

Flunking Politics 101

Mulling Mitt Romney's Libya/Egypt flub, the Atlantic's Clive Crook gets at the heart of the matter: "Romney's mistake wasn't that he was opportunistic. Every successful politician is an opportunist. It was that he was crassly and nakedly opportunistic."

Mika's table dance

Cue the bump-and-grind music. I had a hunch that MSNBC "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski was, well, smokin' hot. I'd say this Vanity Fair photo puts to rest any lingering doubts. As the Bard would put it, "Zounds!"

Needless to say, the pic has gone viral. I'm of two minds about Mika's table dance. First, I'm no prude. So part of me says: Hey, if you've got it, work it, baby. I admire strong, unblushing women who are comfortable in their own skins. On the other hand, as Slate's Alyssa Rosenberg asks, "Do We Really Need To See Sexy Mika?" Probably not. Brzezinski is, after all, a serious broadcast journalist. But her Vanity turn has added an upwardly thrust leg to the menu of my male mind -- a steamy image that will now compete with whatever she says next on US-Russia bilateral relations.

Rosenberg writes: "My jaw literally dropped when a friend sent me the link to Vanity Fair's new joint profile of Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski ... It was the picture that did it: Scarborough in a blue suit and blue, open-collared shirt lounging comfortably in a chair next to a butcher block table. On which is perched Brzezinski, his Morning Joe co-anchor, posed with her left leg skyward, ass just barely covered, balanced on one spindly black high heel. The takeaway: A man is a man and a woman is a table-top ornament."

Rosenberg is spot on, of course. Brzezinski's boldness plays right into the tenacious conceit that women are decorative eye-candy not to be taken seriously.

That said, if a beautiful woman wants to showcase her physical attributes, then she has every right to do so. Moreover, there's no escaping the fact that the female body can be a glorious objet d'art. Just ask Renoir, Degas, and the legion of other artists down the millennium. And Mika is drop-dead gorgeous from bow to stern. But as I've argued before in these pages, I remain mystified why more women -- especially those positioned as role models -- do not at least pause to consider the full consequences of gratuitously sexing it up like Mika.

Precious bodily fluids

There are times when it is just plain embarrassing to live here in Arizona.

Don't get me wrong, most folks here are quite rational and sane, including those in the Republican population. It's just that the nutters have a way bigger megaphone.

Before I continue, recall this classic scene from the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb:

General Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Hayden): Mandrake?
British RAF Group Captain Lionel Mandrake (Peter Sellers): Yes, Jack?
Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have, Jack.
Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without good reason.
Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at, Jack.
Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the source of all life. Seven-tenths of this Earth's surface is water. Why, do you realize that 70 percent of you is water?
Mandrake: Good Lord!
Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids.
Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only distilled water, or rainwater, and only pure-grain alcohol?
Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation of water?
Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? ... That's the way a hard-core Commie works.

Pardon the long set-up, but it's sadly necessary for context. Yesterday, the Phoenix City Council heard two hours of very heated testimony about the wisdom of fluoridating the city's water supply. Yes, you read that right. It gets worse. Opponents loudly argued that fluoride "lowers IQ levels in children." During the debate, some repeatedly shouted "Fluoride is dangerous!" and "The government is poisoning us!" according to the Arizona Republic. Yes, really. After hearing all of this, I'm happy to report that the council voted to keep adding fluoride to the water supply. Bullet dodged. And a grateful citizenry is once again safe from tooth decay. Like I said, most Arizonans are as sane as those city council members. But those who fret about their "precious bodily fluids" always get the spotlight. That's the way your hardcore whack-job works. The gods must be laughing, again.

