Revisiting the Palin Resignation

This has been a busy weekend. I had company from Austin so, although I heard about Sarah Palin's resignation as governor, I didn't actually watch the entire nineteen-minute video from her press conference until today.

The edited text of her speech appears on her Facebook page here. The quotes below, including caps for emphasis, are from that text.

Palin took a meandering path to her resignation; she spent nearly eight minutes talking about Alaska's history and touting her accomplishments in office. She only broke from her relentless good cheer twice: First, to take a jab at the media's "slings and arrows" and then to snipe at the "obscene national debt that we're forcing our children to pay because of today's big government spending."

At 7:50, she finally got down to business, complaining about the "political operatives" who descended on Alaska last August, trying to dig up dirt on her. She then offered a laundry list of the reasons for her resignation with very little specific information about what she will do afterward:

1) The Financial Burden: The fifteen "frivolous" ethics complaints against her have cost the State of Alaska $2 million. And "Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight."

2) The Wasted Time: "And one chooses how to react to circumstances. You can choose to engage in things that tear down, or build up. I choose to work very hard on a path for fruitfulness and productivity. I choose NOT to tear down and waste precious time . . . Productive, fulfilled people determine where to put their efforts, choosing to wisely utilize precious time... to BUILD UP . . ."

3) The Enormous Need: "And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our country. I choose to FIGHT for it! . . . I'll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won't deride them."

At that point she announced that, not only would she not be running for reelection, she would be resigning her job as governor--a year early.

This was where she wandered into territory so obviously self-serving that I wondered if the Washington Post cut a piece of the speech from their video here on the press conference. The part in italics is missing from the WP's coverage:

And so as I thought about this announcement that I wouldn't run for re-election and what it means for Alaska, I thought about how much fun some governors have as lame ducks... travel around the state, to the Lower 48 (maybe), overseas on international trade - as so many politicians do. And then I thought - that's what's wrong - many just accept that lame duck status, hit the road, draw the paycheck, and "milk it". I'm not putting Alaska through that - I promised efficiencies and effectiveness! ? That's not how I am wired. I am not wired to operate under the same old "politics as usual." I promised that four years ago - and I meant it.

The last seven minutes of the speech were sort of anti-climatic except for the final sentence: "In the words of General MacArthur said (sic), 'We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction'."

The press is having a field day trying to figure out what is going on, posting all kinds of reason for her resignation:

1) The most obvious one is that she is prepping for a run at the White House in 2012. I don't buy it as her only reason. Her resume is already thin. Her title as governor of Alaska is her sole credential. Leaving her first term early does not enhance her future prospects as Commander-in-Chief. If you thought SNL made hay with "I can see Russia from my house," just wait for Tina Fey to get her hands on this.

2) The second most advanced reason is that there is a big political scandal about to break that would embarrass her. The FBI has already come out to say there is no federal investigation at this time. Of course, that still leaves a window cracked. Just because the FBI has not opened an investigation, it doesn't mean there aren't any problems on the horizon. A preemptive resignation could help to defuse any resulting media uproar. But I don't know that I believe this one.

3) Rick Sanchez from CNN speculated that she might be pregnant again. This might actually be supported by Palin's own tweet on Twitter: "We'll soon attach info on decision to not seek re-election... this is in Alaska's best interest, my family's happy... it is good, stay tuned."

Do we accept her at her word that she is just fed up with "the politics of personal destruction" and not seeking "a title before one's name"? Her Fourth of July message on Facebook would seem to contradict that notion:

I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!

Okay, this is my blog so here's my opinion.

Back on May 18, Publishers Lunch had this tidbit:

Sarah Palin's memoir, "a wonderful, refreshing chance for me to get to tell my story, that a lot of people have asked about, unfiltered," on both her personal and political life, from "her childhood in Alaska and last year's campaign to her political beliefs and her family life, including the pregnancy of her teenage daughter," to Brian Murray at Harper (which will co-publish with Zondervan), with Adam Bellow editing, on an exclusive submission (said to be "first and fervent in pursuing this project" by Barnett), for publication in Spring 2010, by Robert Barnett at Williams & Connolly (world).

I remember thinking when I read the announcement, "Damn, that's a short turnaround for a large publisher."

