Bayh Courts The Edge of Humor?

I have a lady friend whose astrological sign is cancer. I was reading her daily horoscope, which said, “You feel like all hope is lost today, Cancer, but miracle comebacks can happen.”

A mutual friend, who was walking by at the tail end of the horoscope, put her hand over her mouth. “Oh my God! That’s terrible. I had no idea. Is it serious?”

My friend replied quizzically, “Uhhh, not as much as Chris’s. He’s a Pisces, and his said his big plans are thwarted. Time to regroup.”

“What?!? What are you looking… (seeing horoscope sheet). OH! You said you are A cancer?!? I thought you said you HAVE cancer.”

So we three laughed and laughed and laughed.

Except not really. You see, this story isn’t true, and it isn’t really funny.

Even while admitting our society has become extremely over-sensitive about jokes, I can’t fathom any context in which cancer is funny. This may come from losing my best friend when I was 12 to a brain tumor or the fact that a couple people I really respect in my profession are fighting it desperately right now.

Now what if this same kind of Three’s Companyesque misunderstanding leading to the humorous denouement was about AIDS? Would that be funny?

Judge for yourself. This is U.S. Senator Evan Bayh at the Indiana Jefferson-Jackson dinner last Friday.



The follow-up interview you hear is by Bil Browning from the Bilerico Project.

If I opine that the Senator’s joke wasn’t in particularly good taste, am I being overly sensitive? Before you answer, let me ask three questions. Do you have AIDS? Have you had someone close to you die from it? Are you gay or otherwise part of any at-risk community that has been demonized publicly because of its association with AIDS?

I ask because one thing I noticed is that people who claim others are too sensitive about a joke have almost never suffered from the condition the joke discusses. Can anyone envision any context in which lynching would be funny to a black person? Certainly not if it wasn't said by a professional comedian who was black (as we all know you get some comedic license if you talk about a group to which you belong). Do you think many people in sub-Saharan Africa laugh about starvation? How many Jews laugh at holocaust humor?

I get that AIDS wasn’t the focal point of Senator Bayh’s joke. It was about how different D.C. life is from Hoosier life. But somehow that changes nothing for me.

I’m painfully objective, so I will be the first to tell you that I’ve laughed at some pretty revolting stuff, as can probably be said about anybody who has ever watched South Park. Maybe that laughter comes because we don’t know how to respond to the uncontrollable and horrific. Maybe the laughter comes from disbelief because the creators of Southpark don’t slaughter sacred cows. They kill them, gut them, and turn them into hamburger and serve them to you as you watch.

But isn’t there a significant difference between when two guys nobody takes seriously laugh at AIDS in an expectedly offensive cartoon and when a United States Senator does it?

Or maybe I’m just being too sensitive. Anybody out there with AIDS want to tell me to lighten up?

Bayh Courts The Edge of Humor?

Did Evan Bayh "Show Us the Money"?

When Senator Evan Bayh stepped down, I was angry. He left Democrats in the lurch because D.C. legislators don’t play nice?!? It was the political equivalent of “taking my ball and going home.”

Then I really thought about it.

Partisans don’t own the souls of our elected officials. We’re entitled to have them serve in the right way while in office and to have them exit while mitigating collateral damage. That’s it. We can’t make them stay, in particular when they’re cut from the executive “get things done” cloth, not from the “bloviate on C-SPAN and demonize the other guy” exterior.

The exit timing was a Bayh masterstroke. By waiting until the last minute, Bayh faked Mike Pence and Todd Rokita into staying sidelined though polling showed Bayh wasn’t a sure thing. Also, the Senator ensured there would be no costly primary like the one that caused the party’s 2008 gubernatorial implosion.

Instead, Bayh threw the choice of who filled his shoes to the Indiana Democratic Party State Central Committee’s 33 voting members, and he did so only after ensuring 8th District Congressman Brad Ellsworth had the votes to replace him.

Had Senator Bayh waited until after his re-election to resign, Governor Mitch Daniels would have appointed his successor, who would have served until a special election. Democrats would not have gotten the seat back.

In fact, the only real downside to Evan Bayh’s departure was that Ellsworth had little time to raise money for a 2010 election.

But how big a problem could that be? After all, the GOP has been playing host to a resource-consuming, five-way free-for-all (Dan Coats, Marlin Stutzman, John Hostettler, Don Bates, Jr., and Richard Behney) and Bayh was holding roughly $12 million in the bank, even after refunding contributions designated for a general election in which he will no longer participate.