A return to normalcy, at last

Mercifully, the events of Sept. 11 have largely receded into the realm of a bad dream for most of us. To be sure, the haunting images, sounds, shock and horror of that crystal clear day in 2001 are seared into my mind. I will go to my grave with them. But lingering in those awful moments, 11 years ago, would truly be a form of madness. Somehow, life continued. Somehow, so has mine. Thank God. Indeed, there is now an entire generation of kids 15 or younger who have no memory of 9/11 at all. It's hard to believe, but true. And yet, there are those who would have us re-live the tragedy ad infinitum. Call them the Opus Dei of mourners who insist that we join them annually in what amounts to self-flagellation. Today, for example, NBC caught hell for daring to interview a “Kardashian” star during the 9/11 moment of silence that all the other networks aired live. Was it incredibly tacky of NBC's "Today Show" to chat up "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" star Kris Jenner about her breast implants while the nation bowed its head in remembrance? Absolutely. Is it right to castigate NBC for its dumb decision? Absolutely not. Folks, it's been 11 years. And it's highly likely that most of the country woke up this morning without "September 11" at top of mind. And that's OK. It the simple, inevitable return to normalcy. More to the point, the amazing fact that I can utter "Kardashian" and 9/11 in the same breath means the terrorists have truly lost.

Don't bet on the conventional wisdom

I'VE LONG ARGUED that viewing this presidential election cycle through the lens of the "conventional wisdom" would prove worthless. There are simply too many moving parts this time around. Even the polls seem unreliable. Charlie Cook, the longtime sage of political forecasting and a charter member of the CV club, is clearly flummoxed. He essentially threw in the towel with this gem: "It is becoming clear that if President Obama is reelected, it will be despite the economy and because of his campaign; if Mitt Romney wins, it will be because of the economy and despite his campaign." Hells bells, my grandmother could have cooked up that one (pun intended). Talk about hedging your bets. Cook, who is actually a good guy and often right, says that "this is a very close race and one that still could go either way," though the odds of Romney winning are getting slimmer. That of course is the classical conventional wisdom in all of its unimaginative glory. But just as Obama was no ordinary candidate in 2008, he is no ordinary incumbent today. He's a historical figure, and a very likable one to boot. That alone makes him a wildcard. He's also a master politician (albeit an introverted one) who opponents tend to underestimate (see Hillary, McCain, and the late Osama bin Laden). That means all bets are off. Don't be surprised if Obama wins re-election in a walk if not a landslide.

A chip off the old block

Political scientist Jonathan Bernstein observes that:

"Parties emulate their successful presidents, and for Republicans Ronald Reagan is their successful president. But Reagan's relationship with the truth was pretty complicated, and he would regularly say things that were just not true. I mean, regularly: after every press conference someone would have to clean it up. The thing is that Reagan's genius was for believing what he wanted to believe, and once he was set on something it was nearly impossible to break him from it. ... One of the lessons that Republicans learned from Reagan was that facts just get in the way; what you want are politicians with strong beliefs, not a complex grasp of details."

Which is exactly why we got the Iran-Contra scandal, the Iraq War (plus "Mission Accomplished" and no WMDs), Abu Ghraib, the Great Recession and, well, Mitt Romney.

'One man in his time plays many parts'

Martin Amis, the celebrated novelist, thinker, and great friend of the late Christopher Hitchens, on aging:

"Your youth evaporates in your early 40s when you look in the mirror. And then it becomes a full-time job pretending you’re not going to die, and then you accept that you’ll die. Then in your 50s everything is very thin. And then suddenly you’ve got this huge new territory inside you, which is the past, which wasn’t there before. A new source of strength. Then that may not be so gratifying to you as the 60s begin [Amis is 62], but then I find that in your 60s, everything begins to look sort of slightly magical again. And it’s imbued with a kind of leave-taking resonance, that it’s not going to be around very long, this world, so it begins to look poignant and fascinating."

Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan.

In Mitt We Trust?

OUR LONG national nightmare is over. OK, OK -- it was just a fever dream, but work with me. Yesterday, Mitt Romney proclaimed that he will not -- repeat not -- remove the word “God” from America's currency. Glad he cleared up that burning-bush issue. Never mind that no one is advocating it. Barack Obama certainly isn't. But Romney went all Elmer Gantry anyway before a Virginia Beach crowd, chastising Obama and the Democrats for not mentioning God in their political platform. The Dems did in fact remove a pro forma plank on faith-based initiatives, but later reinserted it after conservative bible-thumpers went all Inquisition on them. For Romney, this is all about pandering to religious right voters. But since it's a safe bet that those folks won't be voting for Obama anytime soon, it isn't clear why the Dems caved on this silly issue (apart from being pussies). “We’re a nation that’s bestowed by God,” Romney ordained, as if the Almighty is heavily invested in the speck of dust we occupy in the vastness of the universe. I suspect the Lord is bemused by our child-like attempts to categorize religion as right or left on some political spectrum. I also suspect He would agree with Gandhi's view that humankind is "not divided into watertight compartments called social, political and religious. All act and react upon one another." As for Mr. Romney's gambit, Proverbs 14:8 best sums it up: “The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit.”

