abrahamhyatt.com

Sarah Palin: Wow.

Theory 1: Since she’s not running for reelection, why not use the time to fundraise and raise support for a presidential run instead of just sitting around as a lame duck governor? A similar theory says that instead of president, she’s going to run for the senate against current Alaska senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski.

Likelihood: Possible. She’s hit a political brick wall in Alaska. She doesn’t have a lot of support from the Legislature. The economy is crashing and she doesn’t want to be a governor who raises taxes. The GOP is desperate for a national leader and she could easily fill the void; up until last week polls clearly showed she’s popular among conservatives. As for the senate, there’s no love between her and Murkowski. This was the senator’s one-sentence statement yesterday: “I am deeply disappointed that the governor has decided to abandon the state and her constituents before her term has concluded.”

Chance of success: Lukewarm. Here’s why: a) Romney doesn’t have a day job and to keep up, Palin needs to hit the 2012 trail right now. Right? Wrong. And not just because it’s possible to run a state while campaigning. It also has to do with how much experience you have when you step down to join the race. As Bruce Reed points out, ex-governors like Carter, Reagan, Clinton and George W. either termed out or had served multiple terms before running for president.

b) The Nixon argument. After Nixon lost the 1960 presidential and 1962 California gubernatorial elections, he gave a bitter, angry speech (a.k.a the Checkers Speech), and seemed destined for political exile. He spent the next six years traveling the nation and world rebuilding his — and his party’s — status as a foreign affairs leader, and went on to become president. Palin isn’t Nixon. She doesn’t have his knowledge of foreign affairs, or his brilliance as a political strategist. Or six years for that matter.

Theory 2: Rather than jumping straight into a new campaign, she’s going to turn herself into an even bigger political superstar (and make lots of money) by writing books, getting her own show on Fox, sitting on corporate boards, and traveling around the country speaking at lucrative speaking engagements.

Likelihood: Possible. The opportunities abound.

Chance of success: Unknown. She’s thrown even her most ardent supporters into a tailspin. Conservatives4Palin.com: “All of us in the Palin camp have found quicksand beneath our feet today. Nobody knows what to think.” How much will they pay to hear her talk? She’s going to have do some serious work to win them back. See also Theory 5.

Theory 3: She’s pregnant.

Likelihood: Um.

Theory 4: She’s facing a federal indictment of some kind. The rumors of an actual indictment are just that. The facts that may lead up to that indictment are, on the other hand, pretty solid. At the center of the case is a building contractor called Spenard Building Supplies. The Village Voice did a in-depth investigation last year; Max Blumenthal has a new roundup:

Likelihood: Completely unknown. This is based entirely on unverifiable comments by off-the-record sources. Yes, Palin has faced at least three separate ethics scandals in the last few years. But we’re not going to know anything about this one until the feds announce something.

Theory 5: She’s simply being her impulsive self.

Likelihood: Very high. Palin’s speech was weird. It was rambling and sometimes incoherent. It’s very likely she wrote it herself; the exclamation points (18 in all), oddly used quotation marks, and repeated ALL CAPS are not the hallmark of a professional speechwriter. Guess where her main spokesperson was at the time of the speech? New York City.

Chance of success: Very poor. Joe Gandelman: “Sarah Palin is again doing it her way — but the question is whether her way is on the same wavelength as America’s overall polity and the way the political system operates.” Friday’s announcement didn’t catapult her to a new level of politics. In fact it did the opposite. Her resignation, with all its uncertainty and caprice, has cemented the fact that this confusing and unpredictable person is the Sarah Palin we will always see, no matter how long she’s on the political scene.

To quote Nixon: “A man is not finished when he is defeated. He is finished when he quits.”

Ink spots in image by Paulo Correa

Today is Nowruz — New Year’s day in the Persian world. And at midnight last night, the president released a brief video — subtitled in Farsi — wishing Iranians everywhere a happy New Year. The underlying reason for the video was diplomacy; Obama challenged Iran to engage in peaceful dialogue with the U.S. “This process will not be advanced by threats. We seek instead engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect,” he said.

I have no idea what kind of impact the video will have. In all likelihood it will be forgotten in a few months. But the simple act of creating it amazes me. There are countless examples of how different this administration is from the last. But I can’t think of one that feels as radically divergent as this.

