Beauty Call

Well the Missus got a phone call from the president on Friday and here’s what he said:

Hi. This is President Barack Obama.

I rarely make these calls and I apologize for intruding on your day. But I had to talk to you about the election in Massachusetts on Tuesday because the stakes are so high.

In Washington, I’m fighting to curb the abuses of the health industry that routinely denies care. I’m fighting for financial reforms to stop Wall Street from playing havoc on our economy. I’m fighting to create a clean energy economy.

And it’s clear now that the outcome of these and other fights will probably rest on one vote in the United States Senate.

We know where Martha Coakley stands. As your Attorney General Martha’s taken on Wall Street schemes, insurance company abuses, big polluters – on your behalf.

She represents the best progressive values of Massachusetts. She’ll be your voice – and my ally.

But a lot of people don’t even realize there is an election on Tuesday to fill the unexpired term of Ted Kennedy. They don’t realize why it’s so important.

So, please, come out to vote for Martha Coakley. And make sure everyone you know understands the stakes for their families, for Massachusetts, and our country.

Thanks for your time.

Me? All I got was a mailer from Scott Brown that displayed:

Black Friday (with a credit card), White Christmas (with a pine  tree), and Brown Tuesday (with a calendar highlighting January 19, the date of the U.S. Senate election).

Is it really possible that Brown Tuesday is the new Black Tuesday for Massachusetts Democrats?

Stay tuned.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

WSJ Coakley-palooza

Friday’s Wall Street Journal was a total Brownsheet – jumping into the Massachusetts U.S. Senate race and jumping on Martha Coakley (D-Is the President Here Yet?).

The Journal ran three – count ’em, three – pieces about what’s being called the Scott Heard ‘Round the World.

Piece #1:

Democrats Fight to Keep Kennedy Seat, 60

Senate Votes

NEW BEDFORD, Mass.—This is supposed to be friendly territory for Democrats, even in this year’s hostile political climate. But the suddenly frenetic and competitive race for the Tuesday vote to replace the late Sen. Edward Kennedy suggests Democrats could be in for tough fights across the political map.

Massachusetts hasn’t elected a Republican to the Senate since 1972, and a few months ago the state didn’t seem to present an opportunity for Republicans. Late Thursday, Republicans touted a new poll showing Republican Scott Brown, a state senator, with a clear lead over Democrat Martha Coakley, the state’s attorney general. The Boston Herald reported a survey by Suffolk University/7News that showed voters preferring Mr. Brown by a 50% to 46% margin.

Then there’s Kimberley Strassel’s Potomac Watch column, which lost some impact because it’s nothing but a jumble of half-baked speculation and rumination. Here’s the lede:

Republican Scott Brown is running strong in Massachusetts on a promise to be the 41st vote against health care in the Senate. Democrats’ bigger worry right now is whether Mr. Brown might prove the 218th vote against health care in the House.

It just gets more opaque from there.

But most damning is the latest installment in a series of scorched-earth essays by WSJ editorial board member Dorothy Rabinowitz about the notorious Amirault case.

(To the Few, the Proud, the Campaign Outsider Commenters: I really really don’t want to reargue the Amirault Rubik’s Cube. I’m just saying that, to the WSJ readership, it looks very bad for Coakley, which only stokes the Brownmania that’s sweeping Tea Bag Nation.)

Meanwhile the New York Times, which conventional wisdom says should be furiously defending – no, promoting – Martha Coakley, ran one lame piece on A15:

3rd-Party Candidate Named Kennedy Could

Tip Senate Race in Massachusetts

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. — In most elections, a politician calling himself the Tea Party candidate would cheer Democrats, raising hopes that he would siphon votes from Republicans by attracting some of the disaffected anti-Washington, anti-Obama electorate.
But when the election is being held to fill a seat that was left vacant by the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, and the Tea Party candidate happens to be named Joe Kennedy, things get a little murkier.
Hey, murky is the middle name of this particular race.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Haunty

Certainly, there’s no shortage of suffering in Haiti. And Lord knows the people of Port-au-Prince have no rival in the misery that their lives are right now, given the unimaginable conditions they find themselves in.

But take a moment also to consider the condition of the journalists covering the unnatural disaster.

Here’s NPR’s Jason Beaubien reporting from Haiti Wednesday night on All Things Considered.

Absolutely heart-wrenching.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Op-Odd Page

Is it just me, or was the Boston Globe’s Wednesday op-ed page a bit of a train wreck?

At the top of the page was this:

WHY I SHOULD BE YOUR NEXT SENATOR

Below that appeared short pieces from the three candidates in next Tuesday’s US Senate special election – Massachusetts senator Scott Brown (R-Talk Show), Massachusetts attorney general Martha Coakley (D-No Talk, No Show), and (Not That) Joe Kennedy (I-Didn’t Get Enough Debate Time).

And below that appeared Joan Vennochi’s column headlined,  “Brown’s glossy veneer conceals misleading campaign.”

Representative text:

Strip away Brown’s pretty packaging – his Massachusetts National Guard combat fatigues, his “American Idol’’- contending daughter, his warm and fuzzy ads – and this is what you get.