I *am* the President

IN THE CLOSING moments of his convention speech in Charlotte, President Obama said: "I recognize that times have changed since I first spoke to this convention. The times have changed, and so have I. I'm no longer just a candidate. I'm the President." (my italics)

That last phrase -- which largely defined the speech -- was actually written as a transitional device to a larger point about the need for a serious leader in serious times. I re-watched that segment several times on YouTube to confirm my hunch. When Obama said "I'm the President" he paused a beat, then drew in breath to speak again. But the crowd went wild. Instinctively realizing the sudden import of those three words to his audience, Obama paused for several more stately beats to let them reverberate while the cameras zoomed in on his firmly set jaw.

Pardon the gushing, but it was magnificent. The viewing audience, all 35.7 million of them, clearly thought so, too. Per Twitter, Obama's speech prompted 52,756 tweets per minute, a new record that peaked at the "I'm the President" phrase.

So what's really going on here?

The Atlantic's James Fallows wrote insightfully: "To me, that final sentence came across not as boasting or preening. Instead it had a startling spare, understated drama. Obama used it as the transition to a line about the burden of wartime leadership. But I heard it as also conveying, Let's get serious here. I'm the President, so I know how hard these trade-offs are. I'm the President, so there are some things I won't joke about. But also: for all of you who think I'm a Muslim, an alien, a socialist, a fraud, here's a reminder. I'm the President."

Fallows is right. But there's something else here that is more profound. From the start, Obama has been savagely disrespected on the right. He has stoically taken, and continues to take, all manner of insults. A goodly number are racially-tinged. Some, if truth be told, stop just shy of the N-word. They hurt. How could they not? But what is lost on the detractors is that decent Americans of all political stripes feel the sting of that hurt, too. An epithet spat at Obama lands on our collective face as well. And for countless Democrats, this particular president is a mirror of their ideal selves. He is us, and we are him. It is visceral, and borne of bone-deep history. Disrespecting him is disrespecting America, her improbable achievements, and the ideals for which she has tirelessly fought for centuries.

Decent folks well know Obama is a product of this great but unfinished American Experiment, and they're rightly proud of it. And that, at bottom, is why Obama's statement of unalterable fact -- I'm the President -- felt so good to so many. Like the America that spawned him, he just won't back down. He is, by God, the President.

Still waiting for Superman -- Ctd

The estimable David Brooks weighs in: "What was there in this speech that will make us think the next few years will be any different? America will only be governable again if there is a leader who breaks the mold and reframes the debate." Point taken, sir. Um, how? Mr. Brooks conveniently didn't say. The ivory tower types never do. Reagan was arguably the last president to break the political china and remold it (never mind the ghastly result). But consider the context. Reagan had a friendly, GOP-majority Senate and a (mostly) rational Democratic House prepared to at least listen to Republican ideas. Compromise, that pesky building block of good governance, had not yet been stood up against the wall and shot. Nor had the Cable-News-Internet Complex arisen like zombies yet. The political environment Mr. Obama faces is vastly different. Dysfunctional is the kindest thing I can say about it. Congressional moderates -- who traditionally played rational codas to presidential prologues -- have, like Elvis, left the building. The Lincolnesque figure in the White House has no William Seward counterpart, nor a LBJ to knock heads in Congress. The news media, while never perfect, is now a toxic stew of intellectually lazy journalists with the memory of a Guppy in a fish bowl. How, then, does Obama "break the mold?" He must first do whatever it takes to win re-election. Once his own political neck is off the block, he must then relentlessly shame Congress into living up to its constitutional responsibilities. As part of this bully pulpit campaign, he could even appropriate John McCain's 2008 slogan: "Country First." It's simple and easily understood. Obama's intriguing discussion of "citizenship" in his speech could be a hint that he's already thinking along these lines. Anyway, Mr. Brooks, that's how.