Since the resignation, there's been speculation about the future of that memoir. Today the Wall Street Journal had a blog by my favorite columnist, Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg, in which he responded to that question:

The answer, say those in the book publishing community, will depend on whether she’s still active in Republican politics. If she is generating headlines while promoting other Republican candidates, chances are that her book will still be of significant interest. Otherwise, the venture could be riskier.

I have no doubt that Sarah's eyes are still fixed on the presidency. However, she has several HUGE problems:

1) Alaska is her base of operations, but the state is no place from which to mount a national campaign for President. She can't just take an afternoon off from her job to campaign in the lower forty-eight states the way other governors have done. She actually acknowledges that in her speech. It's a big deal to fly anywhere from Alaska. She's already had a taste of that during McCain's campaign.

So running for re-election is out. I think she was being absolutely honest when she said yesterday on Facebook: "And once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier – I’ve never been one to waste time or resources."

2) I think the financial burden she talked about is real. This is a blue-collar husband and wife with no family wealth to back them. I don't know what kind of an advance she got for her book, but I'm guessing the money is needed. I'm further guessing she probably has a deadline somewhere around Thanksgiving. Even with Adam Bellow, conservative editor and author helping, she's got some tough days ahead.

3) This morning, Thomas M. DeFrank, the Washington Bureau Chief for the New York Daily News talked of an interview he did with Palin last November: "I can report the Alaska governor was engaging, authentic, gracious and appealing . . . Except for energy, however, her grasp of issues was woefully superficial. She was easily the most inarticulate veep candidate I've interviewed while covering 11 presidential campaigns."

That's a serious problem. Before she can be ready for prime time, the girl will need some heavy-duty tutoring in the issues. You might scoff that such a thing is possible, but I live in the state where George W. Bush went from governor to president--something I did not believe possible when he announced his run for the presidency. And let's face it. Both of them are charming, folksy and about as intellectual as my cat Bob.

4) There have been endless comparisons between Palin and Nixon. Both gave speeches in which they withdrew from public life, blaming the media. Today's New York Times pointed out what Nixon did after his resignation: ". . . Nixon used the next six years to quietly refurbish his image, building ties with the conservative wing that was becoming ascendant in the Republican Party, ingratiating himself with Republican senators and candidates for governor by campaigning on their behalf, and becoming better schooled in issues."

Palin is hugely popular in conservative circles. That makes her a big draw for Republican candidates at a time when Republicans need all the help they can get. She can campaign around the country, keep her name out there and build some political capital among legislators, whom she will later be able to call upon to support her.

All four of the above have one common theme: TIME. Palin needs time to finish her book, to study the issues, to travel around the country and to begin to build her own political network. That's the real reason she's resigning.

And call me cynical. I'm betting she and Todd are knocking boots every spare minute they have together. Because a pregnancy will help erase that black stain her resignation put on her record. I expect the announcement of a pregnancy to be forthcoming, and I suspect the reasons she hasn't announced it yet are (1) She may not yet be pregnant, and/or (2) Why give up an opportunity to hit the news waves twice--once by announcing your resignation and again by announcing your pregnancy?

Stay tuned . . .

Here's the first part of that press conference from YouTube and here's the second part of the press conference.

Happy Birthday, America

My maternal grandfather had three great loves: his family, his piano and his books.

Grandpa was a great reader. Outnumbered by his wife and four daughters, he sought refuge from all that estrogen by escaping into his library. My earliest memories of our visits to his New York apartment always included him with a book in his left hand, his index finger marking his place.

I would ask what he was reading, and sometimes he would actually tell me, which was how I came to know Edward Everett Hale's short story "The Man Without a Country."

I was probably six or seven when Grandpa described the story to me. It made an enormous impression on me. If you have never read it, I recommend it. It was published in 1863 in the Atlantic Monthly.

It's a deceptively simple story. It tells of a U.S. Army lieutenant named Philip Nolan who was tried for treason as an accomplice of Aaron Burr's back in the early days of the United States.

During his sentencing when Nolan is given a chance to assert his loyalty to the U.S., he cries out in anger: "Damn the United States. I wish that I may never hear of the United States again!"

