Coen Brothers Rankings (Updated)

The New Republic's Chris Orr, one of the best commentators around, came up with a ranking of the Coens feature films, and thought I'd do the same. Updated with the inclusion of Burn After Reading.

01. The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)
02. The Big Lebowski (1998)
03. Miller's Crossing (1990)
04. Raising Arizona (1987)
05. Burn After Reading (2008)
06. No Country for Old Men (2007)
07. Barton Fink (1991)
08. Blood Simple (1984)
09. Fargo (1996)
10. O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
11. The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)
12. Intolerable Cruelty (2003)

Avoided: The Ladykillers.

It's a shame that The Man Who Wasn't There, the brothers' most moving (and I'd argue, personal) film, has become a footnote in their oeuvre.

Bringing spitballs to a gunfight

Are they even trying to win anymore? Let's check out the Obama ad team's latest handiwork:



Are you kidding me? McCain lies about your tax plans, basically calls you a pedophile and envious liar in his ads, and you respond with a snarky ad poking fun of his inability to e-mail? What. The. Fuck. This is the "hard-hitting" new campaign that the Chicago team is promising? If this is the kind of swift counterattack Plouffe and Axelrod envision, please refund my donations and take me off the damn mailing list.

Here's a partial list of items to hit McCain on:
*putting out a smear ad that is tantamount to McCain defending child molestation
*McCain/Palin's despicable record on rape victims (voting against violence against women for him; making rape victims pay hundreds of dollars for "rape kit" testing)
* McCain taxing health care benefits
* the new Department of Interior coke and sex scandal, illustrating the GOP's addiction to Big Oil;
* McCain selling out his honor in order to LIE, LIE, and LIE to win an election
* McCain's 26 years of votes - time to start trotting out some bad votes;
* Generic scary ad on economic downturn and Bush/McCain policies
* GOP trying to use foreclosure lists to prevent votes ("As Americans are working harder for less, and losing their homes, the Republicans have a plan: stop Americans from voting.")
* McCain as craps player gambling on Social Security
* McCain as camera hog who makes terrible predictions on TV.

I'm not even touching on McCain's temper tantrums, Palin's three hundred problems, etc. You can find this list of McCain weaknesses at any time of the day in any major liberal blog.

This is the most pathetic kind of attack ad: an obvious personal attack that doesn't land a blow. McCain's old. Voters know this. If you want to reinforce the issue, use a picture that makes him really old in ads that actually hit him, not mock him for not being able to use e-mail. What demographic is he aiming for here, Wire Magazine subscribers? Apple Genius Bar employees?

My god. Being a Democrat is like being a Pittsburgh Pirates fan. Your team loses every year, so to shake things up, your new GM decides to trade for Matt Morris.

Dem messaging blows (as usual)

Political psychologist Drew Westen, who is as frustrated as I am with the Obama campaign's message operation (and has written a whole book ripping into feeble Democratic political messaging), lists ten things the campaign needs to work on to get it back on track. His post is pretty much dead-on. Sample passage:

They were similarly aware of the argument--it was published right here a little over a week ago--that allowing Palin to define herself would make it difficult to change public opinion if she delivered a strong, emotionally compelling acceptance speech, because once people have formed a positive impression, they will fend off data inconsistent with it. Precisely how and why this happens in the brain is not a secret. Once again they chose to ignore the relevant science.

This is how Republicans govern. They ignore science and rely on faith and intuition. Unfortunately, it's how Democrats campaign. No one should be involved in messaging or strategy in a Democratic campaign who isn't intimately familiar with the 60 years of research in social psychology on persuasion--on what works and what doesn't. This isn't optional reading. No one aware of that research would have made the strategic error the Obama campaign just made on the Palin nomination.

I see the Obama team doing the same thing Democrats always do: poll test some issue-based messages, get positive responses, and then the campaign runs with it. For eons now, the Democrats have relied on some model of ultra-rational political behavior completely divorced from how swing voters actually think and behave. It might work in statewide elections, but you give up a ton in national elections, when low-info voters turn out. Meanwhile, the Republicans aim their appeal straight at the brain's reptillian core and win, in spite having dumbass candidates and terrible policies.

Westen also talks about the campaign taking some tips from the Daily Show. I'd go further: Obama should fire his message operation and just hire the staff of the Daily Show. It's kind of embarrassing how much more effective the Daily Show has been than the Obama campaign in its anti-GOP messaging.


Why haven't we seen an animatronic Marlon Brando yet from Obama?

Unleashing Hell-ary?

In the Chinese classic The Romance of the Three Kingdoms (part of which was recently adapted into a John Woo-Tony Leung extravaganza), the three warring kingdoms had to deal with a wildcard named Lu Bu, the most formidable warrior in the story. Decked out in pheasant-tailed headdress and perched atop of his powerful steed Red Hare, Lu Bu would take out all comers in battle. He's portrayed as a someone difficult to stir to fight for you, but insanely awesome if and when he fights. Trouble is, unbeatable as he is in battle, he's fatally flawed. At once treacherous and super-ambitious, Lu Bu repeatedly double-crosses his patrons but ends up being an utterly inept strategist when trying to lead his own troops.

