This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/21/joni-al-qaida-and-rich-folks-oh-my-the-imaginative-republican-response-to-the-state-of-the-union

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Joni, al-Qaida and rich folks, oh my! The imaginative Republican response to the State of the Union Joni, al-Qaida and rich folks: Fox News has a simple playbook for everything Obama says
(about 3 hours later)
There are always low expectations for the State of the Union: if the president is not of your party, he will have profaned America; if he’s from your party, he will have been corrupted by Washington; and much of the analysis will just be Washington having a heavy petting session with itself that it will never agree to consummate.There are always low expectations for the State of the Union: if the president is not of your party, he will have profaned America; if he’s from your party, he will have been corrupted by Washington; and much of the analysis will just be Washington having a heavy petting session with itself that it will never agree to consummate.
As for the speeches themselves, they are processed by speechwriters and pollsters until all texture is buffed out, effrontery elided and passion solemnly subdued. (Obama’s best moment was an ad-libbed burn instantly memorable for bearing no resemblance to the sacralized process surrounding it.) What we remember is branded content often undermined by subsequent events or any contemporary sense of perspective: “The era of big government is over”, “Axis of Evil”. Timeless oratory offends too many focus groups, and about the only thing that can be spoken of with high drama anymore is war. Freedom’s violence can never be too cloying, and, no matter how bumblingly it is conducted, war seemingly cannot be made ridiculous.As for the speeches themselves, they are processed by speechwriters and pollsters until all texture is buffed out, effrontery elided and passion solemnly subdued. (Obama’s best moment was an ad-libbed burn instantly memorable for bearing no resemblance to the sacralized process surrounding it.) What we remember is branded content often undermined by subsequent events or any contemporary sense of perspective: “The era of big government is over”, “Axis of Evil”. Timeless oratory offends too many focus groups, and about the only thing that can be spoken of with high drama anymore is war. Freedom’s violence can never be too cloying, and, no matter how bumblingly it is conducted, war seemingly cannot be made ridiculous.
Which is not to say that Fox News didn’t try. Almost seconds after Obama’s address concluded, the network whose recruiting department is probably a printout of a blonde painted on the side of a B-17 above the words “MORE LIKE THIS” immediately castigated the president for failing to mention al-Qaida. Obama did say, “We will continue to hunt down terrorists and dismantle their networks”, but he didn’t mention al-Qaida by name. You might think that failing to recognize the branding of a group that merges violence and propaganda robs it of its power, but Fox has a playbook, and this is it:Which is not to say that Fox News didn’t try. Almost seconds after Obama’s address concluded, the network whose recruiting department is probably a printout of a blonde painted on the side of a B-17 above the words “MORE LIKE THIS” immediately castigated the president for failing to mention al-Qaida. Obama did say, “We will continue to hunt down terrorists and dismantle their networks”, but he didn’t mention al-Qaida by name. You might think that failing to recognize the branding of a group that merges violence and propaganda robs it of its power, but Fox has a playbook, and this is it:
In 2015, then, Obama is going to get us all killed – just like he was going to in 2009-14.In 2015, then, Obama is going to get us all killed – just like he was going to in 2009-14.
Fox’s anchors weren’t the only ones panning the speech on the basis of what wasn’t there. Every liberal cable news producer’s favorite conservative, SE Cupp – who one supposes left MSNBC’s The Cycle to helm CNN’s Not Trying – likewise felt that Obama’s failure to mention al-Qaida was evidence of his acting as if the war against them had already been won. Worse, she said, he failed to “give a shout-out to Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney” and other Republicans who are “serious about solving poverty”.Fox’s anchors weren’t the only ones panning the speech on the basis of what wasn’t there. Every liberal cable news producer’s favorite conservative, SE Cupp – who one supposes left MSNBC’s The Cycle to helm CNN’s Not Trying – likewise felt that Obama’s failure to mention al-Qaida was evidence of his acting as if the war against them had already been won. Worse, she said, he failed to “give a shout-out to Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney” and other Republicans who are “serious about solving poverty”.