The judge and the officers of the Court, who had all served during the American War of Independence, are horrified by Nolan's thoughtless outcry. The judge, an Army colonel, hands down the sentence: "The Court decides . . . that you never hear the name of the United States again."

For the next fifty-six years, Nolan is transferred from U.S. warship to U.S. warship, condemned never to set foot on American soil again. No officer or enlisted man is permitted to tell him one word about the U.S. Any mention of the United States is redacted from his newspapers, and he is forbidden any book that talks of his former country.

Nolan begins his sentence as an arrogant young fool scoffing at the men who condemned him. However, by the time he dies--more than five decades later--he is a changed man. He has transformed his personal quarters on the ship into a virtual shrine to the country he once renounced.

I re-read that little story every couple of years and, as we celebrate our nation's birthday once again, it seems appropriate to quote from it. The words are Nolan's:

"Youngster, . . if you are ever tempted to say a word or to do a thing that shall put a bar between you and your family, your home, and your country, pray God in his mercy to take you that instant home to His own heaven.

Stick by your family, boy; forget you have a self, while you do everything for them . . . And for your country, boy," and the words rattled in his throat, "and for that flag," and he pointed to the ship, "never dream a dream but of serving her as she bids you, though the service carry you through a thousand hells.

No matter what happens to you, no matter who flatters you or abuses you, never look at another flag, never let a night pass but you pray God to bless that flag. Remember, boy, that behind all these men . . ., behind officers and government, and people even, there is the Country Herself, your Country, and that you belong to her as you belong to your own mother. Stand by her, boy . . .

It was no accident that Hale wrote the story as the country teetered on the brink of Civil War. But as she has for over 230 years, America bled and struggled and survived those dreadful internecine days.

May God bless the United States of America and keep safe the thousands of men and women who protect her daily.

If you want to read the story yourself, go here.

Don't Cry For Sanford, Argentina

Politicians are different. We all accept that. But what exactly sets them apart from the rest of us?

The good ones are able to explain convoluted concepts in simple terms that everyone can understand. To be modestly self-deprecating. And to deliver a zinger of a put-down with good humor and superb timing. In his day, President Lincoln was as much a master of the sound bite as Ronald Reagan would be six score years later.

It takes a healthy ego to first dream of and then plan to occupy the residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. A healthy ego and a single-minded determination.

And how can we be surprised if ... eventually ... those near the top of the political heap begin to believe their own press and start subscribing to the belief that being different entitles them to ignore the rules by which the rest of us operate?

I just looked up the definition of narcissism on the Internet: "self-love; an exceptional interest in and admiration for yourself; a person full of egoism and pride."

That's as good an explanation as any for Governor Mark Sanford's self-serving interviews this week.

First of all, it takes overweening narcissism to offer the media an interview sensational enough that it manages to rise above all the noise surrounding the death of the King of Pop. A lesser ego might have celebrated the fact that Michael Jackson's demise this week had eclipsed the news of his own adulterous affair.

But not Mark Sanford. He set out to give the press a story that would guarantee his place in the spotlight.

In my mind, this spectacular example of poor judgment alone justifies all the calls for Sanford's resignation. Never mind those rumors of financial impropriety.

And then when he's snared the world's attention again, what does the fool do? He sets out to convince us that his affair with Maria Belen Chapur was about more than just sex. As reported in The Philadelphia Inquirer, Sanford had this to say:

"This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story ... A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day."

Gag me with a spoon.

My first thought upon hearing those words was, "Oh, my God. His poor wife."

Then I got seriously torqued. What is he doing? Trying to paint himself as a modern day Abelard to Chapur's Heloise? How stupid is he? And just how stupid does he think we are?

Not yet finished with his plan to self-destruct, Sanford says "he is trying to fall back in love with his wife, Jenny, even as he grapples with deep feelings for Chapur. 'I owe it too much to my boys and to the last 20 years with Jenny to not try this larger walk of faith'.

"I will be able to die knowing that I had met my soul mate."

Yeah, that's the stuff reconcilations are built on.

And just for good measure, he admits he's had "casual encounters with other women while he was married."

Obviously, it's dawned on him that some woman from his past might decide to capitalize on their time together. This must be the Sanford version of damage control.

