Tag Archives: gardner

Election Rule #34: Process Gaffes Matter. Policy Gaffes Don’t.

Mother Jones

Last year, it was conventional wisdom that Republicans had a very good shot at gaining control of the Senate in this year’s midterm election. But then GOP candidates started to falter a bit in Kansas, North Dakota, and other swing states. Charles Pierce comments on how this has played out with Joni Ernst in Iowa and Cory Gardner in Colorado:

The meme looked a little weak and faltering. It was time to make it strong again. And then we saw one of those remarkable moments in which the keepers of Our National Dialogue moved to shore up their own endangered credibility, thereby reviving the meme. Instead of being a demonstration that Joni Ernst’s entire previous political career was built on fringe bushwah, her ability to “distance” herself from these positions was presented as a demonstration of how politically deft she is. Out in Colorado, Cory Gardner, who has spent every second of his time in politics as a proud anti-choice loon, is now ahead of incumbent Mark Udall at least in part because of the credit Gardner has accrued for shrewdly “softening” his long history of extremism. That this might be naked opportunism seems lost in the narrative somewhere. I don’t think it’s entirely out of line to believe that a lot of people in my business need the Senate to change hands in November to vindicate how smart they were in February.

Maybe. Or it might just be the usual preoccupation that political reporters have with process over substance. For example, Steve Benen notes today that Kentucky Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes recently dodged “a straightforward question about whom she voted for in the 2012 presidential election” and got hammered for it. But in Iowa, when Ernst refused to say if she wants to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency or what she’d do for those who’d lose health care coverage if Obamacare is repealed, the reaction was mostly crickets.

The difference is that Grimes was clumsy over her handling of a process issue: her support for a president of her own party. Reporters feel free to go after that. Ernst, by contrast, was crafty over her handling of policy issues: in this case, environmental policy and health care policy. Likewise, Gardner is being crafty about his handling of abortion and contraceptive policy. That sort of craftiness generally invites little censure because political reporters don’t want to be seen taking sides on an issue of policy—or even rendering judgment about whether a candidate’s policy positions have changed. In fact, being crafty on policy is often viewed as actively praiseworthy because it shows how politically savvy a candidate is.

There are exceptions to this rule if a candidate says something truly loony. But the bar is pretty high for that. Generally speaking, policy views are out of bounds for political reporters, regardless of whether they’ve changed or whether they’re transparently absurd. Ernst knows that. Grimes apparently didn’t.

Excerpt from: 

Election Rule #34: Process Gaffes Matter. Policy Gaffes Don’t.

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Election Rule #34: Process Gaffes Matter. Policy Gaffes Don’t.

"Jaws" Is Ridiculous, Say Kids Who Owe Everything to "Jaws"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Happy Fourth of July! Thirty-nine years ago, Jaws became the first summer blockbuster. In it the town of Amity Island is terrorized by a killer great white shark around July Fourth weekend. In honor of that, we decided to publish a chat we just had about it. This chat has been edited for clarity.

Emily Dreyfuss: I saw Jaws last night in a movie theater.

Ben Dreyfuss: Why?

ED: Because it was playing right by our house and we needed to be somewhere air conditioned.

BD: Okay.

ED: Two things: 1) You and dad are exactly alike and 2) I forgot that “we’re going to need a bigger boat” wasn’t his line, which makes me even angrier when people quote that in regard to him.

BD: LOL, everyone thinks dad said that. He and I have this joke about Roy Scheider being pissed off about it for 25 years.

ED: I would be too! I hadn’t seen Jaws since we saw it as a family 20 years ago.

BD: I watched it with mom last year. She was like, “I love Jaws. My favorite part is when dad kills the shark,” and I was like, “Uh, he doesn’t,” and she was all, “Shut up, Ben. I was married to him for 10 years. He killed Jaws.” So we watched it and then she was like, “Huh, I could have sworn he killed Jaws. I’ve been telling people that my ex-husband killed Jaws.” “Well, I guess people think you were married to Roy Scheider.” “I guess so.”

ED: I mean, the way I read it last night, dad kind of fucked up and was semi-responsible for Quint’s death. He dropped the dagger, then swam away and hid, and then the shark ate the captain and Roy Scheider was a hero.

BD: Yeah, I mean, he had the pole knocked out of his hand. Then he swims away and hides. He had just gone down in the cage which was a pretty brave thing to do. By the time he hides he had no chance of killing Jaws. Like, either let yourself be eaten or swim and hide. Scheider was objectively the hero though.

ED: Yeah, I mean, dad had no other options, but i just forgot that he wasn’t the hero.

BD: Look, look, we love dad.

ED: Yes, to be clear, dad is the best.

BD: No one here is saying otherwise.

ED: I also forgot that his character was the rich kid! I guess I basically forgot everything.

BD: Oh yeah, with his tony, rich boat that they should have taken to avoid the whole death/sinking thing?

ED: I mean, they don’t even address that, which is ridiculous. Like, his boat had all the things they needed! Like sonar.