As Ezra Klien pointed out, “It is hard to believe that five years after we were ordering “freedom fries” in the congressional cafeteria, we’re posting Persian translations at Whitehouse.gov.”

Watch the video. Watch the video with Farsi subtitles. Read the transcript. Download the Farsi version of the transcript.

An excerpt:

So in this season of new beginnings I would like to speak clearly to Iran’s leaders. We have serious differences that have grown over time. My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran and the international community. This process will not be advanced by threats. We seek instead engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect.

You, too, have a choice. The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right — but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization. And the measure of that greatness is not the capacity to destroy, it is your demonstrated ability to build and create.

So on the occasion of your New Year, I want you, the people and leaders of Iran, to understand the future that we seek. It’s a future with renewed exchanges among our people, and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce. It’s a future where the old divisions are overcome, where you and all of your neighbors and the wider world can live in greater security and greater peace.

I know that this won’t be reached easily. There are those who insist that we be defined by our differences. But let us remember the words that were written by the poet Saadi, so many years ago: “The children of Adam are limbs to each other, having been created of one essence.”

-White House photo by Pete Souza-

Let’s get one thing straight: It’s unlikely that Obama’s stimulus bill will not pass; even though centrist Democrats and Republicans are balking at at the size of the $900 billion bill, there’s general consensus that they’ll be on board for the final vote. But passing the bill doesn’t mean Obama wins. In fact, it’s the opposite. Most importantly, he lost control over how the public perceives the stimulus package. An angry public now thinks – mistakenly in many cases – the bill is stuffed with pork spending and government waste. This is the first time the Obama team has ever lost control of the message to this degree.

One reason for that shift in public perception is that Obama has allowed Republicans to take over the debate. His attempts at bipartisan collaboration have backfired and the president is left trying to make conciliatory gestures on both sides of the aisle, none of which are helping to contradict the perception that he’s lost control. This week Obama hit the media circuit trying to shift public option. First he had to address the fact that the three of his potential nominees had tax problems, a major public relations gaff in and of itself. But underlying every conversation was the stimulus bill.

“I think that all of these were honest mistakes,” he said on ABC, referring to the nominees who failed to reveal their tax problems, “but ultimately there’s no excuse for them. [...] As I said, I think everybody makes mistakes. And I think I’ve been very clear of the fact that this was a bad mistake. I don’t think it was purposeful, but I think it was a mistake.

“We’re going to have some glitches, and I understand that that’s what people are going to focus on. And I’m focused on it because I don’t want glitches. We can’t afford glitches because, right now, what I should be spending time talking to you about is how we’re going to put three to four million people back to work. And so this is a self-induced injury that I’m angry about, and we’re going to make sure we get it fixed.”

You’d be hard pressed to find another president who has humbled himself to that degree. But is this really going to be enough? Next week you’re going to see his administration return to a well-proven campaign strategy: going state to state, showing politicians and the public who, when and how they’ll benefit from the stimulus bill. That effort will more than likely help ensure its passage. But as I wrote in the last Eatable Politics, the battles he lost over the last week are going to cost him a lot of political capital in the coming months.

-White House photo by Pete Souza-

Bloomberg: “Barack Obama’s inauguration is dedicated to the proposition that all presidencies are not created equal.”

WaPo:  “Like President John F. Kennedy, who summoned citizens to think about what they could contribute to the nation, Obama hopes to turn some of the focus back onto the electorate, as he did with his grass-roots-driven presidential campaign. Aides who have seen parts of Obama’s speech said they expect it to meet or surpass expectations of a president-elect known for his soaring oratory.”

Bloomberg: “The world may well see not only a remarkably historic moment on the west front of the U.S. Capitol but also one of a handful of truly memorable inaugural speeches.”

2: According to ABC, Bush and Obama “have agreed that Defense Secretary Robert Gates will stay away from the Inaugural ceremonies and would become President if catastrophe hit the Capitol at noon on Inauguration day. Gates is the only hold-over from the Bush administration staying on, and as Secretary of Defense, he is already sixth in the line of succession to the presidency.”

Over the weekend someone leaked an unclassified threat assessment (marked For Official Use Only) that’s being used by law enforcement for the inauguration and Washington, D.C. Click here to download.

