By Jonathan Lindberg

Nowadays, a moment can define an election. Take for instance the famous Reagan line during his 1984 Presidential debate, “I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” Any race that was left to be had was finished from that point on.

Or Michael Dukakis. Remember him riding that tank in Michigan, the words Mike Dukakis taped to his helmet. The image seemed to capture the utter ineptitude of the campaign he was running.

And then in 2004, two moments seemed to define an entire election. There was the Howard Dean scream-fest after his primary loss in Iowa, a verbal declaration of a once-promising campaign falling apart. And then we had John Kerry explaining his utterly perplexing vote to veto eighty-seven billion dollars for our soldiers overseas, “I actually did vote for the 87 billion before I voted against it.” Both moments defined a frustrating year for Democrats at the polls.

Over the past forty-five years, something has happened to American politics. Somewhere between Nixon-Kennedy and Moveon.org, campaigns have become less about what is said and more about how what is said is spun. The candidate has been replaced by the consultant, and the result is anything but positive. “Rather than make the game more interesting, they have drained a good deal from our democracy. They have become specialists in caution, literal reactionaries – they react to the results of their polling and focus groups, they fear anything they haven’t tested.” That, according to Time columnist Joe Klein, who’s new book, Politics Lost: How American Democracy was Trivialized by People Who Think You’re Stupid (Doubleday, 241 pages) documents the conquering American politics by pollsters and consultants.

Beginning with eccentric pollsters like Pat Caddell, who helped define the ways to effectively gauge the voter, thereby helping Jimmy Cater ascend to the White House and along-the-way becoming a political celebrity in his own right, Klein charts the rise of the consultant, from Joe Trippi to Karl Rove, to Bob Shrum. “Some of my best friends are consultants,” Klein begins, and then systematically deconstructs their art, laying the burden of passionless politics at their feet.

But what has really changed over the past fifty years? What has made campaigns like Dwight D. Eisenhower different than those of George W. Bush? One word, television. “Television has ruined every single thing it has touched.” Not the words of Joe Klein, but rather Adam Walinsky, who worked on the ill-fated Presidential campaign of Robert Kennedy. However, the words might as well be Klein’s. Politics Lost offers one reoccurring theme, the always-present political consultant constantly throwing television advertising dollars at sagging polls. Who thinks we’re stupid? According to Klein, the answer is apparent – the political handler equates the thirty-second-spot as the modern day version of political dialogue, the one sure-fire shot-in-the-arm for a voter unsure of a candidate.

Politics Lost is about the consultant; however, it does not ignore the candidate, or rather, the diminishing role of the candidate. From Jimmy Cater to Howard Dean, George H.W. Bush to John Kerry, Klein does what few reporters are experienced enough to do, that is, tell us where we have been and tell us where we are going. Where we are going and where we are now. In two candid chapters, Klein looks inside the Gore and Kerry campaigns respectively, painting a disheartening picture of two candidates completely overrun by political handlers, unable to decide the fate of their own race. “The consultants were insistent on running the campaign they wanted to run. If the candidate disagree with them, or wanted to do something else, they sandbagged it.” This unfortunately, is where are.

Where we are going remains to be seen. The impression one gets from Politics Lost is that politics has been sterilized and there is no turning back. Nowadays, unscripted moments like the Al and Tipper kiss at the 2000 Democratic National Convention have little to do with policy and much more to do with poll numbers. Presidents are entrenched in the permanent-campaign, decisions affecting either their reelection numbers or their legacy.

Still, Klein is hopeful that an alternative will one day emerge. Like Robert Redford in the movie The Candidate, the image might be hard to place. Klein offers some help. “A politician who refuses to be a performer. Who never holds a press conference in front of an aircraft carrier or a flag factory. Who believes in one idea that has less than forty-percent support in the polls. Who can tell a joke – at his or her own expense, if possible. Who abides by the sign that graced Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Oval Office: Let Unconquerable Gladness Dwell.” No matter what your politics may be, that is something to which we can all agree.

By Chuck Bates

Well we are finally at the point where the President of the United States brought the immigration issue to a national address to the people during prime time. He waxed eloquently about the need for a nation of immigrants while attempting to please the American citizens with a plan for troops on the border. But what did he really say and what can we expect from Washington on this matter?

Last month we briefly discussed the economic costs of the current illegal immigrant population in this country. Public welfare systems, hospitals and school districts are at a breaking point due to the burden of illegals. The public outcry has come across party lines with most polls indicating that 65%-75% of the American people want order brought to the chaos at the border. Unfortunately Washington seems to be utterly missing the will of the people; or are they ignoring it?

The US House of Representatives passed an immigration reform bill on December 16th, 2005. While it was not a perfect bill it at the very least addressed the immediate problem; border security. Since 9/11 we have daily been bombarded with this War on Terror and the need for Homeland Security, but the borders, particularly the border with Mexico has gone largely unguarded with a mass of humanity in the millions crossing into the US illegally every year.

The House bill provided funding and a federal mandate to secure the border first by adding thousands of agents to the Border Patrol and begin work on a 2,000 mile fence between the US and Mexico. Secondly the measure provided for the enforcement of current laws with regard to employers hiring illegals. It instituted heavy fines for those employers knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. Finally, the bill did note that once the borders were secure then, and only then, would the Congress consider changing the immigration laws with respect to increasing the caps on the number of foreigners who could apply for legal citizenship each year. This is common sense. When a surgeon is dealing with a patient who is bleeding to death, he doesn’t run tests; he takes care of the immediate problem and stops the bleeding to save the patient.

The House of Lords, otherwise known as the United States Senate, seems to be completely out of touch with the will of the people. Following the President’s address in May the Senate immediately took up an immigration bill authored by none other than Ted Kennedy! Try and follow this if you can, Ted Kennedy actually has the Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist along with Republicans Martinez of Florida and Hagel of Nebraska carrying his bill for him. Some Republican politicians believe that somehow rewarding folks for breaking your immigration laws will in the end earn you their votes. However they may have horribly miscalculated. It is anticipated that for every vote the Republicans lose from the base of the party over this issue, it will take at least ten immigrant votes to regain the original loss. Essentially expect that the vast majority of illegals to vote Democrat similar to the ratios in the African-American community. Meanwhile, we the people of these United States get to foot the bill of unmitigated immigration. Here is where the real costs of immigration come into play.

Under the original Senate plan the annual caps would be extended each year the cap was met and would automatically increase by 20% per year. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has completed an analysis of the bill and the sheer numbers of potential ‘legal’ immigration under the bill are staggering. Mr. Rector, along with Sen. Jeff Sessions revealed the bill would expand immigration over the next twenty years allowing between 100 and 217.1 million new immigrants into the United States! On the high end that is equal to 66% of the current population of the country!

Should the Congress pass a measure closely resembling the current proposal get ready for life to change completely in the U.S. Frankly, these numbers of immigrants cannot be assimilated in such a short period of time and as noted last month could mean the end of the Republic as we know it.