BD: Right? And Quint demands that they take his rickety piece of shit which is just an insane thing to do. The only reasonable thing to say to Quint when he makes that demand is, “Sir, you are insane. We are not putting our lives in the hands of an insane person. You’re fired. Good day.”

ED: “Also, we should add, you can’t catch a shark this big with a fishing pole. It had to be said.”

BD: HAHAHAHAHA.

ED: Like, his big plan is that he is going to REEL it in with his human man arms.

BD: I was under the impression that he was using some sort of contraption to leverage the weight of the boat or something? But that might not be how science works.

ED: I don’t think so. I think he was using the power of a metal cup to help hold the fishing rod and that is that and then it shows him reeling in and letting out and then being like, “This shark is so smart! i can’t pull him in!”

BD: “He’s either very very smart or very very dumb.”

ED: LOL, yes. That’s the line. Then he hands the rod—with the shark on the line!—to Scheider who knows nothing about fishing and isn’t even strapped in!

BD: Then at the end he tries to tow him back to shore.

ED: Yeah and that works out well.

BD: Also, the entire notion of the shark following them out to sea seems suspect. Why would Jaws follow their dumb boat? It’s just one boat.

ED: Because of the dead fish and blood trail.

BD: That little bit of dead fish that Scheider throws in there though, it’s not much! Like it’s just a bit of blood. Jaws can eat that much fish whenever he wants.

ED: Oh oh oh, another thing that makes no sense is when dad and Roy find the boat with the dead fisherman at night and in the scariest moment of the film the dead body pops out and freaks dad out? WHY WOULD THE SHARK KILL THE FISHERMAN AND NOT EAT HIM? He is not a murderer. He’s a “maneater!” He would have eaten that body!

BD: Jaws: Actually a story of a shark out for revenge against Ben Gardner. All the other attacks are just to cover up his crime.

ED: HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA.

BD: I mean, maybe Jaws didn’t kill Ben Gardner. Maybe someone else did. Maybe they got away with it.

ED: Wow, you remembered that character’s name. i am kind of blown away.

BD: “That’s Ben Gardner’s boat.”

ED: Yeah, that is the line but like, what are you? A savant? I barely remember dad’s character’s name. I’m confused if it’s hooper or hopper.

BD: Emily, I know all the lines to almost all of dad’s movies. I watched them all dozens of times when I was young…It’s Hooper.

ED: Where was i? I watched Always a lot…and cried.

BD: Yeah, Always is sad. I love the bit of that movie when Holly Hunter comes down in the dress dad bought her and that song “Smoke Gets In Your Eyes” plays. That song makes me cry.

ED: That is a very good moment. Ok, but so, we can agree, Jaws makes no sense.

BD: Yeah. Great film.

ED: Wonderful film.

BD: Makes no sense.

ED: Makes little sense.

BD: It could make more sense.

ED: It could make more sense!

The end.

Read original article: 

"Jaws" Is Ridiculous, Say Kids Who Owe Everything to "Jaws"

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on "Jaws" Is Ridiculous, Say Kids Who Owe Everything to "Jaws"

GOP Senate Candidate Cory Gardner Disavows His Support for Fetal Personhood—After Sponsoring a Bill Last Year

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Col.) has Democrats spooked. Less than three weeks after his late-in-the-game announcement that he would challenge Sen. Mark Udall (D-Col.), a poll from the left-leaning firm Public Policy Polling found Gardner trailing Udall by just two points.

But Gardner, a two-term congressman, brings plenty of baggage to the race, including his background as a fierce culture warrior. Among other attempts to limit abortion access, he co-sponsored a 2011 bill that would have changed the definition of rape under federal law, limiting abortions that could be covered under Medicaid to instances of “forcible rape.” So on Friday, Gardner took a step toward softening his image as a social conservative crusader by recanting his vocal support for fetal personhood laws, which would confer constitutional rights on fetuses and ban abortion from the moment of conception.

“This was a bad idea driven by good intentions,” Gardner told the Denver Post. “I was not right. I can’t support personhood now. I can’t support personhood going forward. To do it again would be a mistake… The fact that it restricts contraception, it was not the right position.”

What changed? Gardner says he “learned to listen” to critics of fetal personhood measures—something it couldn’t have hurt to have done before he co-sponsored a House bill that established a “right to life for every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization.” That bill, which Gardner signed last July, was named the “Life at Conception Act.” During his first run for Congress, in 2010, Gardner boasted of circulating a petition for a personhood ballot measure at his church. Coloradoans voted against that ballot measure—and a nearly identical measure in 2008—by a margin of 3-to-1 that year.

But their opposition didn’t register with Gardner until he faced an electorate that voted for Obama in the 2012 presidential race. Now, his eyes are open. “The voters of Colorado have spoken on this issue,” Gardner told the Post. “To me, that’s the end of it.” What a difference a tight Senate election makes.

Credit:

GOP Senate Candidate Cory Gardner Disavows His Support for Fetal Personhood—After Sponsoring a Bill Last Year

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on GOP Senate Candidate Cory Gardner Disavows His Support for Fetal Personhood—After Sponsoring a Bill Last Year