Hillary and Obama

I do not know what to make of President-elect Barack Obama's consideration of Sen. Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. I don't doubt she has the qualifications to be a good secretary of state - but she is not alone in being so qualified.

I do have doubts whether she is a team player - despite what your old basketball coach told you, I reckon that the Clintons have always spelled team with an "I" in it. This would make me worried if I were Obama.

Even while I can't understand why he would want her, I am further puzzled as to why she would want him as her boss. Being a senator is not chopped liver, despite the best efforts of Republicans to diminish Obama's senatorial service during the campaign. And it isn't a case of making a breakthrough for women: Condi Rice is a woman and there was Madeleine Albright before her.

And how does being secretary of state advance Hillary's quest to be president one day? Her future stocks would rise and fall on his success or failure. If he lasts eight years, she will be in her late sixties, and being older isn't a great advantage (ask John McCain). If Obama doesn't succeed in winning re-election in four years, she would be younger but still toast for being linked to a failed administration.

Perhaps Obama figures that she would be more trouble in the Senate than at Foggy Bottom. Perhaps he is really a heavy sleeper and if she is so eager to answer the phone at 3 a.m, he might as well let her.

But it sounds like trouble to me.

Farewell, PittGirl, we hardly knew ye

This is the part in which I reveal how out-of-synch I am with the modern world, and, even when I blog, I am no better than a guy who ties messages to the feet of carrier pigeons.

The occasion for this is the decision of PittGirl to quit her popular blog.

I take this departure as a sadness and a loss to the general conversation. My remarks here should not be taken as a personal criticism of PittGirl, despite my mention of pigeons, which she hated. Clearly, she turned a very frisky phrase and her talent made her unusually successful. I begrudge her none of it and I admire her for it.

My problem always was with her anonymity - the very thing that made her attractive and alluring to her fans. The blogosphere allows people to lie anonymous in the weeds. In my out-of-step way, I am all about standing up and being counted. I can't say this makes me a better person; I am sure it makes me seem quaintly old-fashioned.

You may say (because I know your type - you are argumentative) that the Post-Gazette editorials which I help write are anonymous - they appear under the paper's masthead on the editorial page and are not signed. That is because they represent the collective view of the paper's Editorial Board, not necessarily that of the individual writer.

But the truth is that the authorship of these unsigned editorials is no great secret. There's usually a box under the editorials listing the various members of the Editorial Board. And if you are particularly offended by an editorial, you could call me up and I'd be happy to tell you that Tony Norman wrote it.

Seriously, if you called up and asked, someone would tell you. By contrast, PittGirl quit because she was fearful of being outed. That doesn't sit right with me. It's like your mother said: If you don't want remarks about another person attributed to you, then perhaps you shouldn't be making them in the first place.

In life as with blogs, you should have the courage of your convictions. For the life of me, I don't see how a new technology should be the reason to upset basic decencies.

Sorry, PittGirl, and best of luck to you. But I have been attacked by too many e-mailers lurking in the tall grass of anonymity to have much sympathy for those who try to hide their identity in any electronic forum.

I'll go off now to feed my carrier pigeons.

Facing the music in Iraq

On the front page of The New York Times this morning, an Associated Press picture shows jubilant Iraqi policemen (and a U.S. Army soldier) dancing on Sunday, the day that Iraq's Cabinet approved a security pact that calls for a full withdrawal of American forces by the end of 2011.

The pact also calls for a U.S. military pullback from urban areas by June 30.

In the picture, the Iraqis appear to be doing the equivalent of the Iraqi hokey-pokey, which, as you know, goes likes this:

You put your ground force in

You pull your ground force out

You do the hokey-pokey

And you screw about

(That's what it's all about)

That's what it's always been about, and it's funnier for us than for the poor guys - ours and theirs - who have been caught in the middle.

But now this merry dance is coming to its inevitable conclusion. After negotiations with the Bush administration, which once said that timetables would only be a help to the enemy, a timetable has been agreed upon. We are going, ready or not, and no more talk about how timetables are bad. That was all just political propaganda anyway, convenient to George Bush's political purpose at the time but not convenient anymore

Now, you could say (and you would be partly right) that the improved security situation brought by the surge is allowing us to get out. Yes, but the situation is far from perfect and we are going anyway because the hockey-pokey always comes to an end sooner or later.