America's reax

In a previous post, I rolled my eyes at the delusional media expectation that President Obama can be the diviner of miracles if only he'd whip out his Harry Potter wand. I hope, nay pray, ordinary America is less crazy. To that end, the latest Gallup tracking poll shows Obama's job approval has hit 52 percent, his highest since 2009. As some observers have noted, the 3-day rolling average (which doesn't reflect the entire convention yet) suggests a post-convention break-out in Obama's favor. Of course, anyone who watched Obama's speech without blinders won't be surprised at this promising development.

Views from outside the bubble

One of Andrew Sullivan's readers weighs in on President Obama's speech: "I wish that the pundits would watch these speeches with ordinary people. Last night I watched the speech with a gathering of about 50 people, from junior-high age to seniors. Everyone loved the speech. The most important thing for me from his speech was that he was challenging us to be grown ups and offering a vision of a people who are united and proud of the contributions they make to each other." Another writes: "Obama is self-aware and sane compared to so many of the twisted souls in politics. Why does so much of the country fail to recognize how fortunate we are to have this guy leading us?"

Still waiting for Superman

It's too early to gauge America's reaction to President Obama's speech. But we're clearly having one of those Aaron Sorkin West Wing moments in the media. Time's Joe Klein perfectly captures the mindset of the left-leaning, elite politicos: "The President gave a fine speech Thursday night. ... He made no absurd promises. He recognized the difficulty of our situation. He acknowledged mistakes. But he did not close the deal. The speech disappointed me, and I’m not quite sure why. ... [perhaps] it’s not too wise to dream big anymore. ... But I want more from him, more guidance, more leadership." Amazing. What more can Obama possibly say or do? I presumed the media had finally gotten past its Messiah Complex, the notion that Obama is Superman. Evidently not. Obama wanted neither the spandex nor the cape. But at the media's relentless urgings in 2008, America insisted that he wear them anyway. After obsessively hyping Hillary, the new narrative became: Obama is "The One." Obama has always argued that the election was never about him. "It's about you," he has said repeatedly. But it fell on deaf ears in 2008 and is doing so again today. Ergo, he's paying the price for impossible expectations. Granted, I could be misreading this. Media opinion could in fact mirror America's. But I'm betting it doesn't.

Do you feel lucky, Mitt?

Republicans ought to tell Dirty Harry to, well, shut the fuck up. Unlike his pick for president, Clint Eastwood is catnip to reporters. That means Mitt Romney gets shoved aside whenever "Detective Callahan" speaks. Eastwood, famous for his man-of-few-words persona, has suddenly gone all chatterbox about his now infamous conservation with an empty chair. "I had three points I wanted to make,” Eastwood told the Carmel Pine Cone. “That not everybody in Hollywood is on the left, that Obama has broken a lot of the promises he made when he took office, and that the people should feel free to get rid of any politician who’s not doing a good job." Glad you cleared that up for the historical footnote you won't be in, Clint. But do keep talking cuz you make way better copy than what's his name. And Mitt, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do you feel lucky letting Eastwood talk? Well, do ya, punk? As the sweating bank robber said in the movie, "I gots to know." Heh.

The President's Speech

I'm biased. So I'll skip the overt hosannas. But I suspect history will ultimately judge President Obama's speech tonight as pivotal and defining if not one for the ages. His call for citizenship, the essence of democracy, was brilliant. So was the linkage to his iconic "hope and change" message. In 2008, candidate Obama said, "You're the change you've been waiting for." Tonight, President Obama said, "The election four years ago wasn’t about me. It was about you. My fellow citizens, you were the change." He then deftly cataloged the accomplishments -- from healthcare to education to ending the Iraq War -- that ordinary Americans made possible by electing him. "You did that," Obama said repeatedly. And here was a man, older and grayer, who has borne the burdens of office, and been humbled by them. "The times have changed, and so have I. I’m no longer just a candidate," he said. "I’m the President." Those words echoed like a thunderclap. More tellingly, he said: "I’m far more mindful of my own failings, knowing exactly what Lincoln meant when he said, 'I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go.' ” The contrast is clear. Romney wants a job. Obama wants to make history.