There's a world of difference between sweaty sex and genuine affection, between lust and love. Publicly dissing your wife by rubbing her nose in this crap does not qualify you as a romantic idol. You've already embarrassed her and your kids. Quit trying to peel her dignity from her back like the bark from a tree.

"Have I done stupid? I have."

Truer words were never spoken. Now do us all a favor and crawl back under that rock you slithered out from.

I take comfort in the knowledge that his political career is finished. Videotape of him blubbering for the cameras while "Don't Cry for Me, Argentina" plays in the background will make an effective political ad for any future opponents.

Have I said too much?
There's nothing more I can think of to say to you
But all you have to do
Is look at me to know
That every word is true.

[Don't Cry For Me Argentina (Evita)]

The DOJ is Looking Into the Google Settlement

If you visit Scribd, you'll find a copy of a letter from the Department of Justice; specifically, William F. Cavanaugh, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, to Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court (Southern District of New York).

Mr. Cavanaugh is notifying the judge in the Authors Guild v. Google case that the Government is opening an antitrust investigation into the proposed settlement:

The United States writes to inform the Court that it has opened an antitrust investigation into the proposed agreement between Google and representatives of publishers and authors which forms the basis of a proposed settlement of a pending class action in The Authors Guild Inc., et al. v. Google Inc., Civil No. 1:05-CV-8136. The United States has reviewed public comments expressing concern that aspects of the settlement agreement may violate the Sherman Act.

For his part, Judge Chin entered an order dated yesterday in which he said:

The fairness hearing is scheduled for October 7, 2009. The Court intends to conduct the hearing on that date. If the Government wishes to present its views in writing, it must do so by September 18, 2009. The Government may also appear at the hearing to present its views orally.

On May 11, I did a post on the pros and cons of the settlement here.

To see the DOJ's letter and the judge's order, go here.

Born Free

I've been waiting for next Tuesday for a long time. That's the day that Chris Anderson's new book Free comes out.

You'll remember Anderson. His book The Long Tail was a best-seller during the summer of 2006. I wrote about the upcoming book for the first time on June 10, 2007 here.

I became interested in Anderson's whole concept of product wanting to be free and did a follow-up blog on the subject on February 13, 2008 here.

Finally, on February 27, 2008, I talked about an interview Anderson did with Advertising Age here.

Okay, it's been two years and the wait is finally over. Free hits bookstands next Tuesday, the 7th.

NOTE TO SELF

Alice Hoffman is among our most well-known contemporary novelists. She writes beautifully and movingly . . . of relationships, of milestones and of the human condition. She is one of those writers whose wordsmithing is so well done, I read passages out loud to myself--just to enjoy the rhythm and rhyme of her sentences.

Her latest book, her 21st novel for adults, titled The Story Sisters was published on June 2. Boston Globe book critic Roberta Silman reviewed the book on June 28, which is where this story starts.

Silman was complimentary of Hoffman's earlier works. Her review said:

. . . one of my favorite books is her “Illumination Night,’’ which amply displays her gifts of precise prose and the ability to create sympathetic characters.

However, when it came to The Story Sisters, Silman was blunt:

But this new novel lacks the spark of the earlier work. Its vision, characters, and even the prose seem tired. Too much of it is told rather than shown, and the story itself is a strange combination of a coming-of-age novel set on Long Island and a brutal story of the consequences of a childhood trauma . . .

I'm going to stop here and editorialize for a moment.

Writing can be a tough business. For most of us, it is done in lonely rooms, in moments hijacked from the rest of our lives: hours stolen from our families, our leisure time and sometimes even our jobs.

When we finally finish polishing our manuscripts, we run a gauntlet of critiques from our writing partners, agents and finally editors. If the work holds up after that barrage of constructive feedback, we wait endlessly for the book or novella to be released; only to find ourselves facing a new volley of feedback cum criticism from critics and fans alike.

I say all this to indicate that I have some understanding of how Alice Hoffman must have felt upon reading Silman's review. It must have felt like having your son's fifth grade teacher greet you during a parent/teacher meeting with the words: "I taught Jessica two years ago and found her to be an excellent student and a darling child. Bobby, on the other hand, is a bit of a dolt. I can't wait for him to move on to sixth grade."