When the Iraqis burst into dance at the prospect of us leaving, it's a fair sign we have long overstayed our welcome. I suppose it's possible that these happy-feet policemen were not celebrating the pact but were just practicing for the Baghdad version of "Dancing With the Stars" but clearly the pact itself is an expression of Iraqi national feelings - i.e., Goodbye, America, it's been real.

Run, Sarah, run

As I wrote in my column on Wednesday, in warning the Democrats not to become too cocky after their victory in the presidential election, "Every victory brings the seeds of a future defeat."

The corollary, however, applies to the Republicans: "Every defeat brings the seeds of a future revival." How they choose to nurture those seeds is the question of the hour.

In a wise column published in the PG Wednesday, the moderate conservative David Brooks of The New York Times said the battle for the party's future vision will be won in the near term by those who believe the GOP has suffered because it "has strayed from the true creed of conservatism" - he calls this group "The Traditionalists." His conclusion is that "the Republican Party will probably veer right in the years ahead, and suffer more defeats." I think that's absolutely correct.

It's not necessarily good news for the country, however, because someone in Washington has to keep the Democrats honest by providing a counterweight. In my view, if the Republicans move to the middle, where most Americans live, they will do better more quickly, especially if the Democrats water their own seeds of destruction by vacating the middle in a drift to the left.

Which brings us to Sarah Palin, whom Brooks rightly identifies as the favorite of the Traditionalists. That is why, my friends, I am not worried about her chances in 2012, despite her best efforts after the election to talk up her cause.

It seems to me that the boat that carries her hopes is caught on a receding tide. She is the darling of a group that feeds on the very things that were so repudiated in this election - disunity, belligerence, bitterness, fear, character assassination. She looks nice, makes a good prepared speech, but isn't going to become miraculously more thoughtful or eloquent off the cuff, even if she spends the next four years studying Africa.

Her appeal will remain strictly with the red-meat eaters in the red states. Everybody else will go on seeing her as a female George W. Bush, capable of giving a nice hug but generally clueless.

After Bush, this isn't the path to future election victories. The American public was hit on the head by two by fours long enough that they finally woke up.

Of course, Barack Obama could be another Jimmy Carter, or else the economy could stay bad for four more years, and then all bets are off.

But, with those caveats, I say bring her on. She's just the one to lead the conservative charge to the rear.

Calling all clowns

As I was driving to work today, I saw a small, forlorn sign tacked to a utility pole in Osborne where Beaver Street meets Route 68, Ohio River Boulevard. It advertised Endless Variety Entertainers.

Endless variety! What a vision that conjured up! All about me was the gloom of dreary morning - grey clouds, sullen light, dispirited motorists. Yet on that boulevard of broken dreams, life and laughter beckoned.

One phone call away, according to the little sign, were singers, dancers, mimes, DJs, magicians, comics, cartoon characters, Elvis and - best of all, in my reckoning - sumos.

I imagined large Japanese gentlemen sitting around Pittsburgh waiting for the phone to ring so that they could trudge over in order to make my living room appear smaller.

(At work, I googled this happy outfit. It is apparently run by some guy in McKeesport and the sumos on offer are, in fact, "deluxe sumo suits," which was a bit of a letdown for me. I wanted real fat guys who eat loads of noodles).

The overall impression of that sign was one of great pathos. How could one utility pole break the stranglehold of boredom and despair that hangs heavy on the land?

Even if a platoon of singers, dancers, mimes, DJs, magicians, comics, cartoon characters, Elvis and sumos were summoned by a desperate call to the number on the pole, would it not be sort of pathetic for the would-be audience to admit how un-entertaining real life is?

And if all that motley crew couldn't help to amuse a grim-faced crowd, what does it say about the chances of a newspaper columnist who works on the proposition that many a true word is spoken in jest? After all, I am no sumo, although lately I have become a little plump amidships.

