You should watch this or listen to the video above. It’s of President Obama speaking to and then taking questions from the House GOP Caucus. While there are the talking point moments, overall this was one of the more fascinating interactions I’ve seen in American politics. It’s also the first time that Obama has, personally, directly engaged himself in changing the tone of politics in an activist manner, if you will, rather than simply leading by example. You can get a sense of what I’m talking about, if you don’t have time to listen to the whole thing, by listening to the last 12 minutes or so (from around 73:00). Some really decent, substantive conversation between Obama and the GOP House Caucus.

More like this, please.

I hope Obama follows through on having regular meetings with both leadership teams (w/ part televised?), and perhaps can make Q&A like this a regular part of the conversation. I would love our own version of prime minister’s questions.

Here’s the analogy that keeps coming up in my head as I try to summarize my thoughts.

Politics is like chess, especially at the presidential level. It takes skill to plan out the next 18-24 months in the future, especially as other potential candidates & their allies are all jostling and repositioning to make themselves look better. Good “players” recognize not only where they need to get to, but the steps required to get there. The next move is as important as the strategy for three moves down the road.

Bad players, on the other hand, tend to focus on the grand strategy and lose sight of the next few moves. That’s how you can four-move checkmate an opponent at the start of a game. They’re too busy thinking about a complicated opening or their middle game while you’re actually checkmating them.

Perhaps this is an esoteric analogy, but Palin’s move seems like that novice chess mistake. No matter what the actual reason, she’s missed the whole “quitter” angle. It’s a big mistake. The ads for the Republican primary practically write themselves. I can’t imagine Romney is going to back down from that fight or that some deal can be struck that puts her at the top of the ticket unopposed. There are too many competing voices and egos, as there always are, in Presidential politics.

No matter what is really going on here, her ambitions are toast. She’s hurt her own chances as a candidate. She’s diminished her ability to help other candidates in close races (key part of the endorsement quid pro quo at this level). I can’t see anything that gets better because of this, and I’ve tried hard to look at this from her perspective.

I keep imagining the following scenario playing out at Team Palin HQ:

1. Palin believes she has a legitimate shot at 2012, she knows she’s popular now, and therefore can create/cement a movement around her right now. Two more years in Alaska won’t get her any more visibility but will likely diminish it.
2. Some opportunity has presented itself to allow her to focus on that movement: a book deal, tv/radio gig, etc. This is the “higher calling” she feels is a must do, because it enables point 1 which means she can “save America.”
3. If she does this while being governor, she’ll be criticized for ignoring the work of being governor.
4. Ergo, she resigned to preempt that criticism so she can be free to pursue this opportunity.

That’s the most Palin friendly explanation I can see at this point. Just to get there, I’m conceding her claims of patriotism driving this (it wouldn’t be the first time she’s confused ambition and patriotism), and conceding that there’s no scandal. Even in this frame, nothing else makes sense.

So I keep coming back to that analogy: she’s going to get four-moved. She just hasn’t realized it yet.

Is it too early to worry about this stuff as the beginnings of a new fascist movement? When do we worry about this stuff seriously? From the 2006 state GOP Convention in Texas:

At Saturday morning’s prayer meeting, party leader Tina Benkiser assured them that God was watching over the two-day confab.

“He is the chairman of this party,” she said against a backdrop of flags and a GOP seal with its red, white and blue logo.

The party platform, adopted Saturday, declares “America is a Christian nation” and affirms that “God is undeniable in our history and is vital to our freedom.”

“We pledge to exert our influence toward a return to the original intent of the First Amendment and dispel the myth of the separation of church and state,” it says.

…

At Saturday morning’s prayer meeting, ministers delivered prayers, gospel singers sang, and the Rev. Dale Young, pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Laredo, picked up the convention’s dominant theme of immigration.

“Lord, your words tell us there’s a sign that this nation is under a curse, when the alien who lives among us grows higher and higher and we grow lower and lower,” he preached.

BTW, someone want to reassure me that “the alien who lives among us” doesn’t mean me?

This is the state GOP convention in the second largest state in the union. The #@!@#& state GOP…. Tina Benkiser is the chairman of the party, not some random minor figure. The prayer meeting wasn’t a fringe event. This is the front page of the Texas GOP home page as of 10 minutes ago:

Read the first line of the image.

Some elements of the platform are the same from years past. So, perhaps I’m overreacting or taking it too seriously. You can see that this didn’t get much mention in most news outlets.

Still scares me, as it’s the first time I’ve learned about this.

(via Atrios)

This is so pathetic:

Hutchinson: Indictments Should Be “On a Crime and Not Some Perjury Technicality”

On Meet the Press, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson picks up where George Will left off:

I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn’t indict on the crime so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation were not a waste of time and dollars.

Perjury is just a little technicality punishable by up to five years in prison.

Where were these GOP opinions (note the George Will link, too) when Bill Clinton was getting impeached for the same exact bull? And, to put this in further perspective, President Clinton lied about a blowjob while this potential perjury charge will be about outing a CIA agent, something that impacts national security.

There’s a difference, and it ain’t favorable to the GOP talking point zombies.

Update: Didn’t see that Atrios has a better example: The GOP wants to Free Lil’ Kim!

A detailed explanation of Hutchinson’s own hypocrisy in this matter is on CardCarryingMember.

Update 2: And it just dawned on me the President Clinton’s perjury charge was part of a cover up to a part of the investigation UNRELATED to the original reason the special prosecutor was brought in (Whitewater). In the Plame case, any perjury charges would be related directly to a cover up of the charges under investigation. F’ing party of law and order my ass.

Will the other Republicans please stand up to these thugs running your party? For God’s sake, have you no integrity?