Winners and Losers in the Election

Saletan gets it:

"In the national exit poll, voters were split on health care. Unemployment is at nearly 10 percent. Democrats lost a lot of seats that were never really theirs, and those who voted against the bill lost at a higher rate than did those who voted for it. But if health care did cost the party its majority, so what? The bill was more important than the election.

I realize that sounds crazy. We've become so obsessed with who wins or loses in politics that we've forgotten what the winning and losing are about. Partisans fixate on punishing their enemies in the next campaign.

Reporters, in the name of objectivity, refuse to judge anything but the Election Day score card. Politicians rationalize their self-preservation by imagining themselves as dynasty builders. They think this is the big picture.

They're wrong. The big picture isn't about winning or keeping power. It's about using it."

I wish the health care bill were better, frankly. (Single-payer or a public option, I think, would be both better policy and better politics.) But on the other hand, you don't govern so you can keep governing. You govern to get stuff done. Dems got stuff done, and if it means they lose out on power for a couple of years, that'll have to be the case. From that standpoint, I wouldn't change anything.

Wait. The Republicans Didn't Run on Cutting Social Security Did They?

Because that's the Republican agenda now that the election is over. Eric Cantor writes his fellow Republicans:

"Getting our long-term deficit under control will require that we address major entitlement reform.� It is a conversation that we must have, but one that is easier said than done. President Obama, congressional Democrats, and their liberal allies have made it abundantly clear that they will attack anyone who puts forward a plan that even tries to begin a conversation about the tough choices that are needed."

Entitlements being, of course, Social Security and Medicare. The Economist and Kevin Drum point out that Republicans spent the campaign season savaging Dems for reining in Medicare in the health bill -- but now that the election's over, things have changed.

My problem isn't the hypocrisy -- well, ok, my problem is partly the hypocrisy. Instead, I hate it when people run for office with big plans they don't tell the public about. That's deceiving the voters -- if only by omission -- and it's a lousy way to make a democracy. One reason George W. Bush started sinking so quickly after the 2004 election isn't just that he tried to privatize Social Security; it's that he didn't raise it as an issue until after the election was over. It's bait-and-switch, and it shouldn't be rewarded.

About The 'My Son Is Gay' Lady

I love my son. If he turns out to be gay: Awesome. If he wants to dress up someday as Daphne from 'Scooby Doo,' I'll buy him the wig. So I'm down with the Nerdy Apple Bottom blogger who did just that for her son. I'm just not quite as down with what happened next:

"Then as we got closer to the actual day, he stared to hem and haw about it. After some discussion it comes out that he is afraid people will laugh at him. I pointed out that some people will because it is a cute and clever costume. He insists their laughter would be of the ‘making fun’ kind. I blow it off. Seriously, who would make fun of a child in costume?"

Good lord. How about most of the other kids? And maybe even many of their parents? Unfortunately, that's what happened.

I'm not one to criticize another person's parenting: It's a friggin' hard job, we all make mistakes, and we all generally do them out of love. I have no reason to believe that Nerdy Apple had any other intent in her own actions.

But like I say: If my son wants to dress up like Daphne, that's how we'll play it. If he decides to reverse course because he's not sure he can handle the ridicule at school, well, I won't blow it off. Is it fair that he was ridiculed? No. Was it predictable? Absolutely. And while it's fine to support your child if he wants to challenge conventions, it's probably also important to support your kid if they'd rather not fight that particular battle in that particular manner. I'm going to instill values in my son as best I can, among them a dedication to standing up for the rights and feelings of less-powerful people. My job, however, is primarily to protect him -- and nudging him gently to let his freak flag fly might end up being more a demonstration of my own open-mindedness than his. It's a tough balance, to be sure, but I don't think the Nerdy Apple blogger found the right side of it.

Nerdy Apple meant well, I'm certain. She clearly loves her son. I agree with her values. But I think she made a mistake.

What The Eff Has Obama Done So Far?

Lots of my friends have been posting links to whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com in recent days. I'm not sure if the site is intended to buck up dispirited liberals or convince skeptical independents -- but either way I'm not terribly impressed. A lot of what's listed on the site is either bureaucratic paper-pushing that, while important, stands a fair distance from the heart of the liberal agenda. Other stuff is empty gesturing that deserves no better than a slow golf clap.

