Go read the job numbers from today.

Back? Ok good. Now re-read this part:

The Labor Department data showed private sector employment increased by 104,000, while government jobs continued a downward trend, reporting a loss of 24,000 jobs.

Private sector? Check. They’re hiring. Not at huge paces, but they are hiring. Public sector? Nope. Our government is actually reducing the amount of jobs they provide. And for the most part, I blame that guy up there, Mitch McConnell.

For a Congress that’s supposed to be all about jobs (even though it’s really all about denying President Obama a second term), they’re being awfully hypocritical. Take some of the GOP’s favorite talking points, for example—they’re completely at odds with each other. Even “Create more jobs!” directly contradicts “Reduce the size of government!”

Republicans in Congress are essentially saying that some jobs simply don’t count—specifically, government jobs. It’s fine, as long as it’s not public service, says the GOP.

Is that what we really want to promote? I’ve always thought public service was a good thing. That is was good and honorable to want to serve your country, whether in the military, through volunteerism, or through public service. Why do public sector jobs, apparently, not count anymore?

Of course the GOP would probably respond to this post saying that federal workers are lazy, and the the government is inefficient and can’t get anything done. But aren’t there better solutions to fixing that than cutting jobs? Republicans and their senseless, over-the-top “we need a surplus” agenda are causing the problem. We should be finding ways of training existing government workers to make the government work better. We should be trimming programs and unnecessary projects, yes, but we should do so in a way that salvages as many jobs as possible.

Anyway, my point is: I’m sick of hearing Republicans complain about slow job growth. Progressives and moderate conservatives are pushing to take three steps forward, while the far right is forcing us to take one step back.

America, please look at this carefully. Read, learn, watch, and observe closely. The problem here isn’t President Obama or his policies. It’s progress being held back by ancient ideals and outrageous politics and personal vendettas. That’s not the way a democracy should run.

I hope to use this blog to explore the nexus between new media and the 2012 Presidential Campaign- at all different levels. To start, here’s a very superficial look at how the candidates are using Facebook. The following are the number of “likes” as of July 09, 2011 for each of the declared Republican presidential candidates:

• Mitt Romney 1,031,700
• Michelle Bachmann 414,107
• Herman Cain 147,795
• Newt Gingrich 142,056
• Gary Johnson 126,426
• Tim Pawlenty 103,049
• Ron Paul 29,767
• Rick Santorum 23,374
• Jon Huntsman 9,111
• Fred Karger 2,048
• Thaddeus McCotter 1,009
• Andy Martin 568 (Facebook Friends)

One of the above will compete against President Obama in the 2012 election. As of July 09, the President has 21 million, 968 thousand 390 (21,968,390) likes. 

shortformblog: soupsoup: Visualization of Twitter Town Hall topics Press focuses on conflict/politic

Call me a crazy liberal, but I find it difficult to argue with the success and the good things that came out of the WPA. This article on Brainpicker got me thinking–while I agree with the idea of the stimulus, maybe we should’ve structured it a little more like we did way back when. Problem is, something like that would never happen today. It’s too much government power, it’s taking power away from the private sector. I can see conservatives now–they call Obama socialist already! What if he passed a package like this?

And of course that’s regardless of the results. There’s no doubt in my mind that a renaissance of the WPA to help us tackle the current crisis would’ve helped us recover more quickly than almost any other solution. But conservatives will be conservatives, and they would never in a million years even dream of support such a “radical” solution.

That’s not even to mention the cultural and artistic brilliance that came out of the era. Brainpicker said it best:

We just wish the political powers of the day would consider investing in such art-driven efforts the way the WPA did. What would $7 billion be, adjusted for inflation? Roughly $160 billion. And how does that compare to what today’s government is investing in war? As the kids say, just sayin’.

I couldn’t agree more. Check out some of the amazing posters on this Flickr set.

What do you think? Would you like to see this? Is it too “socialist” for you? I’m curious.

Need we say anything else? Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (@presssec) agrees:

Could he save 2010 for the Democrats? Two things that have happened in the past 24 hours suggest, to me, that he may be figuring out the strategies it takes to salvage these midterms. Simply put, he’s figuring out the winning issues (hint: health care is not one of them).

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” has been a divisive issue for a long time. For years, it was accepted by the majority, while it infuriated gays and allies behind the scenes. Upon Obama’s election, he pledged to repeal the policy, but last year saw little action on that front. This week we’ve seen the action liberals have been waiting for and it’s making the GOP look petty, homophobic and, especially in the case of Senator John McCain, lacking convictions on the issue. Three things that make this one a winner for Obama and the democrats:

1. Public opinion has shifted and a majority now favor repealing the policy
2. Top defense officials support an end to the policy
3. Republicans can’t make up their mind–John McCain, in particular, flip-flopping on the issue since October 2006

Keep pushing this until it happens, Obama. This shifts focus away from the economy a bit, gives you a lot of support from your liberal base (which you desperately need if you want to mobilize voters come November), and will make for plenty of heart-warming stories about gays being able to be “themselves” when the policy is finally ended.

