Keller @ Large Blog

What they really need to know to blend in here, tonight at 11 on WBZ.

               President Obama’s speech to the nation on the end of our combat mission in Iraq suffered from some of the same problems the often afflict his presidential addresses. It went on a bit too long, covered a bit too much ground, and was delivered in that now-familiar, less than compelling low-key style. And by now you’ve surely heard the speech picked apart by the usual suspects – I heard one genius  last night suggest it was designed to "distract the public" from the down economy, as if that’s possible.

               But while I don’t know if history will prove the president’s war policy to be the right one, I did hear some things that I liked a lot in his address. As someone who harshly criticized the Iraq war from day one and ran against it in his presidential campaign, it couldn’t have been easy for Obama to defend the war last night, but he did. He said that it "defeated a regime that had terrorized its people," that it helped Iraq "seize the chance for a better future." He praised the Bush-era decision – one candidate Obama opposed – to shift tactics with the surge. As the result of our intervention, he concluded: "Iraq has the opportunity to embrace a new destiny."

               He then went on to graciously praise former President George W. Bush for his "support for our troops, his love of country and commitment to our security." Obama had to know his remarks about Bush would enrage some of his supporters, but he made them anyway as part of an appeal for those divided over that war to "turn the page" - wise, statesmanlike advice. And finally, the president endorsed a belief that many on the left flatly reject – that "no challenge is more essential to our security than our fight against al Qaeda.”

               In short, I saw a leader last night willing to reach across ideological and partisan lines, making it clear he’s anything but soft on terror. And I liked what I saw. You?

Poor President Obama. He makes his first formal public remarks on the economy in the wake of new poll numbers showing approval of his economic management at an all-time low, and the mike goes on the fritz! If it wasn't for bad luck....

But seriously, it's clear there's a problem with the Obama messaging on the economy. Some of the public backlash is surely based on substance -- massive deficits were a political problem for the Bushes (#1 and #2), and they're now a problem for Obama. But if you find yourself uplifted and reassured by the president's rhetoric on the economy, you are one of the few.

I take up this problem in tonight's piece at 11pm on WBZ (watch it online after it airs if you like). But something tells me our esteemed commenters might have some thoughts on how the White House can do a better job of communicatin with the public in this area. Let's hear them below.

If you enjoy a rousing political debate between two articulate candidates, don't miss tomorrow's 8:30am airing of the encounter between Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-9th District) and his Democratic primary challenger, Mac D'Alessandro.

Here are some excerpts to whet your appetite.

After it airs Sunday at 8:30am during the WBZ Sunday morning news, look for the entire debate posted here for on-demand viewing.

And, of course, let's hear what you thought of it below.

At first glance, Sarah Palin comments yesterday about Sen. Scott Brown - that "up here in Alaska and so many places in the US where we have a pioneering, independent spirit...we wouldn't stand for...Scott Brown and some of the antics there" [e.g. his votes with the Democratic majority] - appear to be a major league diss.

But that's not how some local conservatives see it. Your comments invited below.

Hope you enjoyed tonight's report at 11 on an impromptu mini-debate between dueling Democrats Suzanne Bump and Guy Glodis in the race for auditor.

Here is a link to their entire exchange.

For more information about all the candidates in this race and in the GOP primary for auditor, here is a link to a web site I use often, Politics1, where you'll find links to all the relevant campaign websites.

As we gear up for the first televised gubernatorial debate of the season here on WBZ-TV, WBZ Newsradio 1030 and WBZTV.com at 7pm on September 8th, we're also dipping into a couple of interesting local congressional primary races for mini-debates the next two Sundays.

Please tune in Sunday, August 29 at 8:30am for a 15-minute mini-debate between Congressman Steve Lynch (D-9th District) and his Democratic primary challenger Mac D'Allesandro.

Then, on Sunday, September 5, 10th district Democratic hopefuls Bill Keating and Rob O'Leary will meet in debate, same time and format.

We continue to solicit your suggested questions for the Baker/Cahill/Patrick/Stein debate on September 8th. Just e-mail me at kelleratlarge@wbztv and make them applicable to all four candidates. If you'd like to propose a question for one of the congressional debates as well, feel free.

Here is a link to the factcheck.org analysis cited in tonight's piece on the ever-more-popular lie about President Obama's religious faith. I challenge those who buy the thoroughly debunked rumor that he is a Muslim (and a radical one, to boot!) to read it, and then, before dismissing it, consider how you like being victimized by similar smear campaigns against your favorite political figures.

As we prepare to mark the anniversary of Sen. Ted Kennedy's passing, let's do so without photoshopping history, shall we?

 

In columnist Peter Gelzinis's interview this weekend with Ted's widow,Vicki, Mrs. Kennedy recounted a recent conversation she had with Vice President Joe Biden in which “he reminded me that Teddy never questioned other people’s motives, no matter how much they may have disagreed with his positions. He understood that they cared for America just as deeply as he did. Ted didn’t demonize people.”

All due respect to Mrs. Kennedy, to the vice president, and to the memory of the late senator, who was indeed a master of bi-partisan coalition building in the Senate, but that’s false. Ted Kennedy certainly did demonize political adversaries when it suited his purpose.

In his 1992 campaign for US Senate he unfairly cast Mitt Romney as a heartless swine who hated working people, and, through surrogates, tried to smear Romney and other Mormons as racists. And in 1987, Ted raised the art of political demonization to an unprecedented level with his hatchet job on Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, who he accused of pursuing an America in which "women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, and rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids." This level of distortion, while politically effective, was so rank, it gave birth to a new verb, to "bork" someone, defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "to defame or vilify (a person) systematically, esp. in the mass media.”

This sort of thing had been going on in our political culture well before Ted, and he is not to blame for the grotesque examples of it we see these days, such as the brainless effort to cast the president as a closet Muslim. But if we’re going to confine this to the fringes of political discourse where it belongs, let’s not pretend that one side or the other has a monopoly on the practice. And as we rightly honor Ted’s memory this week, please, no whitewashing history, lest we be condemned to repeat its mistakes.

Here is a link to the Daily Beast ranking of the "most corrupt states" referenced in tonight's 11pm report. Watch the piece if you consider this cause for excessive celebration.