Still pining for Hillary?

For some reason MSNBC's Chris Matthews has been relentlessly pushing the idea that Hillary Clinton should run for president in 2016. He's been bullying his guests on the subject all week at the DNC convention. Color me perplexed. Put aside Hillary's qualifications, potential presidential temperament or the daunting politics of a run. Does the Hardball host not realize Hillary turns 65 in October? That means she would be 69 on Election Day 2016. She would 73 at the end of her first term, a mere warm-up act for the next one. Sure, Reagan did it. But that was a wholly different time (now 31 years ago) and pleased only Republicans of that era -- the legacy of which the nation is still paying dearly. Sure, in my book, Hillary would be preferable to a Republican in the White House in 2016. But would she be preferable to a younger, stronger Democratic candidate (without her baggage) and better adapted to the 21st century in a post-Obama world? Moreover, could she even win? Matthews thinks Hillary would be a slam-dunk. But we've heard this talk of "inevitability" before -- and we know how that movie ended. If I were Hillary, I'd exit gracefully on a high note, bask in the coming sunset, and pass the baton to Chelsea's generation. I, too, wish to see a Democratic female president. But Hillary ain't The One.

The King's Speech, Arkansas-style

THAT WAS SOME hootenanny last night in Charlotte. Perhaps you're still shaking off the political hangover. And if you're wondering why there are two vials of Snake Oil No.9 sitting on your kitchen countertop, you bought them from that silver-tongued devil they call the Big Dog. I am of course poking fun at William Jefferson Clinton -- whom the national press is unabashedly dubbing the Greatest Politician on Earth. (Daily Beast reporter Michael Tomasky: "Holy smokes. That was the best political speech ... ever!") By their telling, the man could sell a howitzer to a pacifist. It's embarrassing. But make no mistake: Elvis was definitely in the building last night. By all accounts, Bill Clinton -- in full Spencer Tracy Inherit the Wind mode -- was simply masterful (read the speech here). The only thing missing were suspenders and the rumbled white suit. Clinton didn't just dismantle every charge Team Romney has made against President Obama, he exploded them. His exposure of the lies and obfuscations at the core of the Republican argument was devastating. A few key lines cleared the air for all to see: "[Republicans] think government is always the enemy, they're always right, and compromise is weakness; Their number one priority was not to put America back to work -- it was to put the president out of work." And Clinton literally laughed at the argument against re-electing the president, saying: "We [Republicans] left him a total mess. He hasn’t cleaned it up fast enough. So fire him and put us back in." Again and again, Clinton said "We're all in this together." That is the Democratic way, and one Obama espouses. But if you want a "winner-take-all, you're-on-your-own society," Clinton said, then vote Romney. As they say in Hollywood, that's a wrap.

Politics and pink pumps

Garance Franke-Ruta, a senior editor at The Atlantic, rightly observed that Michelle Obama "knocked it out of the park" during her DNC convention speech last night. Then she muffed it: "Those who are fans of the first lady will doubtless spend the next few days dissecting her patterned silk Tracy Reese frock, or her very high pink heels, or how she made them feel. But the first lady is no Barbie doll." Yes, but Franke-Ruta dolled her up anyway with the unneeded reference to haute couture. Granted, this is a pet issue of mine. Franke-Ruta is a decent political observer, and her piece is worth a read. She is simply being too clever by half with the cute "FLOTUS like a butterfly, sting like a bee" motif. And her fashionista laspe is actually tame compared to others. "Obama drew 'oohs' and 'aahs' as she stepped on the stage looking striking in a sleeveless, deep pink dress with a shimmering pewter hem. The two-tone frock accented her rose-colored pumps and highlighted her perfectly coiffed bob and hip silver manicure," wrote Allison Samuels of the Daily Beast in full-on fashion runway mode. Yeesh. Even when it's unintentional, we objectify women each time we reference their appearance. It's rarely appropriate. And, sorry ladies, women are often the worst offenders. Will anyone wonder or care whether President Obama is wearing Brooks Brothers or Armani when he glides across the stage to accept his party's nomination? Nope. Like the old Virginia Slims ad said, "You've come a long way, baby." But it's time to break the mindset, ladies.