A maximum mitigation effort would have Bayh legally laundering his money by giving it to every federally-qualified candidate or party committee with even the remotest Indiana connection, knowing it would wander home to Ellsworth. Or Bayh could always donate it all to the state party. No, it couldn't go directly to Ellsworth, but once state party and all the legislative party committees were covered, they could start directing all their prospective donors to give to Ellsworth instead.

We all knew the Senator would tip the cup. We just didn't know whether he'd pour it out or just let some drips fall.

I'd be lying if I said I was optimistic. Despite his considerable accomplishments, objective party folk will tell you off-the-record that the Senator has a lackluster record sharing his wealth unless the recipient's campaign helps him.

I’ll never forget one candidate who who was offered then-Governor Bayh’s support. The candidate recounted that the Governor was cordial as they talked about Bayh’s appearance at a fundraiser and in some joint political communications. But as soon as talk turned to Bayh donating money directly from his extremely flush campaign committee, the candidate said, "I could literally hear (Bayh’s) sphincter muscles clinch.” This was a key Bayh ally making the request.

But couldn't his circumstances now make him more sensitive to the need to rise as the consummate team player?

We got an answer today when the Indiana Democratic Party issued a release saying that Evan Bayh donated one million dollars to the state party, "the largest donation ever by an individual not on the ballot." Bayh called it a "million dollar vote of confidence in Brad Ellsworth and Indiana Democrats."

Call the Senator a victim of his astonishing fundraising prowess, but that's not nearly enough, even for a guy hoarding money for a 2012 gubernatorial run.

I have no doubt the Senator will stump for and attend events for candidates, but Mitch Daniels is investing his personal and political capital in untold numbers of state representatives in an effort to control legislative maps.

As insane and ungrateful as this will sound, I have to ask. Why did Bayh only give a million?

No, Bayh hasn’t become President (or even Vice-President), but he is a shrewd political operator. Thus, while I know I’d donate to him if he is generous with his current funds, he undoubtedly knows too many Democrats have less kind spirits about his exit. Moreover, he's raised money nationally from people who were thinking about sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom some day. Now that he's coming back to a smaller pond, it will be harder to recapture the dollars.

Basically, any goodwill engendered by spreading his largesse might not be enough to help him get it back dollar for dollar. But if he keeps it, the cash plus his statewide standing makes him the prohibitive favorite for 2012 if he wants to make a go. If he rolls into 2011 with at least eight or nine million, there’s no way he doesn’t clear the Democratic gubernatorial field the millisecond he declares. More importantly, if Democrats retain the U.S. House of Representatives, with eight or nine million, Mike Pence has to think very carefully, in particular if he becomes minority leader. Without it, he's "back home again in Indiana."

Accordingly, Democrats who look to Senator Bayh as Santa Bayh in 2010 will find more lumps of coal in the stockings than presents, though there is always the possibility that he's checking the list twice with an eye toward giving more. I hope so.

Because if Democrats lose the Indiana House of Representatives and Evan Bayh still has $8 or $9 million in his account on November 3, 2010, a lot of Democrats won't be quick to forgive, even if we know he's our best chance to end the Daniels-Skillman administration.

Did Evan Bayh "Show Us the Money"?

Classic iPOPA: Carson-Elrod-Shepherd Debate

I'm a day late with my "Classic iPOPA Monday," which is where I pull one from the archives on the first Monday of each month for the new readers. Another post understandably took precedence yesterday. Newbies, enjoy! If you've been an iPOPA reader from day one, you needn't linger here because you've probably already seen.....

********************************************************************************

I've just returned from the great 7th District debate at IUPUI featuring Andre Carson (D), Jon Elrod (R), and Sean Shepherd (L), and I've reached the following conclusion.....

Libertarians are entertaining.

In P.J. O'Rourke's book Parliament of Whores, he states that "in the American political system, you're only allowed to have real ideas if it's absolutely guaranteed that you can't win an election."

Maybe this is why Sean Shepherd was the most engaging personality on the stage tonight. When asked about legalizing marijuana, Mr. Shepherd did not directly support the same, but he pointed out that a family of seven never gets run over by someone who has smoked too many joints. The only thing they do, Shepherd said, is clog up the fast food drive-thru. The crowd burst out laughing.

