Nationals Politics

America’s Hometown Team, the Washington Nationals, today fired their manager.

It’s funny to watch sports teams which adopt the culture of the city in which they play.  The New York Yankees demand championship-level success each year the same ways the leaders of the business community would push for market share (or at least the way they used to).  The Pittsburgh Steelers play physical, hard-nosed football much the blue-collar work of their namesakes, the steelworkers who literally built that city.  Detroit Pistons games sometimes end up in violence and the Detroit Lions are the Edsel of professional sports.  The 2007 New England Patriots were cocky and overconfident in their quest for a 19-win season like some dude named Sully from Southie who thinks Smithwick is to him what spinach is to Popeye.

(Before anyone complains, spend a couple years in the dorms at UMass, then let’s talk.)

Similarly, the Nationals resemble the inside-the-beltway mentality.  After drifting along without a discernible plan for five years, the team found a scapegoat and fired the man in charge.  (That’s nothing special – baseball managers get axed all the time, even during the season, and going 26-61 is no way to keep a job.) But Acta’s firing comes after years of personnel decisions coming from a front office which mirrored the bureaucracy in the buildings surrounding it.  At its best, Nationals leaders have been incompetent; at their worst, they have been crooked and corrupt.  Not only were the players on the field bad, but there was never a clear plan for developing a winning team.

Washington DC is not a sports town, but it is a frontrunning town, so a winning Nats team here and there would cause some local buzz – and fill some of those empty seats I keep seeing when I make it out to what is a nice and conveniently located ballpark.  But like their bureacratic neighbors, the Nats are content with showing up for 81 home games with a roster of warm bodies – in other words, doing the absolute minimum.  And except for a handful of scapegoats who had to pay the piper after four years, there has been little chance of getting fired.  If only we all had such job security.

I’m not saying Acta is a genius, but he is certainly deserving of another chance – hopefully for him, with a team which is serious about winning.

Wait – Marion Barry actually has supporters?

Marion Barry’s defenders in his latest flap are accusing the Washington City Paper of racism.  The free weekly fronted their coverage of Barry’s latest public embarassment with a quote his former girlfriend apparently left on his voicemail: “You put me out in Denver ’cause I wouldn’t [perform a specific sex act which, if I wrote it, might get my blog flagged as ‘not safe for work’].”

It’s a legitimate question for people in neighborhoods to wonder why the City Paper – which again, is free and readily accessibly to kids – should use such vulgar language.  Barry and his minions have no beef.  They may complain that a white politician would not be covered the same way – as if late night talk show hosts hadn’t chewed up and spit out John Edwards, Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton, etc.  (Also: other politicians who don’t get this kind of coverage include the ones that don’t kick their mistresses out of hotel rooms for refusing to perform sex acts.)

If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, apparently racism is a close second-to-last. Those who would cry racism in this case forget that Barry’s latest public embarrassment is just that – his latest, and not his only, public embarassment.

It should be noted that charges that Barry was stalking his former girlfriend were dropped, and that the legal side of the dispute appears to be an overreaction to a private situation.  Given this, I was a little surprised that Barry didn’t resort to his tried and true defense when it comes to girlfriends who get him into hot water with the law.

No offense, but #$@& Alaska…

Sarah Palin may be the most scrutinized governor in the history of Alaska – a state that many Americans probably didn’t actually know was a real place up until last August.  Her resignation has only stoked that attention – and as Stanley Fish wrote in yesterday’s New York Times, media coverage refuses to take her words at face value that she feels the political system is broken despite the era “hope” and “change” that was supposed to be ushered in last January.

Here are some economic facts worth considering: Ben Stein, the former Nixon speechwriter who gained fame as a bit player in John Hughes movies in the 80s, commanded $30,000 per speech when he hit the college speaking circuit for Young America’s Foundation a few years back.  Palin could likely pull down $35,000-$40,000 a night speaking to packed college auditoriums.  In other words, she could probably pull down the annual $125,000 salary of an Alaskan governor inside of a week.  Not to mention that a wise PR director would make sure she had local TV and radio appearances.  And this doesn’t even take into account corporate speaking engagements, which she could probably charge double or triple for.

It all adds up to a lot more than most 45-year-olds earn on a yearly basis – especially 45-year-olds with five kids and a grandchild.  But there’s as many political reasons why her choice may be right for her as there are economic reasons. If you were Sarah Palin and had something to say about the state of the country, which would be a better platform for you – Governor of Alaska, a political office where you have constant legal challenges and criticisms, or giving speeches from coast to coast for a week or two a month, commenting on radio shows here and there, and writing books and opinion pieces?  And if she wanted to start her own think tank or 527, there are plenty of people who would line up to give her money – her already well-supported PAC reported a spike in fundraising after her resignation.

Given that her first exposure to national politics resulted in a steady drumbeat of opposing voices calling her a dolt at best and an unfit mother at worst, this may be the avenue to engage in the national debate on her own terms – and to reposition herself if she wants to make a future run for the Presidency (which, incidentally, only pays about $400,000).

“Politically speaking, if I die, I die.  So be it,” said Palin on Good Morning America – reflecting the candor which attracts her most dedicated followers.  She may not want to get back into the fray of electoral politics, but Palin is far from politically dead.