Then another thought struck me: Why can't I just go to work like a normal person without being invited by utility poles to go on a flight of fancy?

Breakfast of champions (heroes)

If there is one thing I dislike more than a taste of winter, it's getting up on a cold morning. If it were up to me, I'd stay in bed through April and then pop up like a daffodil.

But this morning, reveille sounded and I was off Downtown early to attend the Veterans Day Breakfast sponsored by the Friends of Danang, which has a special place in my affections.

The Friends of Danang was founded a decade or so ago in Pittsburgh by Vietnam veterans and others who wished to bring reconciliation and healing to a country where Americans and their allies once fought a war (Australia was one of those allies and that is how I first got there).

The Friends of Danang has undertaken several humanitarian projects around the city of Danang, including the building of a school, a medical clinic and a bridge linking two villages separated by water during the rainy season. It is about to embark on a new project: the building of another school.

Brian O'Neill wrote about the non-profits' good work in his "Around Town" column on the Portfolio page this morning "The Friends of Danang: Making Good on Their Mission to Help the Vietnamese People."

This was the 10th Veterans Breakfast and it's been a big success story, providing a convenient place for those veterans who wish to go on and march in the parade.

The first event was attended by 32 people. This morning at the Marriott Pittsburgh City Center at least 450 people took part. The organization's founding Friend and resident saint, Tony Accamando, received a special award for his service from his fellow Friends, a gesture which went much against his humble instincts. No one deserved to be honored more - and no one could have been more embarrassed. After giving a brief thank you, he shook his head repeatedly as if to say: "It's not about me."

Sadly, we don't see that much in America these days and I am glad I got up early enough on a cold morning to see it.

For more details on what the group does and how you can help, go to http://www.friendsofdanang.org/

Note to Toadsley on my previous blog: I came from sub-tropical Queensland. While they must have some deciduous trees, there can't have had many and I don't remember ever raking leaves.   

Winter of my discontent

I saw snowflakes on my way to work today. The only thing that accumulated was my depression.

I came from the tropics; I was born in Singapore, near the equator, and grew up in Brisbane, Australia, near the Tropic of Capricorn. I never saw snow until I went to England at age 25. I thought it was very picturesque for about five minutes, about the time it took for the chill to enter my bones. Nowadays it enters my bones if I see a snow-globe or a Christmas card featuring sleighs.

Oh to be in the Caribbean! I'd be laughing at you winter-loving Pittsburghers then! As it is, I am merely coughing, like everybody else in this town, or so it seems.

Gun nuts go shopping

Gun nuts take great offense at being called gun nuts, but they do have a way of conforming their nuttiness in ways that reinforces the image of the armed and the cranky

Consider the national rush to buy guns and ammo in advance of the Obama presidency. Apparently some gun nuts believe federal agents will swoop down - I assume in black helicopters - to pry the guns from the hands of law-abiding Americans.

I am not a gun nut but I am not against guns, per se. I think gun ownership is a constitutional right. I conceded that this right was probably an individual right before the Supreme Court so ruled earlier this year. It is not, however, an unlimited right. Common-sense boundaries apply to all rights lest they trespass on other people's rights.

I am a nut for clear thinking -- what I am against is irrationality, of which this firearm shopping spree is an example. While some attempt may be made to close down gun-show loopholes on gun purchases in the next four years, it doesn't mean you have to rush out now so you can still buy a shotgun.

In the same way, I am against people channeling their inner morons and still insisting that Obama is a Marxist/socialist, when he has no plans to take over any means of production or do anything remotely socialist that a real socialist could recognize (he just wants to tax the very rich some more, which will have no effect on me and probably not you, dear reader). The idea that he is a Marxist is, of course, is linked to the idea he will ban guns. One stupid notion becomes the accomplice of another.

Perhaps these worrywarts should stock up on champagne, bonbons, top hats, sports cars - anything that the alleged chief commissar might ban in the name of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Rest easy. The cold steel of your guns and the chilled champagne of your pursuit of happiness will still be available to those who want them during the Obama years.