Quote of the Day

Roger Simon: "I am not saying there are no undecided people. There are. But they are not going to vote. They are going to do what they always do: Sit on their behinds on Election Day and then complain for the next four years."

'Michelle, ma belle'

Andrew Sullivan sums up Michelle Obama's DNC convention speech this way: "Stunning, brilliant, moving, passionate and right. Flawless." Well said, and spot on. It's another testament to the priceless value of this once-in-a-generation president and his character. Will America foolishly fritter it away?

And the hits just keep on coming

I was scanning Slate today when I spied an item about Russell Crowe. Apparently the actor and a friend got lost (sorta) while kayaking off Long Island. The Coast Guard helped guide them back to civilization. Why is this news? Beats me. So I grunted and prepared to click away when I spied the buried lede. Crowe was in the area filming Darren Aronofsky's upcoming movie, Noah. As in Noah's Ark. As in the Genesis flood narrative. This won't be your father's biblical epic, Aronofsky promises. "Noah was the first person to plant vineyards and drink wine and get drunk," he told the Guardian, as if that's a historical fact. "It's there in the Bible ... There was some real survivor's guilt going on there." So, Noah has 21st century-like "issues." Right. In the movie, a divine vision alerts Noah (Crowe) to God's plan to drown humanity for mistreating the earth. Why can't they be more like the Na'vi of Pandora? Anyway, Noah warns everyone that the End Is Near. They laugh and cast him and his family into the wilderness. Noah sets out to build his ark. But he needs help. So he enlists the "Watchers," a race of giant six-armed angels. And ... well, you get the picture. U.S. movie box-office revenue fell 3% this summer, the first time that's happened in 7 years, per the NY Times. Gee, I wonder if Hollywood dreck like Noah could be the leading reason?

Break 'The Cycle?' Not yet.

THERE ARE plenty of well-educated, knowledgeable, telegenic, articulate women with deep track records in political affairs. Former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm is an example, just to name one. And yet such women are rarely given cable shows to share their insights. When Dylan Ratigan ended his show on MSNBC, the network suits came up with "The Cycle," an ensemble talk show. Its two male "stars" are Touré (a writer and pop-culture gadfly) and Steve Kornacki (a political writer for Salon). Kornacki, only 33, provides the political gravitas, such as it is.

But let's get down to cases.

The two females stars are S. E. Cupp (seen at left) and Krystal Ball (yes, that's really her name). Both sport the lofty but meaningless title of "political strategist." Cupp is the conservative yin to Ball's liberal yang. Cupp's claim to fame: She's a Cornell grad (art history), a classically trained ballet dancer and author of a book slamming liberals for "destroying" religion. Ball's claim to fame: She's a Univ of Virginia grad (economics) and political naif who was photographed holding a dildo while running for Congress (she lost) -- hence, instant fame. MSNBC is now showcasing both women as paradigms of political wisdom on The Cycle. How'd that happen? Simple: Cupp and Ball are bright, articulate and, let's not mince words, raven-haired visions of Aphrodite. And that's ok. What's not ok is MSNBC's exploitation of two smokin' hot babes for ratings. Clearly, neither is there for their intellectual heft -- which, on politics, is feather-weight at best. The need for breaking this sexist "Cycle" is obvious. But it's going to take concerted Girl Power to do it. Without vigorous protest from females, trust me, guys will just sit there and salivate. That said, I wish Cupp and Ball all the best and don't blame them for going for the gold. After all, a girl's gotta pay the rent. But I'll get my political analysis elsewhere.

Crow with all the trimmings

Politico's Roger Simon says: "Can the president save himself this week?" Oh brother. Clearly, it's time to start my "Eat Crow" list. The pundits -- the folks who live inside the hermetically-sealed media bubble and work overtime to keep it inflated -- will have you believe President Obama is toast. This is the same bunch who confidently predicted Hillary would inevitably become Madam President and that Sarah Palin was a "game changer." Simon writes that at Tuesday's convention, "It will be the Democrats’ turn at bat. They will get one big try here in Charlotte to persuade America to trust them again. ... He has three days. Or America will be done with him." Right. Dinner will be served after the polls close on Election Night.