AIG Bonuses

Now this could really go either way, but with Obama holding the momentum and public approval on the rise since the State of the Union, I’m feeling confident this will, ultimately, work in democrats favor.

As most of us know, AIG is readying another $100 million round of bonuses for its executives. Naturally, this infuriates about 99% of all Americans. Here’s the deal, three things to remember for this one:

1. Obama didn’t start the bank bailouts, Bush did, way back in 2008
2. Everyone hates AIG, and democrats have been doing a better job showing outrage over this issue than Republicans have–Republicans have to worry about losing wealthy, corporate donors and voters for November
3. This adds support for Obama’s proposed financial regulations–regulations Republicans have been pretty adamantly opposed to thus far

Keep up Obama. If you can show that this is your issue and that you’re willing to tackle it head on–as opposed to the Republican skirting around the issue–you can make this a real winner and start pulling around your approval rating on economic issues.

Behind the Scenes: Demonizing Las Vegas

Now this is pure conjecture on my part, but I’ve got a feeling Obama’s recent flap on Las Vegas, and subsequent apology in response to Senator Harry Reid’s outrage, are very planned events

First of all, this isn’t the first time this has happened. Now I’m not about to suggest Obama is above making the same mistake twice, but this is a tense political climate and he knows his good friend Harry Reid is up for re-election. Now what could possibly help Senator Reid at this juncture in the race…?

How about a show of strength? A little bravado from our fearless Senate Majority Leader? Well that’s what he got. Obama’s comment on Las Vegas gave Senator Reid an excellent opportunity to complain–loudly–and Obama immediately issued a formal apology for the comment.

Not only does this help Senator Reid immensely–now he can say he fights hard for his state’s largest city, and he’s willing to stand up to President Obama, and he understands the pain Nevadans are feeling and wants to help fix it–but it’s an event that, outside of Nevada, will only last in this news cycle for about two hours. The majority of Americans will ignore the story altogether, and even less will care. Nevadans are the only ones who will hear it, the only ones who will care, and Reid’s approval rating will go up. This might not help Obama’s approval in the state, but really, who cares? Politics is a short-term game, and Obama’s got almost three years before Nevada voters go back to the polls for him. There’s time.

After a stinging loss in Massachusetts, miserable polling and ever-lower expectations for the November midterm elections, there has been plenty of advice going around for Democrats. Last week, I counted no less than five such articles and editorials in Sunday’s Washington Post.

Miraculously, President Barack Obama seems to be changing the game. His State of the Union address, high-speed rail announcement and “question time” at the GOP retreat were three powerful wins in a row for him and for the Democratic party.

But not all is well and good. To fully recover from the recent tailspin of negative coverage, one person in particular needs to straighten up. The Obama administration’s main spokesman for the press, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, simply hasn’t been doing his job well. I’ve got some tips.

Dear Mr. Gibbs,

Quit pissing off the press. Sound complicated? It’s not.

It’s no secret the Obama White House has been getting more and more negative coverage by the press in recent days. Sure, there’s a lot of bad news being steered in your direction, but a press that gets along well with the press secretary might be a bit more inclined to break bad news more gently.

The press isn’t irritated with President Obama himself. Nor are they against his policies. Many journalists, statistically speaking, lean left anyway. In fact, I’m sure they quite like him as a person, too. According to a poll from late December, 58 percent of all Americans hold a favorable opinion of him personally.

This is all about the communicator. That’s you, Mr. Gibbs. You’re getting on their nerves, and because of that, you’re failing at your job to communicate White House policy effectively. Two weeks ago Dana Milbank at the Washington Post wrote a scathing column criticizing your “usual mix of wisecracks of insults,” your “glib Gibbs gibes,” and referring to you as “smart-alecky” and “combative.” Not good.

Then the weekend after that, liberal MSNBC news and radio host Ed Schultz told the nation about an unpleasant encounter with you. He told you that you were “full of sh-t”, and then you dropped the f-bomb right back.

Now you’re saying Mr. Schultz was misleading viewers in order to “get viewers to watch his show.” Not cool, Mr. Gibbs. Not cool at all.

There are three things you need to do to get out of the White House Press Corps’ doghouse.

First, quit being so political. You’re the press secretary. Yes, you should defend the administration, but you’re not campaigning anymore. Give them the news, answer the questions and spin as necessary. Don’t campaign — you already work in the White House; you can worry about re-election next year. Focus on your message, not everyone else’s.

Secondly, chillax. Not every question is an attack on Obama, and if you keep snapping at the media, they aren’t going to be nice to you in their columns that they write in newspapers with far more readers than this one.

