Burris, Get Out—Part 3

By Jennifer J. Foster

Roland Burris can’t catch a break.

The latest high-profile pol to call for the resignation of Illinois’s junior senator is Illinois’s senior senator, Dick Durbin.

From Fox News:

Durbin said he did not get the answers he hoped from the senator, the subject of an investigation into whether he lied to an Illinois House panel deciding whether to impeach Blagojevich. The latest controversy started when Burris amended his public statements to disclose that the former governor’s brother asked him to raise money for Blagojevich last year. Burris later disclosed that he attempted to raise the money, but was unsuccessful.

“This is a critical element,“ Durbin told reporters Monday, saying repeatedly he was “disappointed” with Burris. “Governor Blagojevich, or former governor, has been charged with trying to sell the Senate seat, so raising money or trying to raise money for him was in fact a very important fact that should have been brought forward and was not.“

For his part, Burris wasn’t talking.

Burris, who has been in office for little more than a month, darted out of the meeting and refused to discuss the details.

“I’m under orders not to speak about this,“ Burris said, noting his lawyers have told him to stop talking publicly about the events preceding his appointment to the seat by ousted Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Um ... maybe that’s because Burris’s memory has proven to be—what’s the word?—oh yes; unreliable when it comes to details of important conversations with political figures.

Unreliable, spotty, selective ... you pick a word.

In a move that shocked no one, Burris spurned Durbin’s advice.

Despite the building pressure, Burris spokesman Jim O’Connor said the senator is keeping a regular schedule on Tuesday and could even make a speech on D.C. voting rights before a Senate vote on the legislation later in the day.

Voting rights!! I hope he’s fighting for those voting rights. I’d hate for anyone to miss the opportunity to vote this egomaniacal self-aggrandizer out of office.

Barkley to jail

By Jennifer J. Foster

Charles Barkley is going to jail.

According to KPHO in Phoenix, the Alabama gubernatorial hopeful will do 10 days in Maricopa County’s famous Tent City as a consequence of pleading guilty Monday to two counts of drunken driving.

But wait! There’s more!

The sentence, which will start March 21, will be trimmed to five days if he completes an alcohol rehab program, said city spokesman Mike Phillips. He will also pay $2,000 in fines.

Under Arizona law, he’ll also be forced to install an ignition interlock device on his vehicles, Phillips said.

(Um ... just wondering ... what alcohol rehab program can be completed in less than a month?)

Anyway, in case you missed it, Barkley’s blood-alcohol level was nearly twice the legal limit when he was pulled over on New Year’s Eve. The audiotapes of his arrest—which include Barkley’s really interesting explanation for his running through a stop sign—are available on KPHO.

A few questions for you political consultants out there ... One, how to play Barkley’s legal troubles during his campaign? I know you guys are geniuses when it comes to euphemisms, but I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a positive spin on drunk driving. Two, if Barkley completes the mysterious and likely-worthless one-month alcohol rehab program, can he brag on that in a mail piece? Three, how do you think “drunk driver” plays in a push poll?

And ... would you take this client?

New poll

By Jennifer J. Foster

Nightcap

By Jennifer J. Foster

OK, so President Barack Obama and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal have both delivered their speeches.

There will be plenty of time for further analysis tomorrow, but let’s just get this out there so there isn’t any confusion:

Obama: A-.

Jindal: D-.

It was no contest, people. If Bobby Jindal is the Republicans’ answer to Barack Obama, then they’d better start aiming at the 2016 presidential race.

Obama was everything he was during the campaign—confident, charismatic and—yes, hopeful. Jindal was nervous and awkward. Never mind that the message from the “new” Republican party was completely AWOL; at some points during Jindal’s speech, even the messenger’s words were garbled and nearly unintelligible.

When it comes to policy, we have a lot to talk about (at least on the president’s side). We’ll do that tomorrow, when the transcript of the speech is available.

Just know this: If Republicans were relying on Bobby Jindal to emerge as the mano a mano match for Barack Obama, tonight was a brutal and very high-profile disappointment.

Barack’s big speech

By Jennifer J. Foster

President Obama will address a joint session of Congress tonight with a speech that, if it was a musical, would be a cross between REM and “Annie”: It’s the end of the world as we know it, but the sun will come up tomorrow.

(IRONY ALERT!! In that clip from the movie “Annie,“ the red-headed orphan sings the famous song of hope to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In our metaphor, is President Obama the singing orphan, the New Deal president or—a singing president? END IRONY ALERT)

A couple of curious things from the CNN advance:

President Obama will speak primarily about the economy in his address to a joint session of Congress.

The senior official said there will only be a brief discussion of foreign policy, with mentions of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as other threats around the world.

I’m sure this has nothing to do with Obama’s having backed off his campaign promise to get troops out of Iraq within 16 months and his recent decision to actually escalate American involvement in Afghanistan.

Instead, the speech will be dominated by four issues that all relate to the president’s broader economic message: financial stability and responsibility, education, energy independence and overhaul of health care.

The official said that unlike the more formal State of the Union speeches delivered later in a presidency, Obama will not go into great detail on questions such as whether large banks will be nationalized.

Could this be because they don’t have a lot of “great detail” to offer?

Obama is known for being a big-picture guy, the guy with the vision who depends on worker bees to come up with the plans to implement the vision.

So, here’s how it would work with the financial crisis:

President Obama: Guys, we need to win the financial crisis. Any ideas?

Guys who do work and stuff: Well, we could nationalize large banks.

President Obama: Hmm ... yes, we can (echoes in the distance) ... yes, we can ... yes, we can. Let’s do that.

Guys who do work and stuff: Yes sir, Mr. President.

President Obama: Right on. Good luck with that.

I’m sure that’s an oversimplification. But you get the idea.

In other news from the Preview of 2012 front, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal will deliver the Republican response after the president’s speech.

This will be interesting, because it will be one of our first looks not only at the GOP’s new message (if they have a new message), but also at Jindal as the messenger—and acrobat. Jindal will have to find some way to articulate ideological opposition to the president and his agenda without sounding like the latest doctoral graduate from the Republican School of No. (See advance excerpts of the speech here.)

If you’re like the rest of the country, you’ve only known Jindal’s name since John McCain’s veepstakes last summer. So I offer you some background.

Here’s Jindal’s official bio from the Governor’s Office; here is CNN’s big profile on him, written specifically for this occasion; and, if you crave something with a Clint Eastwood reference, here is the bio piece Seth Colter Walls did for the Huffington Post on Jindal during the height of the VP hysteria last summer.

And then there’s this story from the Toronto Globe and Mail. The story gets points for its headline: “Bobby Jindal is the Republicans’ answer to Barack Obama.“

Tonight, that’s as literal as it is figurative.