Err McNair?

In a quasi-obituary of the late Steve McNair, ESPN’s Jemele Hill  argued that we should remember the highlights of the former superstar in the wake of his tragic death – and not get caught up in the apparently adulterous circumstances surrounding his demise.

I should admit two things upfront:  I tend to abhor Jemele Hill’s columns (although I saw her doing a segment as a talking head on ESPN’s First Take morning show, and thought she was much better on TV).  That’s just my personal opinion on her writing style, although I usually disagree with her points as well. I was also a big fan of Steve McNair as a football player; as has been rehashed over and over in the days since his death, he seemed to play through more injuries than anyone else and, more than any other player, carried his team when his team needed carrying.

In reading this piece, though, I found myself agreeing with Hill – something that only happens once or twice a year, at most.  It made sense to remember NcNair for his accomplishments and not his detriments.  But one paragraph made me do a complete 180:

But my lasting images of McNair will be of him as a football gladiator, clutch performer and, overall, a decent man. Those images won’t be replaced by the TMZ photos of him on vacation with Sahel Kazemi, the young woman who died along with him. I’ll leave the judging to a higher authority.

Indeed, the facts surrounding McNair’s not out. But there’s something about athletes, entertainers, and sometimes politicians that allow us to gloss over their flaws to remember the great things they did on the field, on the stage, or in the halls of power.

In discussing him as a role model, McNair’s flaws do matter – not in the consideration of his football career, but in consideration of him as a person.  We know about McNair the Hall of Fame football player, but we should remind ourselves that we don’t know much beyond that – and because we don’t know, we can’t hail McNair as a model citizen in anything beyond the white lines.  As in any endeavor, success on the field means little if one cannot honor his own family.  Mark Sanford is a similar cautionary tale in the field of politics; the mysterious Michael Jackson comes to mind in entertainment.

Time may or may not reveal all the details surrounding McNair’s life and death.  As Hill reminds us, we can hail his on-field achievements whether those facts come to light or not; there are no doubts about those.  But neither McNair nor any athlete – nor, for that matter, any public figure – should be assumed to be great simply for what they do on the professional field.

It’s like listening to music in the Dark Ages

When you turn 30, it takes less and less to make you feel old.  Case in point for me is the reaction of a British teenager whom the BBC convinced to give up his iPod to carry around a Walkman for a week.

An no, not a “Walkman” as in Sony’s MP3 players.  Scott Campbell carried around a portable cassette player.  Taunts and ridicule from his peers made him eager to give it up, although there was some technological confusion, too – for example, it took Scott a bit to figure out that the tapes were two-sided.

And of course, Scott complains about the size, the shortage of music on a single tape, and other inconveniences – but probably because these damn kids today with their music don’t know what us children of the 80’s had to go through…

It’s Washington, so we can chalk this up to habit

The newspaper that taught us to “follow the money” is apparently doing the same: Politico reports that the Washington Post has advertised events to sell access to reporters and government officials.

This type of thing isn’t new – political debates and public forums often have media sponsors.  But those events have a purpose which serves the “public good” (and as journalists like to remind us, theirs is a profession where the pursuit of public good is vital).  The public good in exclusive “Salons” for the inside-the-Beltway intelligentsia is, shall we say, somewhat less clear.

New on YouTube: Citizen journalism and civic action

As many social networks as exist, YouTube still has the greatest potential for driving action for the simple reason that video is a powerful medium for communication – and short videos are even more so.

By offering a platform where people could host and share their videos easily, YouTube has had no small role in advancing the citizen journalism; if blogs gave everyone a printing press, YouTube has given everyone a TV news station.  YouTube is taking its role in this media re-alignment seriously, too, by creating a Reporters’ Center – a resource page with various videos to help people produce better news stories.

While some corners of the media landscape like to harp on bloggers and internet news as “unofficial” and “unprofessional”, this offers a real solution to those somewhat apt criticisms.  While there will always be muckrakers and yellow journalists in any media, these resources will help increase the amount of well-researched coverage through channels that news consumers are increasingly turning to.

Another new development from YouTube – that actually interests me a bit more personally – are the “call to action overlays” that launch today.  If you’re a YouTube advertiser, you can now run a link on your video that points viewers to another website.

Virally popular commercials – like the McDonald’s Filet-o-Fish commercial from this past Lent – can now link directly to the products they hawk.  But more importantly, political videos can do more  than simply raise awareness and frame issues.  Imaging the now-infamous “macaca video” with a link directing you to a page where you could contact then-Senator George Allen’s office.  (Of course, mass emails to Allen’s office may not be the most effective way to contact the Senator, but it would build a heck of a nice email list.)  Having videos that directly inspire action will make YouTube an advocacy tool for campaigns that may have, previously, only looked at it as a messaging tool.

Question for the President

With his last health care town hall drowned out of the media spotlight by l’affair Sanford and the death of Michael Jackson, President Barack Obama is hosting another one – this time online.  (Which is probably strategically better – after all, he won’t have to worry about having McDonald’s commercials playing in between his calls for preventive medicine, as happened on the ABC telecast.)

The president is inviting questions on YouTube – and TechRepublican contributor Jonathan Rick has obliged with a good one: