Tom Watson

Bush in Spring

Quicks observations on the state of George W. Bush as February fades, Super Tuesday annoints Kerry, and the President's men loosen up their $200 million warchest on the eve of spring.

First, the President has slipped below 50 percent in approval for the first time, according to the CBS polls - 47 approve, 44 disapprove.

Secondly, a theoretical Kerry-Edwards ticket leads a theoretical Bush-Cheney ticket 50-42 - some serious open space between the campaigns. (I continue to believe Cheney will suffer a sudden health setback this summer and a new veep nominee will emerge).

Thirdly, the President's disgraceful and cynical "amendment" proposal banning gay marriage is already dead - some political success! The following Republican Senators have already indicated they won't be voting for it - Lamar Alexander, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Lincoln Chafee, Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, Mike Crapo, Chuck Hagel, John McCain, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter. All believe it's a question for the states, as do I.

Finally, did you see John Kerry on the CNN debate last week? Giving his best performance of the campaign, the Senator showed real life - and he's willing to counterpunch hard. And this weekend, he's attacking Bush where he lives, arguing the President has done a lousy job in the war on terror.

Sure, it's not even spring - but you do hear the stirrings. Could our long national nightmare be over? It's not the beginning of the end, but it may be the end of the beginning.

Johnny Thunders Best

Okay, I've got a few tracks by the White Stripes and the Strokes on my iPod. But it drives me crazy that the true creators of the sound these pretenders are mining get almost no props. Isn't it a little crazy that these two manufactured bands have made more dough than the New York Dolls, MC5, Richard Hell, Stooges, and Patti Smith combined? Anyway, if you dig the faux NYC punk vibe, I've got a recommendation for what is actually a little-known classic record.

Run out and pick up a copy of So Alone by Johnny Thunders. For the unitiated, Thunders was the lead guitarist at age 17 for the New York Dolls and, along with David Johansen and the gang, cut two classic records before flaming out in the mid-70s. Hooked on heroin (which eventually took his life in a New Orleans flophouse), Thunders became the Godfather of the New York punk scene - playing regular gigs at Max's Kansas City and CBGB, and opening the infamous Sex Pistols UK tour with his band, The Heartbreakers.

Thunders created a signature guitar lick that he used on almost every song (you can hear the borrowed version of cuts of such diverse bands as Guns n Roses and the Strokes) - a slim version of an old Chuck Berry play that consists of bending the inside string of a simple two-string chord - and running it through some major clipping on the amplifier.

Johnny could be a terrific live act - or he might be semi-comatose. I remember having a semi-lucid discussion of Reggie Jackson with him over beers at the old Brooklyn rock factory Zappa's before a scorching set in 1979. But his habit always overshadowed his talent - in short, he was a cheaper Keith Richards.

With one huge exception. So Alone is a true rock classic, with guest performances by Sex Pistols Steve Jones and Paul Cook, Patti Palladin and Paul Gray from The Damned, and a young Chrissie Hynde. From the hilarious and sneering London Boys to the touching You Can't Put Your Arms Around A Memory (which appeared over the closing Sopranos credits last year), this record never lets you rest. It's self-pitying, funny, and it never stops moving. One listen, and you'll know why the Strokes are such a pallid imitation.

Hate Amendment

Well, the official Watson Poll is complete. I've asked a dozen people I know - Democrats, Republicans, conservatives, liberals, gay, straight, black, white, Catholic, Jewish, atheist, left-handed, right-handed, tall, short, male, female - and the results are in on George W. Bush's proposed amendment to the United States Constitution.

12-0 against.

Every single person is my unscientific survey laughed at the Bush's proposal as a naked play to his party's extremist base - the so-called "religious" conservatives. This is not to say that everyone I've asked about it in the last few days is in favor of widespread gay marriage - far from it. But every one favored some form of legally binding civil unions, and most approved of local control over the term "marriage."

Bush's Amendment - for he will be tarred with it in history - would be the first to that sacred document to actively target one group of Americans in order to limit their rights (recognizing of course that the first 100 years of the Republic withheld rights to non-whites, but with local codes). And with the exception of Prohibition (and that went well, eh?) every amendment to our Constitution has extended rights to Americans.

Of couse, Bush's Amendment is a sham - we know he doesn't really believe in it, will never push for it in Congress, and will never campaign in the states for adoption. In modern America, it has no chance of passage.

And in my view, the reason for that is a vast increase in tolerance and human respect in most areas of our society toward homosexuals in the past decade. At the root of this is a stunning social change that changes voting democraphics dramatically - simply put, gays no longer stay in the closet. (There are exceptions, there has been occasional violence, and people still struggle - I don't intend to minimize that here). That triumph, earned person by person with dramatic struggle along the way, is permanent. Because of this new openness - call it the "I've got tons of gay friends" factor - homosexuality itself is most often greeted with a shrug in most circles, and homosexual unions are rewarded with congratulations.

And frankly, that's the kind of America I want my kids to grow up in - gay or straight.

New York Primary

New Yorkers are the ultimate conformists - and very conservative - when it comes to politics. That may sound crazy to Republicans and conservatives; isn't New York a hotbed of rabid liberalism? Well, yes - just a long as we can still hail a cab, get a decent cup of coffee, and watch property values rise.

In short, New York liberals are conservative.

This dates back to the Dutch of the 1600s, a conformist trading society that stood for no ripples in the line of commerce between old world and new. In the Revolution, New York stood with the British - and its trading power (what were a few pesky excise taxes, anyway?). And just look at our greatest political radical! In the new republic, Alexander Hamilton was the leading New York political thinker - and his political thoughts centered around commerce. We have always accepted social change readily - that's in our eternal favor - and we are a progressive city ... as long as it promotes business, or at a very minimum, doesn't interfere with it.

So when some observers predict a New York miracle for John Edwards, I have to laugh. New York take a major political chance?! Please! We embrace the political conventional wisdom, folks - and the safer bet is with John Kerry. Clearly, the latest pols bear this out. We will vote in huge numbers for Kerry because he is perceived as "electable." Until proven otherwise, we'll stick with the winner.

I've covered this story before. Most forget that in 1992, Governor Jerry Brown had Bill Clinton on the run. I covered that race for The Riverdale Press. Simply put, New Yorkers took stock of electibility and factored in their native tolerance for sexual proclivities, and sent Bill Clinton on his way to the convention - which turned out to be a rather staid, conservative gathering at Madison Square Garden.

So a week from today, when Democrats here go to the polls, don't expect a big surprise. Edwards hasn't made any big plays over the last week, and is unlikely to dent Kerry. And as long as Kerry seems solid, he'll get the vote here. And that's because New York's liberals are a conservative lot - we bet the winning ticket.

---

UPDATE: Kerry squashed Edwards in Idaho, Utah, and Hawaii last night and is now a third of the way to the magic delegate count. The latest New York poll? Kerry leads Edwards 60-21 percent with six days to go.

Demagogue Nader

We now know this: Ralph Nader doesn't care about his country, he doesn't care about the environment, he doesn't care about corporate corruption, he doesn't care about public safety - more than he cares about "Ralph Nader."

The faux champion of the people, the phony environmentalist, the self-centered demagogue announced yet another campaign for the Presidency this morning. This single announcement shows that he has a full-blown case of what brought Howard Dean down - he thinks he's far more important than the causes he pretends to espouse.

For a once-great champion of people's rights to be brought so low by the egotistical lure of demagoguery, to abandon the best interests of the average American he pretends to presesent, is the saddest story thus far in this year's politial cycle. Once was enough, once can be forgiven. This time, you know he's a total fake.

Maximum R&B

Steven Van Zandt - Little Steven, Miami Steve, or Silvio Dante depending on your viewpoint - is on to something big. His Underground Garage syndicated radio show is the perfect antidote to adulthood for those of us in a certain age demographic. The veteran Jersey rocker and E-Streeter has this incredible knack for blending rock across the eras. This is not an oldies show - indeed, Van Zandt plays tons of new tunes from unknown bands. But he'll roll in Otis Redding, the Beatles, the Searchers, and the White Stripes in a single set, surrounded by dramatic readings from obscure texts and clips from vintage television shows.

Yeah, it's a bit nostalgic. Listening to the show, I evolve from b&w Beatles at age 7 to blowing off work and driving out to Jones Beach with the Ramones blaring in my Buick at 16, to popping the Strokes on my iPod on Metro-North at (gulp) 42. “Sometimes people don't know if I'm playing old or new,” says Van Zandt in a Cleveland FreeTimes article. “There's virtually no difference. The newer has more of an edge and is a little more punky. The guitars might be a little more distorted, too."

It's that timelessness, the blurring of era's, that makes the show compelling - and takes the music I love out of the realm of oldies rock. And it's one man's viewpoint - his singular take on music and the world, and the context he finds for the work. On mainstream radio, there's no place for the likes of Allison Steele or Dennis Elsis these days. I like my radio with some attitude, not a ClearChannel database.

Suggestion: Van Zandt should cut a deal with iTunes (and other pay services) to create sections on their sites promoting both the new garage bands he loves and the legacy acts that never cashed in. Developing that core following into a small cash engine would only encourage others. Hell, maybe I'll even give up the commute and return full-time to my beloved Telecaster.

Programming notes: Here in New York, UndergroundGarage is broadcast on Sunday nights at 10 pm on WAXQ 104.3. The shows are all archived for Web streaming on the Website, so you can catch them anytime.

---

UPDATE: Van Zandt has announced a national garage band competition this summer, sponsored by Dunkin Donuts. Prizes include exposure on his show and upcoming music festival, and some gear. Asked whether it would be like American Idol, Van Zandt quipped: "More like `American Hoodlums."'

Dean vs. Dean

It used to be that we debated the legacy of two-term Presidents. These days we debate the legacies of also-ran Democrats. And in Dr. Howard Dean's case, at least, it is clearly justified.