Over on Facebook, poor, ignored Romney blithely ignored the al-Qaida-gone-missing talking points blasted out by the Republican National Committee while the president was speaking and made a Bridge To Nowhere joke, insisting that the president was “more interested in politics than in leadership”, resulting in “a missed opportunity to lead”. Amongst other things, Romney also insisted that we need to simplify the tax code, which is something Obama called for in his speech, but which Mitt might have missed while playing Führer in Bizarro America, where he leads more people to the polls than his opponents.Over on Facebook, poor, ignored Romney blithely ignored the al-Qaida-gone-missing talking points blasted out by the Republican National Committee while the president was speaking and made a Bridge To Nowhere joke, insisting that the president was “more interested in politics than in leadership”, resulting in “a missed opportunity to lead”. Amongst other things, Romney also insisted that we need to simplify the tax code, which is something Obama called for in his speech, but which Mitt might have missed while playing Führer in Bizarro America, where he leads more people to the polls than his opponents.
But Mitt was the GOP’s past, and Joni Ersnt is its present. More specifically, at present, she is a senator from Iowa, which is hugely important in primary season, so she gets to do things like deliver the Republican response to the State of the Union speech, a coveted job recently held by these Wunderkinder.But Mitt was the GOP’s past, and Joni Ersnt is its present. More specifically, at present, she is a senator from Iowa, which is hugely important in primary season, so she gets to do things like deliver the Republican response to the State of the Union speech, a coveted job recently held by these Wunderkinder.
Ernst looked presidential in the same sense that the robots in Disneyworld’s Hall of Presidents look presidential: rigidly more or less human-shaped and smiling from somewhere deep in the uncanny valley. After announcing that she would not respond to Obama’s speech – which is the purpose of the response – she criticized him for a “stale mindset”, for “failed policies” like Obamacare and for presenting “political talking points, not serious solutions”. She then offered job-creating solutions like the Keystone Pipeline; cutting down trade barriers in the Pacific and eliminating tax code loopholes (which Obama called called for in the very speech to which she was/was not responding); supporting “our exceptional military and its mission” (which she left undefined); the “repeal and replace” of Obamacare (without saying with what); correcting executive overreach; confronting Iran (but, presumably, not negotiating with it, since Obama called for that); and defending life (ie, the American fetal kind; the rest can be droned or “repealed and replaced”). At 10 minutes of quickly-exhausted vagueness, it was a great introduction to a Republican response that no one else showed up to deliver. Still, you have to admire the gumption of calling out Obama’s stale “political talking points” by almost literally reading a Romney ‘12 checklist.Ernst looked presidential in the same sense that the robots in Disneyworld’s Hall of Presidents look presidential: rigidly more or less human-shaped and smiling from somewhere deep in the uncanny valley. After announcing that she would not respond to Obama’s speech – which is the purpose of the response – she criticized him for a “stale mindset”, for “failed policies” like Obamacare and for presenting “political talking points, not serious solutions”. She then offered job-creating solutions like the Keystone Pipeline; cutting down trade barriers in the Pacific and eliminating tax code loopholes (which Obama called called for in the very speech to which she was/was not responding); supporting “our exceptional military and its mission” (which she left undefined); the “repeal and replace” of Obamacare (without saying with what); correcting executive overreach; confronting Iran (but, presumably, not negotiating with it, since Obama called for that); and defending life (ie, the American fetal kind; the rest can be droned or “repealed and replaced”). At 10 minutes of quickly-exhausted vagueness, it was a great introduction to a Republican response that no one else showed up to deliver. Still, you have to admire the gumption of calling out Obama’s stale “political talking points” by almost literally reading a Romney ‘12 checklist.
SE Cupp loved it, naturally: “I thought she was great, she was a star”, she said, calling the entire enterprise “a really sort of positive, fresh-faced spin on this new Congress”. In a place where words don’t mean things, this probably was pretty fresh! We might as well travel there, then.SE Cupp loved it, naturally: “I thought she was great, she was a star”, she said, calling the entire enterprise “a really sort of positive, fresh-faced spin on this new Congress”. In a place where words don’t mean things, this probably was pretty fresh! We might as well travel there, then.