He is allegedly for health care reform, except he doesn’t support the historic health care reform legislation that is on the brink of passage in Washington and was Kennedy’s life quest.

He supports Roe v. Wade, except that a prominent anti-abortion advocacy group backs him as a “pro-life vote in the Senate.’’

I know it was Vennochi’s turn on the wheel Wednesday, and I’m not suggesting she shouldn’t write what she wants.

But really – is it right to run a hit piece on one particular candidate in those circumstances? Not to mention the Globe’s endorsement of Coakley on the facing page.

You don’t have to be a fan of Scott Brown’s to find this whole thing, well, odd.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Is the New York Times Buying a Ford?

During the past seven days the New York Times has run eight pieces about a potential U.S. Senate Democratic primary smackdown between former Tennessee congressman Harold E. Ford, Jr. (D-Playboy) and emergency back-up New York Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand (D-David Paterson).

So maybe the Times should change its banner to “All the Newsletter That’s Fit to Print”?

Not so fast.

Also over the past week, The New York Daily News has run 10 – count ’em, 10 – pieces on the Ford fiesta, while the irrepressible New York Post has put Ford in the driver’s seat nine times.

Your pom-poms go here.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

What Ailes Fox

The Fox News/Roger Ailes/House of Murdoch rumpus proceeds apace, here in a Daily Beast piece from Lloyd Grove:

Several News Corp. veterans tell Lloyd Grove that Roger Ailes may soon be out as Fox News chief—and that Rupert Murdoch can’t have been pleased with a story depicting his employee as the savior of a struggling empire.

That story appeared in the New York Times on Sunday, touting Mr. Ailes as the alpha male of Murdoch’s News Corp.

[Ailes] made $23 million last year in salary, bonuses and other compensation, more than Mr. Murdoch

Beyond that, the Times reported:

At a time when the broadcast networks are struggling with diminishing audiences and profits in news, [Ailes] has built Fox News into the profit engine of the News Corporation. Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute.

This outsize success has placed Mr. Ailes, an aggressive former Republican political strategist, at the pinnacle of power in three corridors of American life: business, media and politics. In addition to being the best-paid person in the News Corporation last year, he is the most successful news executive of the last 10 years, and his network exerts a strong influence on the fractured conservative movement.

The Times piece included Murdoch’s perfunctory endorsement of Ailes (think, vote of confidence in a baseball manager):

Mr. Murdoch, in a statement relayed by a spokesman, said: “I’m proud of Fox News and what it is accomplishing, and I am grateful to Roger and his team for creating such a great asset for News Corporation.”

But more telling was Murdoch son-in-law Matthew Freud’s statement to the Times:

“I am by no means alone within the family or the company in being ashamed and sickened by Roger Ailes’s horrendous and sustained disregard of the journalistic standards that News Corporation, its founder and every other global media business aspires to.”

That sound you hear just might be an empire crumbling.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

“D’You Read David Brooks’ Latest Column?”

Yes.

D’you?

David Brooks’ Tuesday New York Times piece led with an amazing array of statistics (and not just because I’m Jewish by attraction):

Jews are a famously accomplished group. They make up 0.2 percent of the world population, but 54 percent of the world chess champions, 27 percent of the Nobel physics laureates and 31 percent of the medicine laureates.

Jews make up 2 percent of the U.S. population, but 21 percent of the Ivy League student bodies, 26 percent of the Kennedy Center honorees, 37 percent of the Academy Award-winning directors, 38 percent of those on a recent Business Week list of leading philanthropists, 51 percent of the Pulitzer Prize winners for nonfiction.

I’ll be compiling the Irish stats right about the time Dick Cheney submits himself to waterboarding.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Dead Blogging the (Deadly) Massachusetts Senate Debate

Monday night’s Senate debate was only slightly less jangly than the average David Gergen sentence. Gergen, who moderated the debate, started off with a litany of luminaries who had occupied this particular U.S. Senate seat over the years: Ted Kennedy, Jack Kennedy, Henry Cabot Lodge, Daniel Webster, John Quincy Adams.

That, of course, led any sane person to respond, “Wait – could we kind of postpone the January 19 special election and find some more, well, weighty candidates?”

But you go to the polls with the ballot you have, as Rummy might say. So, a few observations:

• If you chose “lawyering up” or “a half-trillion-dollar cut in Medicare” for your drinking game, you were knee-walkin’ by 7:20.

• The three candidates – Martha Coakley (D-Is It January 2o Yet?), Scott Brown (R-See My Pickup Truck?), and (Not That) Joe Kennedy – performed pretty much the same as they have all along, only more so.

• Brown spent the entire evening playing to the cheap seats. On healthcare reform, he represented the I-Got-Mine wing of the Republican party, asking why Massachusetts residents should subsidize other states that aren’t as legislatively advanced as we are with our pathetically underfunded healthcare system. He also accused Coakley of being soft on terrorists and hard on third-trimester fetuses.