I'm pulling up the site now and running through a few items. What the eff has Obama done so far?

* Appointed nation's first Chief Technology Officer.

Um. Great. I know that's why I voted for him.

* Signed financial reform law establishing a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look out for the interests of everyday Americans.

Better, actually.

* Signed financial reform law requiring lenders to verify applicants' credit history, income, and employment status.

Reasonable, but very "campaign in poetry, govern in prose" type stuff. And I suspect this particular item might have come out of a McCain presidency, actually.

* Appointed more openly gay officials than any other president in US history.

Nice, but we're veering pretty close to the "empty gesture" territory. (Rick Santorum has gay employees, too!) It's taken Obama so long to get the ball rolling on "Don't Ask Don't Tell," for example, that he's about to lose the Democratic congressional majority likely to pass a repeal. And of course, he remains opposed to same-sex marriage. Obama's not been a disaster, I suppose -- unlike George W. Bush, he didn't try to win a presidential campaign by putting gays on the defensive -- but the inaction on this front might explain why gay voters doubled their support for Republicans in Tuesday's election from two years ago.

* Created more private sector jobs in 2010 than during entire Bush years.

That might be true, but only as a niggling technicality. As Atrios pointed out this week, unemployment has consistently been much higher under Obama than it was under Bush. I don't think that's Obama's fault: I do believe the unemployment rate and slow growth of the economy are the result forces that came to a head during the Bush years. But as a political matter, that doesn't matter: We're feeling the pain right now, and the voters are going to punish anybody who isn't making it better quickly.

I could go on, but won't. And maybe liberals need a reminder that the last two years haven't been as pointless as Tuesday's election made them feel. But there's something about the WTF site that strikes me as out-of-touch with the wants and needs of the average American voter -- and disconnected from the bigger picture of good liberal governance, as though the accumulation of small acts of governance is somehow good governance. That's not necessarily the case.

Rick Perry For President?

It certainly seems so. As always, it's intriguing to me that Republicans spend a fair amount of time casting their rivals as "un-American," but tend to get a free pass when it comes to things like publicly (and favorably) musing about secession. I guess I should be used to the double-standards by now.

The South Street Bridge Opens Saturday!

And I'm really looking forward to it -- the bridge is just a few blocks from my home and has been closed for most of the two years we've lived here. West Philly, you're not going to keep me out!

The Inky reports:

"The South Street Bridge will allow people to move between two neighborhoods without feeling as if they had made a wrong turn on an interstate. At their narrowest, the sidewalks are nine feet, and broaden to 15 on the Center City side.

For bicyclists, there will be direct connections to the Schuylkill Banks path and new cycling lanes on South and Lombard Streets between the bridge and 21st Street. Though they run only a few blocks, those lanes make it possible to travel from, say, Northern Liberties to the University of Pennsylvania exclusively on the city's bicycle network."

Read the whole piece, as they say. Inky architecture critic Inga Saffron does a wonderful job of explaining the importance of a bridge -- not just as a way to move traffic, but as a public space -- in the life of a city. Fascinating reading.

More About the ACLU's Suit Against Philly Police

The Daily news profiles Mahari Bailey, an African-American attorney who has joined the suit against Philly PD's "stop and frisk" tactics:

"The following August, Bailey and some friends were standing near 53rd and Euclid streets in Wynnefield when officers, without cause or justification, the suit says, ordered Bailey and his friends to stand against a wall to be searched.

When Bailey told the officers that he was a lawyer and refused to consent to a search, one officer 'raised his fists in a threatening manner,' and told Bailey that he didn't 'give a f--- who you are,' the lawsuit says. Bailey was again released with no criminal charges being filed against him.

In May, Bailey was pulled over at 59th and Master streets in West Philadelphia. When Bailey asked why he had been stopped, one of the officers told him to 'shut up' and that he 'was in the wrong neighborhood,' according to the suit."

I'm dubious those tactics would ever be attempted in my Center City neighborhood. I know Philly's tough to police, but treating everybody like a criminal is a crappy -- and unconstitutional -- way to try and fix things. And probably ineffective: If even innocent and accomplished people like Mahari Bailey become angry and alienated from the police, is it any wonder a "don't snitch" ethos prevails in the city?