Mr. Carson took umbrage and pointed out that drug use is not something at which one laughs and that he knows "ten crackheads" who began on marijuana. Mr. Carson's point was undoubtedly not to emphasize that he knows more crackheads than most voters in the 7th District, but rather, to emphasize marijuana's standing as a "gateway drug." This was expected law enforcement dogma from a man who worked in law enforcement, and it was echoed by Elrod in standard Republican "law and order" dogma. And that's the problem. Only a libertarian could entertain the idea of serious debate on this issue because it's too dangerous for the other two, seeing they have better than a snowflake's chance of winning.

But I won't bore you with the details of how many people we have incarcerated for life for possessing marijuana on a "third strike," or how many hundreds of thousands fewer die each year from marijuana than alcohol and cigarettes, which are also "gateway" drugs, or how much money the government could make taxing marijuana, or how legalizing marijuana would reduce violent crime associated with its distribution, just like it did when we re-legalized alcohol. You aren't allowed to think about that.

Shepherd also had the best line of the night. On gay marriage: "We need to get government out of the marriage business. The Bible says, 'Give to Caesar things that are Caesars.' I say we take from Caesar things that are God's."

Libertarians might be thought of as a fringe party, but they know a good sound bite. Libertarian wit, along with knowing the formula for a space-age, super-adhesive, are the keys to the vitality of the Libertarian Party in Indianapolis. This is no joke. Some aluminum lamp posts downtown still have bumper stickers for Libertarian Kurt St. Angelo from the 10th district race he ran in 1996 against Julia Carson.

Shepherd also seemed to have superior knowledge on most issues. He had a lot of statistics at his fingertips that he used to illustrate his points. Admittedly, 72% of statistics are made up on the spot, so he could have been lying to us all. But if you know somebody who cares enough to fact-check whether it's true that it cost $1.29 in conventional fuel to create $1.00 worth of corn-based ethanol, I hope you'll let me know. Either Shepherd possesses a broad intellect, or he reads a lot of books like "Medicare Part B for Dummies."

I know. People want to know, "What about Andre Carson? What about Jon Elrod?" I'm reluctant to criticize any of these three political gladiators. They stood on that stage for ninety minutes on live TV under intense media scrutiny that would have left mere mortals huddled in the fetal position.

Oh, what the hell.

Elrod came off slightly mechanical, and he said that he wanted to be my "neighborhood congressman" so many times, I was waiting for him to put on a sweater and take us by train to see King Friday in the Land of Make Believe.

Paying homage to irony, Elrod repeated a soundbite about the typical Washington, D.C. politics and soundbites that epitomize campaigns. But he came off as sensible and likeable. To his credit, Elrod refused to make religion an issue, pointing out there is no religious test to hold office. In a line that would make Eric Miller cringe (which makes me like Elrod), he noted that an office holder can be of any religion or NO religion. He also said that if Andre Carson were elected, he could be sworn in upon whatever holy text he wanted to use. One wonders what the crowd’s reaction would have been had Elrod “let loose” of his programming.

Carson, while very charismatic, also hit a “message rut” by referring to “senior citizens” as “precious” so many times, I had to leave the auditorium to call my grandmother and tell her I love her.

I’ve seen Mr. Carson in social settings just talking one-on-one about issues, and he can be incredibly sharp when he’s his own man. But tonight, it was as if he was so focused on staying “on message” for the campaign that he came “off message” for some questions. Only once (on a question about federal earmarks during which Mr. Carson waxed appreciatively about dinosaurs at the Children’s Museum) did his compassion and well-measured sentimentality show through.

I don’t blame Mr. Carson though. I believe the DCCC stole his personality by chocking him full of “talking points,” and I'd like for the DCCC to give him his soul back. Just like with Elrod, when a candidate strains to hit certain pre-programmed responses, they lose their individuality, spontaneity, and humanity. Of course, they also win that way, which is why Senator Bayh keeps getting elected while boring the hell out of us all.

Don't get it twisted, people. I hold the Senator in high regard. He is why I’m a Democrat. His campaign for Governor was the first on which I ever worked. I still have an autographed photo of him in my house somewhere.

But when was the last time you heard him give a speech that really moved you like he did back in 1988 or 1992 when he spoke with more urgency? (I miss the wordsmithing of Will Fay).

I think that’s what happens when you become too cautious. You become boring. Sean Shepherd had us in his palm tonight because he had nothing to fear. Including the fear of being elected.

Classic iPOPA: Carson-Elrod-Shepherd Debate