• Coakley, who’s clearly just looking to run out the clock, tried to be more aggressive, but just came off as trying to be more aggressive.

• (Not That) Kennedy was the only candidate who had the courage to inject Warren Harding into the race. You could almost feel the momentum shift – back to Gergen.

Even lower points:

• Brown’s hypothetical about his daughters getting raped was flat out creepy. Kineahora.

• Just when the hardworking staff at Campaign Outsider was having a good thought about (Not That) Kennedy, he goes and says this: “I’ll repeal Obamacare.” So, what – he’s running for king? I don’t think so.

• (I’d criticize Coakley here, but she wasn’t really there.)

• After Brown essentially called Coakley a baby-killing, terrorist-loving, pocket-picking liberal, he said “We’re both good people.” Actually, no – one of you isn’t.

Is it January 20 yet?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 9 Comments

What I Caught

So the Missus and I went down the Big Town for a few days and here’s what we took in:

• A charming Gauguin-and-his-influence show at the Wildenstein gallery. (Campaign Outsider Bonus Quote®: “When you see a Gauguin, you think, This man is living in a dream world. When you see a van Gogh, you think, This dream world is living in a man.”  – Adam Gopnik, The New Yorker.)

• The exhibit at Spanierman Gallery of the work of Jimmy Ernst, who wouldn’t have been there if he weren’t the son of German artist Max Ernst, one of the Daddies of Dada and surrealism.

• Two excellent exhibits at the Museum of Arts and Design: Read My Pins, a collection of the Unsinkable Madeline Albright’s staggering array of brooches; and Slash: Paper Under the Knife, an eye-popping array of paper machinations. (Big shoutout to Colin, origami master of the Carroll clan.)

• A compelling performance by Liev Schreiber as Eddie Carbone in Arthur Miller’s A View From the Bridge, which included a nicely nuanced turn by Scarlett Johansson as the niece Eddie burned for.

• An exhibit of abstractionist Gerhard Richter at the Marian Goodman gallery that made up in length what it lacked in visual interest.

• A wonderful Jacob Lawrence show at DC Moore that featured numerous examples of his beautiful gouaches, along with all 23 of his Aesop’s fables drawings shown together for the first time.

• Francis Picabia: Funny Guy at Tibor de Nagy, which included a fabulous portrait of Man Ray dashed off in a Paris restaurant.

• MOMA’s Gabriel Orozco extravaganza, which started out with – air quotes – artwork such as yogurt lids on each of the four walls of a white room; a photo of breath on a piano; and toothpaste spit on graph paper with drawings around it.

(Yeah, right.)

Actually, though, Orozco has done some pretty interesting things, the particulars of which I’ll let you decide for yourselves.

• Also at MOMA, the Tim Burtonpalooza, an absolute scrum of international Burtonauts who go beyond groupies into culties. Admittedly I was the third-oldest person there, but putting aside the staggering lack of common courtesy of the Burtonistas, it’s always good to bring new people to museums. If even five percent of them return to look at the other art, it’s worth the inconvenience.

• A thoroughly delightful performance by Angela Lansbury in a mediocre production of A Little Night Music. As we left the theater, the Missus commented that the musical emphasized the raunchy elements at the expense of the lyrical and tender ones, and I entirely agree. Meanwhile, Catherine Zeta-Jones  did a bit of scenery-chewing in her rol;e as Desirée Armfelt, but at least she didn;t have to floss between scenes.

• An exhaustive retrospective at the Museum of the City of New York of architect Eero Saarinen, who designed iconic structures from the TWA terminal at Idlewild to Black Rock, CBS’s midtown headquarters. Special bonus exhibit – Only in New York: Photographs from LOOK Magazine. Especially noteworthy: the striking photography of fledgling movie director Stanley Kubrick.

Nexus New York: Latin American Artists in the Modern Metropolis at the impressively renovated El Museo del Barrio, which limned the connections between, for instance: the great Mexican caricaturist Miguel Covarrubias and the great New York Times caricaturist Al Hirschfeld; “Mexican provocateur” Marius de Zayas and funny guy Francis Picabia; and Uruguayan Joaquin Torres-Garcia (father of Universal Constructivism) and American re-constructivists Stuart Davis/ Joseph Stella/Adolph Gottlieb.

(Campaign Outsider Bonus Quote©: “In New York York I’m immensely rich – millions of images I dreamed and desired – millions of things that appeal to intelligence. My city – the most city of all cities.” – Joaquin Torres-Garcia)

Alias Man Ray at the Jewish Museum. Early on, Man Ray worried that he’d be remembered more as a photographer than a painter, and he was right. But this eye-opening exhibit gives Man Ray – another Daddy of Dada -his due. He was an accomplished painter, he created “ready-mades” before Marcel Duchamp, and “mobiles” before Alexander Calder.

(Campaign Outsider Bonus Quote™: “Dada cannot live in New York. All New York is dada, and will not tolerate a rival.”)

• A fine performance by Laura Linney in Time Stands Still, a Donald Margulies play about journalism and war and loss and compromise.

All in all, a nice catch.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments