Dec. 21, 2006
I predicted Al D'Amato would beat Chuck Schumer. I predicted George H. W. Bush would beat Bill Clinton. I predicted Hillary Clinton would never become Senator of New York State. I predicted the Republicans would retain both Chambers of Congress. I predicted a ship like the Titanic could never be sunk and the Hindenburg was as safe as a horseless carriage. Finally, I predicted that the Democratic leadership wouldn't be able to help themselves after winning Congress and would throw a lavish Hollywood type "Inaugural" - the kind normally reserved for Presidential elections. I guess I had to be right one of these times:
Tony Bennett is coming, of course, to croon his trademark "I Left My Heart in San Francisco.''
Carole King and Wyclef Jean will be there. Mayor Gavin Newsom is scheduled to be there, too.
And a big delegation of San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and labor leaders is jetting back East, together no less.
All will converge on Washington in early January to take part in four days of events surrounding the swearing-in of Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, who will be elected the new speaker of the House and the first woman and first Californian to occupy the post.
After running through a long list of planned events designed to highlight different phases of 66-year-old Pelosi's life, her spokesman Brendan Daly said, "Overall this is who Nancy Pelosi is. And this is a chance for people to meet Nancy Pelosi and see who she is.''
Already "historians" are ">trying to rewrite history to say such a party isn't unusual:
"The communications strategy is simple," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. "Feature those facets of biography that make it harder for people to say 'San Francisco liberal.'"
That focus on personal history is a marked contrast from the festivities that surrounded the installation of Speaker Newt Gingrich with the Republican revolution of 1994. Then, the GOP limited the formal revelry to two days, and Gingrich concentrated primarily on speeches articulating conservative plans for the country.
"We're at a different time and a different place right now," said Jamieson, author of several books on political communication. "Speaker Gingrich wasn't trying to overcome a lot of stereotypes. He hadn't been regularly vilified by the other side."
Newt Gingrich wasn't vilified by the other side? Apparently the liberal Ms. Jamieson didn't read the newspapers at the time (or she doesn't realize which party the mainstream media actually works for.) As the Media Research Center points out it was the Press vilifying Newt Gingrich in 1994.