On Fox, George Will praised Ernst’s speech because of her zero name recognition: “She was effective because we haven’t seen her before”. That is the same rationale that leads adolescents to buy a 50th new YA vampire novel because they haven’t seen an ancient male vampire be diffident and immortal while falling in love with a teen girl protagonist with this exact proper name before.On Fox, George Will praised Ernst’s speech because of her zero name recognition: “She was effective because we haven’t seen her before”. That is the same rationale that leads adolescents to buy a 50th new YA vampire novel because they haven’t seen an ancient male vampire be diffident and immortal while falling in love with a teen girl protagonist with this exact proper name before.
Still, George Will has never met an argument he can’t make dumber by thinking more about it, so he went on:Still, George Will has never met an argument he can’t make dumber by thinking more about it, so he went on:
The rhetorical presidency was born with Teddy Roosevelt, and most presidents talk too much about too many things. Barack Obama is unquestioningly the most talkative, to put it politely, president we’ve ever had. His default position in any difficult or any moment of tranquility is to go give a speech. So people are thoroughly tired of this, that’s why four times more people are going to watch the Super Bowl next week, two weeks from now than watched this tonight. Then along comes someone we’ve actually never seen before. What a refreshing experience.The rhetorical presidency was born with Teddy Roosevelt, and most presidents talk too much about too many things. Barack Obama is unquestioningly the most talkative, to put it politely, president we’ve ever had. His default position in any difficult or any moment of tranquility is to go give a speech. So people are thoroughly tired of this, that’s why four times more people are going to watch the Super Bowl next week, two weeks from now than watched this tonight. Then along comes someone we’ve actually never seen before. What a refreshing experience.
That provided viewers with the classic George Will experience of wrongness metastasized into the unintentionally sublime via his radiating idiocy. More people watch the Super Bowl because politics is depressing; football doesn’t have people like George Will in it; games have actual outcomes; the winners aren’t always the same 3m rich mostly white people; and the losers aren’t always the other 300m of us. God knows how things would be different with Joni Ernst leading Team America – someone so mechanized that she makes Joe Buck seem like John Belushi.That provided viewers with the classic George Will experience of wrongness metastasized into the unintentionally sublime via his radiating idiocy. More people watch the Super Bowl because politics is depressing; football doesn’t have people like George Will in it; games have actual outcomes; the winners aren’t always the same 3m rich mostly white people; and the losers aren’t always the other 300m of us. God knows how things would be different with Joni Ernst leading Team America – someone so mechanized that she makes Joe Buck seem like John Belushi.
Other familiar faces met familiar low expectations, mostly on Fox. Frank Luntz –who constructs polls and focus groups to generate the buzzword results desired by the people who hire Frank Luntz – conducted another suspicious-looking Fox News focus group in which one panelist didn’t like that Obama filled his speech with “a lot of clapping”. (Luntz claimed that half of its members had “voted for Obama”, but that could have meant half fed-up Republicans who took a flyer on him in 2008.)Other familiar faces met familiar low expectations, mostly on Fox. Frank Luntz –who constructs polls and focus groups to generate the buzzword results desired by the people who hire Frank Luntz – conducted another suspicious-looking Fox News focus group in which one panelist didn’t like that Obama filled his speech with “a lot of clapping”. (Luntz claimed that half of its members had “voted for Obama”, but that could have meant half fed-up Republicans who took a flyer on him in 2008.)
Ted Cruz made his disingenuous rueful face at the fact that Obama wasn’t conciliatory enough with Republicans, then blamed the success of the 1% on Democratic big-government, saying, “Those who walk the corridors of power in the Obama administration, have gotten fat and happy”. (Rubio blamed the power of the 1% on Democratic “crony capitalism” in his book, which just shows that this is the best 2016 anti-Warren talking point that the fellas in R&D could cook up in the GOP Labs.)Ted Cruz made his disingenuous rueful face at the fact that Obama wasn’t conciliatory enough with Republicans, then blamed the success of the 1% on Democratic big-government, saying, “Those who walk the corridors of power in the Obama administration, have gotten fat and happy”. (Rubio blamed the power of the 1% on Democratic “crony capitalism” in his book, which just shows that this is the best 2016 anti-Warren talking point that the fellas in R&D could cook up in the GOP Labs.)