The day after

It was quite a night. In the light of day, Barack Obama's achievement seems almost miraculous. How did he do it?

I think the answer may lie in areas that the Republicans have disparaged - his intelligence and experience. These alleged weaknesses actually might have been his strengths.

When Obama made a slip of the tongue in the heat of the campaign and referred to the 57 states he had visited, it was seized upon as evidence of his stupidity. It was pretty pathetic evidence: Many things can fairly be said about Barack Obama but being stupid is not one of them. He is as smart as a whip.

Intelligence and thoughtfulness are a big plus in any enterprise. They can help compensate for a lack of experience. Despite the conventional wisdom, Obama wasn't without some relevant experience. He was at one time in his early career a community organizer.

This is the very thing that numerous conservatives have ridiculed, most famously Rudy Giuliani at the Republican National Convention. Ha, ha, ha! What does that mean? What good is that?

As it turns out, perhaps very good. Until an Obama volunteer pointed it out to me, I didn't consider that the ability to organize communities might help in running an effective political campaign.

Of course, Obama, being smart, has attracted smart people around him and I don't know to what extent his hand was on the inner workings of his campaign. Still, campaigns are a reflection of a candidate's competence and the fact remains that Obama's campaign was masterful and John McCain's was inept. Last night on CNN, political commentator David Gergen called the Obama campaign one of the best ever seen in American politics.

In community after community across America, the Obama campaign was supremely organized and won the ground war. I wonder if Rudy and co. still think community organization is such a laugh line?

A SLICE OF BLOGGING

It is great to be in a newsroom on a busy Election Night. Reporters and editors are assembled in battalion strength to cover all the different stories and angles. The old place throbs with excitement and energy. At the Post-Gazette, pizza is delivered free for all the workers.

Loving democracy and pizza both, I would not have missed it. As a journalist of great antiquity, I wonder how many more of these events I will participate in. I hope to work as long as I can but one day newspapers may all become Web sites and the romance will be gone. Moreover, conservatives won't have anyone to blame for their own failings and pizza deliverers will prowl the streets without a sure destination.

Until that sad day comes, I am glad to be working on Election Night. My job last night was to blog in a duel with my conservative colleague Jack Kelly in a feature called The Last Word. I hope you found it entertaining.

The problem for Jack and me is that we like each other perhaps too much even as we don't like each other's politics. I suppose it might have been more entertaining if we had a real knock-down brawl but I figure there's too much of that already. Why can't we all just get along? as a guy called Rodney King once said in a different context.

READ IT AND WEEP

As I predicted last night would happen, the right-wing rat-bags of the airwaves today have been foaming with jets of bile at the nerve of the American people in picking the Marsist/socialist/elitist Barack Obama for president.

While I managed to miss these sulphurous eruptions, I could not miss the Tribune Review's editorial on Obama's election. Its main headline said: "America loses."

I had thought the Trib's 2001 editorial on the death of Katharine Graham was the worst I had ever read in my life, but the vileness and hatefulness of this latest effort exceeded it. Indeed, a special talent is required to overlook the incompetency and dishonesty of the Bush administration in predicting ruin to the republic because a Democrat wins the White House.

There wasn't a single word on the historic moment of an African-American candidate being elected president, yet there was room for a quotation from a 17th century French essayist who didn't have much to say but served to suggest that the editorial writer was at least a well-read cretin.

Barack Obama hasn't done one thing yet, hasn't been in office one day, hasn't even been chosen by the voters for one day. Yet a conservative writer for a conservative paper can't even bring himself to wish him the customary good luck? How thoroughly lacking in class, how completely despicable.

Read it and weep - weep for America.

Where I am tonight

I have had a splendid day. It was glorious outside, I had a run, I went on a long dog walk with a short dog and, oh yes, I voted. St. Stephen's Church in Sewickley was packed with voters at 10.15 a.m. Altogether, I am feeling very wry.

But for wryness, you must migrate tonight to another blog on the PG Web site - The Last Word, where my old mate Jack Kelly and I are doing the equivalent of a smackdown.

See you back here tomorrow. Hope I am still feeling wry.