Did Dean "change America"? No way - his impact is minimal. But he did energize a significant chunk of the Democratic base when snoring Senators like Kerry and Edwards were content to go along. And he built the nearest thing to a national digital grassroots political movement that we've yet seen.

I've read a lot of hand-wringing by Deaniacs, who blame the DNC or the myterious Democratic Establishment for taking Dean down. They're just rationalizing. Dean began to tank when he embraced that establishment - Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Bradley etc. They're not exactly outsiders. And Dean the candidate couldn't match Dean the movement - he started to believe his own press, and that proved fatal.

So what's Dean's legacy? It's a belief in databases, in Weblogs, in online fundraising (I know Convio, the company that handled Dean, quite well and they're a terrifric outfit). And it's also a realization that you can't just go along, that anger - publicly expressed - has an appropriate and honorable place in American politics.

Edwards and Jobs

They're trying to take a close second and make it a John Edwards win in Wisconsin, but I don't think that story has legs.

Yes, Edwards' numbers will go up from now till Super Tuesday. But no, he won't beat out John Kerry for the nomination. Still, there's a huge lesson for Kerry in this - one that goes beyond Edwards' ballyhooed charisma. And that lesson is jobs. Edwards has been pushing job loss - particularly overseas to outsourcing - over the last week. Kerry has as well, but with less attention on NAFTA. It's an issue that the Bush Administration seems destined not to escape.

I think Edwards is building a terrific case for the Vice Presidency - it would be wonderful to see his sunshine vs. Mr. Halliburton. Remember the energy of the early days of Clinton-Gore '92 - when that political team clicked and connected? I think the Kerry-Edwards duo can offer the same optimism this year - and I think they should key on creating jobs.

---

UPDATE: Kerry won by a 40-34 margin, according to final tallies. He's won 15 of 17 Democratic primaries. And his speech last night keyed on jobs. The "two-man race" theme seems to be today's headline (somewhat upstaged by Howard Dean suspending operations) - and I think that's great for Kerry. He needs the fight, still needs to gain recognition around the country, and it serve him well to run major media operations leading to Super Tuesday. And I think it all builds momentum to Kerry-Edwards.

Jeter Era Over

Well, it's official - the Derek Jeter Era has come to an end in Yankeeland. With the arrival of superstar Alex Rodriguez - the third best player ever to wear Yankee pinstripes - the scrappy never-say-die NL-style Torre-and-Jeter show has finally come to its end. Eventually, A-Rod will replace Jeter at shortstop, where he is a far better defensive player. Moreover, he instantly replaces Jeter as the most marketed Yankee.

Look, I'm a Mets fan. Have been since 1969. Won't change allegiance - ever. And that's despite the Wilpons' utter mismanagement of one of baseball's top five franchises. While I have not rooted for the 1996-era Yankees, I have admired them and the core they built the team upon. At the center of that core is the two-sided beating heart of Torre-Jeter. As we know, Torre will take his wisdom elsewhere next year. And now Jeter has to play beside a third-baseman who is a better shortstop than he is - and is just behind Ruth and Gehrig as the best position players ever to suit up on the Bronx.

And, of course, George Steinbrenner wants them both gone. And that's because George believes that credit for the Yankees great late-90s run should be his and his alone. In his mind, Torre and Jeter are supporting actors to his shining lead. That this is nonsense doesn't matter; it's George's show and he runs it the way he wants to.

So Yankee fans, take long look at shortstop Derek Jeter on Opening Day. Sure, he'll play short for a while - until he gets hurt or slumps or Torre takes an early leave of absence. Hell, he might even last out the season at short. But in 2005, with Torre gone, Jeter will either be at second base - or he'll follow Andy Pettitte out the door.

---

UPDATE: The Yanks management is saying all the right things about Jeter, his captaincy, and shortstop. But nothing is permanent in Yankeeland - a la "Yogi is my manager." Meanwhile, I've started something of the controversy about all-time great Yankees.

Blogging Pols

If there's one innovation you can carry forth into the future from this Presidential campaign thus far, it's blogging campaigns and politicans. Even as their former boss gets ready to drop out, Political Wire reports that former campaign chief Joe Trippi and chief blogger Mathew Gross have launched their own campaign blogs.

We already know John Kerry and John Edwards (et al) minted blogs after Howard Dean's success. And over the the UK, my favourite Labour MP is a blogging sensation - and does all his posts personally, I might add. Now, local candidates are getting into the action. In George's hotly-contested 12th district, for example, Democrat Doug Haines is using his Weblog for daily updates and links.

I've already seen what a blog can do in the public policy arena - for the past year the Drum Major Instititute for Public Policy has published the ProgBlog - a tasty morsel of daily predigestion for progressives that boasts 8,000 followers.

That leaves me with this question: Does the left own the political blogosphere? Are progressives more open about news, opinion, ideas, and media? Or do we just get it - are we, in fact, a hell of a lot more mainstream?

Well, there is this - if you can call it a Weblog....