Last and least was Rand Paul, who blamed government gridlock on Obama (for those who doesn’t live or occasionally spend a weekend in objective reality): “I think the intransigence is on one side: his”, he told Fox viewers. But it was in his independent Randian Response that he checked off all the familiar policy boxes for use in his 2016 campaign commercials: term limits; liberal elites imposing their will; get government out of the way; no redistribution; hand-up-not-handout; new thinking; Hillary and Benghazi; the risk of terror attacks greater than ever; a boosted Martin Luther King, Jr quote; “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”; repeal and replace Obamacare “with freedom”; tax cuts; spending cuts; a balanced budget; and “wiretapping”.Last and least was Rand Paul, who blamed government gridlock on Obama (for those who doesn’t live or occasionally spend a weekend in objective reality): “I think the intransigence is on one side: his”, he told Fox viewers. But it was in his independent Randian Response that he checked off all the familiar policy boxes for use in his 2016 campaign commercials: term limits; liberal elites imposing their will; get government out of the way; no redistribution; hand-up-not-handout; new thinking; Hillary and Benghazi; the risk of terror attacks greater than ever; a boosted Martin Luther King, Jr quote; “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”; repeal and replace Obamacare “with freedom”; tax cuts; spending cuts; a balanced budget; and “wiretapping”.
It was everything you’d expect of Paul: he has to woo the big GOP money while keeping his core donor group that – via pulling himself up by his bootstraps – he inherited from his dad along with his MLK-quotes habit. His high-wire balancing act is fun to watch: he has to placate non-interventionist, constitutionalist Ron Paul fans with statements like, “The hollowing out of our national defense comes from the advocates for unlimited spending and perpetual military intervention”, then follow it with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ warning that we’ve militarized too much of our foreign policy while, at the same time, stating that “national defense is the single most important constitutional obligation of our federal government”. He can be a hawk on foreign adventures, so long as he’s also hawkish on gutting other federal expenditures to fund them. He gets to be all things to all non-poor people.It was everything you’d expect of Paul: he has to woo the big GOP money while keeping his core donor group that – via pulling himself up by his bootstraps – he inherited from his dad along with his MLK-quotes habit. His high-wire balancing act is fun to watch: he has to placate non-interventionist, constitutionalist Ron Paul fans with statements like, “The hollowing out of our national defense comes from the advocates for unlimited spending and perpetual military intervention”, then follow it with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ warning that we’ve militarized too much of our foreign policy while, at the same time, stating that “national defense is the single most important constitutional obligation of our federal government”. He can be a hawk on foreign adventures, so long as he’s also hawkish on gutting other federal expenditures to fund them. He gets to be all things to all non-poor people.
It was a good night, as far as these sorts of things go.: a vague address that garnered a mixed reception; a Republican response of historically consistent insipidity that earned fawning praise; Fox News telling you that the black guy was going to get everyone killed; Ted Cruz smirking; Rand Paul convinced of the absolute necessity of hearing from Rand Paul. There was even a Tea Party response to Obama that no one is talking about because – thank God – nobody showed up with a swastika, so it wasn’t that interesting.It was a good night, as far as these sorts of things go.: a vague address that garnered a mixed reception; a Republican response of historically consistent insipidity that earned fawning praise; Fox News telling you that the black guy was going to get everyone killed; Ted Cruz smirking; Rand Paul convinced of the absolute necessity of hearing from Rand Paul. There was even a Tea Party response to Obama that no one is talking about because – thank God – nobody showed up with a swastika, so it wasn’t that interesting.
Low expectations status: met. Let’s watch the same show again next year.Low expectations status: met. Let’s watch the same show again next year.