Meet the New Boss

Same as the old boss  . . . well that remains to be seen I suppose. But NBC has finally announced that David Gregory will be filling the moderator shoes of the late Tim Russert for their Sunday morning political roundup, Meet the Press.

The 38-year-old journalist has jam packed some experience in his working years, so I don't doubt that he is up to the task. But change is a hard thing, something I personally don't always cotton to, and Russert's charm was as much is brains as his demeanor, tough with a gentile inner core. Gregory will have to develop his own style presumably, but from his tenure as a White House correspondent his style seems a tad more brash than Russert's, perhaps that was just due to the circumstances and the current administration's lack of respect for the press. Tune in and decide for yourself.

Subconscious Musings

Sad, but true gentle readers, even my subconscious veers into the political. Yesterday, I read this great article from The New Yorker about Keith Olbermann. It is a long piece, but I enjoyed it and it must have planted the man in my head because last night I dreamt I was hitting on him in some apartment as we were putting away groceries. Later in the same dream, Tim Russert appeared, we had a conversation and when he left I said, 'Bye Uncle Pete.' In my dream as soon as I said that I knew that his name wasn't Pete, it was Tim. And of course I don't really have an Uncle Pete. Random.

I am not a dream expert, but I do think this is a rather curious one.

In Memoriam

Tim Russert

May 7, 1950—June 13, 2008

Nothing glib today, gentle readers. Broad minded is still in mourning for the late Tim Russert. Cover the mirrors and stop the clocks, journalism has lost a great voice.

I learned of Russert's truly untimely death during a longer than intended layover in Atlanta. I was stunned and bereft. Obviously I didn't know the man, but I had come to know the integrity and decency he brought to the political arena. Russert was not a mere pundit. He was a seeker of the truth; he was a paragon of honor; he was dedicated to reliability. It took every ounce of my hatred of public displays of emotion to not shed a tear. And it wasn't just me, the husband was equally devastated–unable to say anything more than "it was really sad" when I asked what they did on Meet the Press yesterday morning.

While Keith Olbermann's passion and righteous indignation arouses me and Chris Matthews' waggling jowls and blatant obsequiousness mixed with rampant sexism angers me, the stalwart Russert was always even keeled and judicious in his pursuit of fact. He informed me.

Meet the Press under Russert was an institution, one that has now lost its rudder. Who could possibly guide that ship in any manner remotely equal to Russerts'? I am at a loss for a news person today that has the same combination of steely resolve, goodness and intelligence. Tim Russert was unlike any other.

Condolences to his family and friends, as well as the media at large. We have all lost one of the last, great purveyors of journalism, of truth, of integrity.

Rest in Peace.

The Final Debate—In Review

Well kiddies, that was it—the 20th Democratic debate and yes I watched the whole damn thing, staying up way past my bedtime. Hold your applause until the end.

Clinton tried to make a couple of jokes and jabs, one time referencing a skit from last Saturday's SNL that dealt with how the press fawns on Obama, and they seemed to fall flat. I was especially turned off by the moment of righteous pissiness that she exhibited over Tim Russert and Brian Williams always directing questions to her first.

And they spent the first 16 minutes talking about their healthcare plans. Let me tell you people, the difference between these two plans are miniscule. While I think it is a great thing to focus on policy ideas so much, I am not sure that the subtle differences between the Clinton and Obama plan warrented 16 minutes of back and forth.

What else? Oh yeah—I was thinking about my fence sitting friends last night and this is what I am puzzled by:

When it comes down to it there aren't any fundamental differences between Obama and Clinton, both essentially want to do the same things—help the middle class, get us out of Iraq and make healthcare affordable for more Americans. That is the nut-nut. These are all things I agree with and support. So what makes these two different comes down to the fact that one is a white woman and the other is a black/white mixed man. And one is a Clinton. Now some of you may argue with me, but that is the difference.

Then you have McCain. And I think this was correctly summarized in the debate last night (sorry I can't remember which candidate said it, maybe both did) that he is basically an extension of the Dubya White House. He wants to keep us in Iraq for an undeterminable time, he thinks the tax cuts Bush gave the wealthy should be permanent and he doesn't have a plan to fix our healthcare system. Oh yeah, he also voted against raising the minimum wage. Really John? Do you want to try to provide for yourself or a family on $5.15 an hour? That barely buys you a gallon of milk and not even two gallons of gas these days.

So this is what I think it comes down to—if you think the last seven years have been a disaster you vote for Clinton or Obama (frankly I don't care which one, as I said above the results will be the same in the end although they might choose different paths to get there). Or if you think that Bush has done a bang up job—choose McCain. It is as simple as that.

Fourth Times a Charm

What in the bloody hell does Ralph Nader think he is up to? I know he told Tim Russert yesterday on "Meet the Press" that "we have to take this opportunity to have a much broader debate on the issues that relate to the American people."

Do we Ralph? And do you honestly think that you are the man to do that? Listen, whether you believe that Nader tipped the 2000 election to Bush or not, causing Gore to lose (on top of the disastrous Supreme Court decision—in case you forgot, I am a flaming liberal), this man doesn't need to be coming anywhere near a ballet this time around. Honestly, what does he offer?

Oh yeah—Ralph, thank you for making our cars and roads safer (although it didn't save me from being driven around in the back seat of a Ford Pinto for most of elementary school). Keep up the good work. Maybe this time you could make our food safer or do something to clean up the environment. But you can't do anything to fix Washington. It is time for you to take your shabby suit and go home.

In the grand scheme, I don't think Nader's entrance into the race will have anywhere near the same effect that it did almost eight years ago. People see what damage came from having Bush "elected." I highly doubt that most people are willing to risk that again. My opinion? If Nader hurts anyone, it will be the GOP this time. Those conservatives or whomever on the right who don't like McCain might be crazy and angry enough to throw one Ralphie's way as a means of protest. But no sane Democrat, Independent, Liberal, Lefty or whatever the hell name Fox News is calling us this week is going to go down that path again. We have been burned once already by Nader.

Maybe Nader is right, maybe we need someone to mix it up and try to break the two-party system we have had since the dawn of time. Frankly, however, I don't think now is the time. Our country has been going downhill for seven years now. We are in pain—emotionally, economically, physically and mentally. We need someone that can repair the damage Dubya has inflicted. We need someone who can repair our reputation around the world. Someone who can heal our economy. Someone who can restore our spirit after the Iraq war.

Nader could never do that.