Finally, give the press the respect they deserve. These people are keeping you relevant. And for the most part, they’re also being nice to the Obama administration; in 2009 they gave you the most balanced coverage in history, about 49 percent positive and 51 percent negative, according to the Center for Media and Public Affairs. If you want anything close to that in 2010, you’d better shape up.

Your bad attitude only results in one thing and that’s more columns like this. Obama’s doing a nice job recovering — don’t ruin it for him.

This week is proof. Wednesday night’s State of the Union speech was not a complete revolution in the rhetoric, but it was far more detailed, passionate, and blunt than I think anyone really expected. And the American public seem to have received it well, with 83% of speech watchers approving of his proposals.

Thursday we saw the bold announcement of a new high-speed rail proposal, utilizing $8 billion of stimulus funds. This announcement is a huge deal for each state involved, and is a pretty well-supported investment. God knows I can’t wait for a high-speed trip to NYC from DC.

Finally, in one of the most glorious demonstrations of American democracy I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, we had a direct question and answer session with President Obama and House Republicans Friday afternoon. Not only was it pleasantly surprising to see the GOP actually invite our Democratic President to come speak with them but, to put it bluntly, he absolutely schooled them.

He shot down their accusations. He legitimized and substantiated his proposals. He took them to task for their ridiculous politicizing and demonization of his policies. He did everything right. Have you seen it? You need to. Especially if you’re a Republican. I’ll join with journalists all over the Internet calling for this to be a regular occurrence. Let’s make “question time” happen all the time. Hell, let’s put it in the Constitution. Anything to make this kind of reasoned, even, logical debate happen more often and in public.

Have you seen the video? Watch it below. Miss the State of the Union? Check out the video embedded above.

In the end, it’s been a good week for Democrats. And it’s been a great week for Obama. I don’t know if I’d call this Obama v2.0 as much as a return to Obama v1.0, after a regression to Obama v0.5.

Consider this a rebound. Obama is back in the game. Maybe it was a wake-up call from Massachusetts, maybe it was advice from David Plouffe, or maybe it was simply Obama deciding it was time to change the way he’s been doing things. Regardless, I like it. I think this is a good thing for Democrats, a good thing for Obama, and a good thing for America. And look at how quickly the past week has changed things–if nothing else, this week should teach us all that things in politics can change incredibly quickly. We’ve got about ten months between now and November, I have no doubt Republicans will have good weeks and Democrats will have good weeks. Here’s hoping we can see more “question time”-style debate, more civil debate and more productivity on Capitol Hill between now and then, too.

Edit: Thanks so much to Andi Narvaez (@andinarvaez) for the tip on “Rebound” instead of “Reboot”. Flows much better, and certainly more contextually appropriate given his appearance at today’s Georgetown v. Duke game.

The reason for this sudden post this morning is simple: I’ve come to the sudden–perhaps far too late–realization that the press is genuinely pissed off with the Obama administration. They aren’t upset about the policies (indeed, most journalists lean left, and probably support most of them wholeheartedly), they don’t mind Obama himself (he’s a likeable enough fellow), and I’m sure the work environment down there for the White House press corps is stressful, but pretty hospitable. It ain’t exactly physical labor for minimum wage. But they aren’t happy with his communications team. And given what I’m hearing, I think that’s actually pretty reasonable. It appears Obama is doing a good job controlling his agenda, but his team really isn’t doing a great job communicating it (kind of important, there, guys).

Dana Milbank–who, honestly, I can’t stand, but sometimes makes some relevant points–wrote some shockingly insightful words in his “Washington Sketch” column in this morning’s Washington Post. A select quote from the column:

The Democrats’ failed struggle to hold onto Ted Kennedy’s seat in the liberal state showed how badly the party’s brand had been damaged over the past year. But as the White House press corps challenged President Obama’s press secretary on Tuesday afternoon about the unanticipated loss, Gibbs answered with his usual mix of wisecracks and insults.

Emphasis is mine. That’s not the kind of impression you want to be making on the press. It’s just not. It reminds me of some of the more contentious conflicts in “The West Wing” between CJ Cregg and the fictional Bartlet White House press corps. It usually ends with her getting really upset, the press being outraged, and her working to correct the mistake later on in the episode.

Milbank continues to refer to Gibbs with language like “glib Gibbs gibes”, “the smart-alecky press secretary”, “combative”, and more. Not exactly how I would want to appear in the Washington Post.

There’s no question Robert Gibbs is an outstanding political mind here in Washington. My question–echoed by many others, I believe–is: is he too political? Does he need to chillax a bit? Should he cool it down and give the White House press corps a little more of the respect they undoubtedly deserve?

I think the answer to all those questions is yes. Calm down, Mr. Gibbs. You hear it from Republicans all the time: this isn’t the campaign anymore. Now you can hear it from me, a hardcore Democrat–this isn’t the campaign anymore.