3: Politico: “Vans will be poised at the Capitol to take a few top aides of Barack Obama’s to their new offices at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. as soon as he is sworn in. About 20 senior officials have had their paperwork cleared to enter the White House complex on Tuesday. Some will attend a traditional lunch with the new president in the Capitol, then get to work while the inaugural parade is under way.”

The following day will be intense: He’s expected, according to ABC, to issue executive orders to close Guantanamo Bay on a still-to-be-decided date. He’ll meet with military commanders to finalize a his 16-month withdrawal plan for Iraq. He’ll institute a code of ethics for his administration.

Newsweek: “There’s a plan for what to do with the rest of the first 100 days. We just don’t know it yet because the Obama people are so damn disciplined. It will likely involve setting the table for big changes in energy and health-care policy with bills boosting renewable energy and extending health-insurance coverage to children (which passed the House last week). Obama will soon assume his role as educator in chief with the televised discussions he promised during the campaign.”

-White House photo by Pete Souza-

From Politico.com a few minutes ago:

“President-elect Barack Obama is expected to move swiftly to reverse executive orders regarding torture of terror suspects, the military prison at Guantanamo Bay and other controversial security policies, sources close to his transition said, in dramatic gestures aimed at reversing President Bush’s accumulation of executive power.

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) said he’s been informed that President Obama will support his proposed legislation to make public some opinions from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which issued some of the Bush Administration’s most sweeping claims of executive power. Obama also has promised to limit President Bush’s practice of using “signing statements” to amend legislation.

“I don’t know in what order or how fast” Obama’s executive orders could come, Feingold said. “It’ll be important that a couple of them be done immediately, and I think they will be, to show there’s a strong break from the current policy.”

Hear that noise? That’s the sound me eating crow.

-White House photo by Pete Souza-

Pick a medium and chances are Barack Obama was on it or in it last week: cable television, radio, YouTube, newspapers. The soon-to-be Commander-in-Chief is playing the role of Salesman-in-Chief, hyping, explaining and pitching his economic stimulus package to a public who will certainly find the final price tag a little terrifying. Obama is intentionally following the footstep of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who played a similar public role as he sold a stimulus package to a nation in the depths of the Depression. As serious as Obama’s plan is for the present economy, it’s even more crucial for him. If he gets what he’s asking for from Congress, he’ll have the political capital to do almost whatever he wants for the next 8 years. But if he fails, he could have some serious problems living up to all of his promises of change.

On paper, Obama’s stimulus package — which has its share of strong and weak points — looks pretty viable. The key idea is that it pumps new money — not existing money from tax breaks — onto the economy. (Although there will probably be some tax cuts included to appease Republicans.) As part of a piece I wrote on Oregon’s stimulus efforts for this month’s magazine, I interviewed an economics professor at the University of Oregon who put it this way: You can’t shift money from one part of the economy to another and create growth. “On the federal level they can run a deficit and borrow money against the future. On the state level you can’t do that,” he says. “The federal government can do effective short-term stimulus.”

You’re going to hear Obama talk about that principle again and again and again in the coming weeks. “Mr. Obama’s aides said that for the next three weeks, he would pack his schedule with interviews, speeches, news conferences and limited travel to try to rally public support behind the effort. The overall political goal, aides said, was to ensure that Mr. Obama’s economic recovery program was approved quickly by a substantial bipartisan vote in Congress, while at the same time playing down public hopes about how quickly it might work,” wrote Adam Nagourney and Jim Rutenberg in The New York Times.

But what’s missing from the discussion right now? Wiretapping. Torture. Even health care, which has an estimated $650 negative impact on the economy each year. Right now, Obama’s holding off from making any big pronouncements. From The NYT: “In the clearest indication so far of his thinking on the issue, Mr. Obama said on the ABC News program “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” that there should be prosecutions if “somebody has blatantly broken the law” but that his legal team was still evaluating interrogation and detention issues and would examine “past practices.”

If he ends up looking like a hero with his stimulus plan, I’m sure we’ll hear how he’ll fix those problems. But if not, it’s anyone’s guess.

“Everybody’s going to have to give,” Obama said on This Week when talking about the stimulus plan. “Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game.”

Obama, perhaps, more than anyone else.