Imagine the shock, the rage, the desire to respond to such outrageous calumny.

Unfortunately, Alice Hoffman acted on that impulse. She tweeted her outrage on her AliceHof Twitter account. Although the posts are no longer available for viewing, Gawker immortalized them online on Monday morning:

Roberta Silman in the Boston Globe is a moron. How do some people get to review books? And give the plot away.

Writers used to review writers. My second novel was reviewed by Ann Tyler. So who is Roberta Silman?

And Hoffman didn't stop there. In twenty-seven . . . count 'em . . . twenty-seven posts she lambasted Silman, the Boston Globe and the City of Boston, her own hometown.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, she offered up Silman's email address and phone number, suggesting people contact the critic and give her hell.

{Shakes head sadly}

It was like watching a trainwreck. Hoffman tried to rally legions of female supporters to her cause with statements like:

Girls are taught to be gracious and keep their mouths shuts. We don't have to.

And we writers don't have to say nothing when someone tries to destroy us.

{Wince}

That last line brought to mind a character in Hoffman's The Third Angel. Here is how she described him:

Michael Macklin had done some bad things, it was true . . . He put his life on the line in France, and he hadn't even shivered . . . In battle, he'd felt alive. On the run, he felt he had something to run to. He liked danger, he liked the smell of it. He liked the feel of his blood running hot.

The only blessing in this debacle was that Hoffman mistyped Silman's phone number in her exhortation to readers to reach out and touch Silman.

Silman told the L.A. Times' Jacket Copy:

"Aside from your email there have been nine emails to me, all in support of my review and/or my right to review and all apologizing for Alice Hoffman's perplexing behavior . . . I wouldn't change anything about my review. I have written many reviews for The Globe and say what I believe, and, in this case, I praised her earlier work, which was clearly better. I'm sorry Alice could not take pride in the good things I said, and perhaps mull a little on the criticism. That is what I have always tried to do when professional people have criticized my work."

Jacket Copy also printed the following:

Alice Hoffman's statement, which was conveyed by her publicist, Camille McDuffie at Goldberg McDuffie Communications, reads:

I feel this whole situation has been completely blown out of proportion. Of course I was dismayed by Roberta Silman's review which gave away the plot of the novel, and in the heat of the moment I responded strongly and I wish I hadn't. I'm sorry if I offended anyone. Reviewers are entitled to their opinions and that's the name of the game in publishing. I hope my readers understand that I didn't mean to hurt anyone and I'm truly sorry if I did.

Best,
Alice Hoffman

NOTE TO SELF: Don't ever, ever respond to a review. No matter how much it hurts, just walk away.

Read Silman's review here.

Stuck at the Prom

Sorry to have been gone for so long. My day job just had to take precedence.

Today is my first day off since we rolled out our new software. I've been napping and catching up on Internet news.

Just for fun: check out this year's contestants for the Stuck at the Prom annual duct tape competition. The rules require that two people create prom attire from colored duct tape and then attend the prom wearing their original creations. The ten 2009 finalists have now been selected, and you can vote once a day for the ones you believe should win from now until July 2.

Each half of the winning couple for the year receive a $3,000 scholarshop; each half of the second place couple win a $2,000 scholarship; and each half of the third place couple receive a $1,000 scholarship.

Here is the page to vote on the finalists for this year. I'm voting for #36, #87 and #179.

Sacha Baron Cohen's Latest Stunt

Sorry I've been out of touch. My university rolled out a new software program this morning at 6:00, and I'm the project manager for my department.

Back to work now, but here's a link to the video You Tube keeps taking down. I didn't see the MTV Movie Awards last night, but Sacha Baron Cohen's stunt is all over the news this morning.

Cohen flew into the awards dressed as "the dove of peace" in feathers and a jockstrap. A "malfunction" caused him to land facedown in rapper Eminem's lap. His bare bottom was in the startled Eminem's face. The rapper's posse quickly seized Cohen and pulled him off their boss, but Eminem and his entourage immediately stormed out.

I found the video on a UK You Tube website here. Don't know how long it will last before Viacom forces them to take it down.