Lu Bu came to mind as I read recent accounts of Democrats yearning for HRC to be unleashed against GOP's now not-so-secret weapon: Sarah "Spiro" Palin. I'm part of this crowd, too (and not just because I used to drop all my books and run over and anytime someone yelled "girlfight!" in the schoolyard). I kept thinking just wait, you fucktard, Obama will let his female surrogates fight the dirty fight. If Hillary can be stirred to battle, she'll go to town on this well-rehearsed naif. But you know, the warlords who sought Lu Bu's services all met unhappy ends. And with respect to Hillary, not only is she not the fearsome warrior of the liberal imagination, her strengths are almost completely opposite of Palin's. Palin's a force because she's a very good political performer who's culturally one of them, them being the white, Rust Belt working class vote that may decide the election. Like Bush in 2004, Palin's is a perfect GOP general election candidate -- clearly an inept, dangerous dimwit to anyone who's paying attention and isn't in the tank for the right-wing (those of whom are now tarred as "elites"), but a skilled performer who not only electrifies the fact-avoiding GOP base and can also prey on low-information whites by playing up cultural identification markers.

Hillary's a political force in this election not because she connects to working class voters on some root level, but because she has credibility on economic issues facing these people. So while we think Hillary will just go out there and eviscerate Palin, it's really up to her to do it. In fact, Hillary isn't some wildcard warrior, but someone whose skills fit well within Obama's strategy, which is now to re-run 1992, hammer away at economic issues no matter how loud the GOP beats their culture war drums. As much as I would like to see someone besides Andrew Sullivan and the liberal blogosphere unload on Palin, I do remember 1992 very well. Back then, the inexperienced hippie beat the respected war hero.

I'd still call McCain/Palin's plans not just "more of the same" but also "dangerous" or "extremist." And yes, Sarah Palin is new Bush, the bete noire for Democratic partisans. It would be wise to have surrogates define Palin as someone out-of-the-mainstream as early as possible, a book-banning, managerially inept radical rightist. Keep her lies, scandals and hypocrisy in the media, but as a secondary storyline. In general, it might be wise to keep the eye on the ball and not get drawn into the petty newscycle battles that the McCain team wants to play on. I hate this phrase, but yes, it's the economy, stupid.

The Kool-Aid Drinkers keep saying trust the plan. And I guess I should.

looney tunes

What was the saying about a little man in need of a balcony? Rudy Giuliani, a sniveling would-be generalissimo, brings to mind that quote. What a wretched little critter.

Prior to RNC, this election has been rather painful to sit through, for someone of my sensibilities anyway. Obama is a deft counterpuncher, but he doesn't have a zest for blood and guts, still a source of immense personal frustration. Likewise, it's a bit discomfiting watching John McCain prostrate himself before the wingnut base. McCain's the true Shakespearean (or Lucasian) character this election cycle, a formerly noble man who sold his soul to the miscreants and degenerates populating what's left of the GOP base, the same folks who tormented him and took away what was his. As hungry as I've been for a piece of McCain's flesh these days, it's a little sad to see a politician I once admired live out the Anakin Skywalker story in real time.

Seeing the likes of Mittens and Noun-Verb-9/11 on stage, it's easy to imagine a far more entertaining election cycle. More blood! More explosions! Suppose Hillary went up against Rudy. Wouldn't it be just delightful to see HRC shred that loathsome cretin into mincemeat while Clintonites feed the media wolves the latest oppo research. Or if gasbag Biden went nuclear against Mittens, phony blow-dried politician extraordinaire. Alas.

After tonight, my blood is boiling again. Sarah Palin is obviously an engaging performer and cleared the 4-inch high bar the media set for her. It helps that, like all successful Republicans, she's a fabulously convincing liar. (When there's a photo of you holding up a "nowhere" t-shirt, I think it's time to cut your losses on the lies about opposing the "bridge to nowhere.") But the effusive praise is a bit daft. Is the media overcompensating? This is another instance of a tactically sound McCain move that will lead to no long-term gain. The big miscalculation is the biting, sarcastic tone. Rudy already delivered the red meat to the right-wing lunatics. What Palin needed to do was to cut an image of competence while telling her winning story. Instead, she came off as defensive and smug, throwing bon mots to the whiny ass titty babies in the audience (oh noes! another media hobgoblin will eat us! Oh noes!), and mocking "community organizers" in trying to rekindle the culture wars. This plays well with dittoheads, but with independents and suburban women (typically more focused on pocketbook issues than other voters)? (EDIT: early word is NO!)

Palin would have been a much more effective running mate had she presented a positive story initially. It would've been difficult for the Democrats to hit her hard, and she'd probably come off better to independents. She can clearly turn on the charm. Surely the base needs to get stoked, but Palin's gonna be an issue from now til November 4th. And the more hay the news media makes about Palin (and McCain's judgment and age), the less oxygen for negative Obama stories. Doubling down on the base-feeding is likely a mistake, even if McCain moves hard to the center tomorrow. (Nate Silver makes a very smart case about how an unknown like Palin has very little standing to attack a known quantity like Obama in the manner she did. I'd further add that Palin's attacks largely consisted of sneering allusions to campaign gaffes and memes that made sense mainly to those who've followed it closely, but probably lost on casual election-watchers.) Palin's swallowed the entire newsworld whole this week, and will likely to be a very visible story until election time, as the media hounds continue to sniff around Alaska, looking to break the big scandal. If the idea was to send Palin to the Dick Cheney circuit (interviews with media loyalists only, fundraisers, small rallies with true believers in deep red areas), that's not a reality now. Palin is as much a part of the GOP ticket as McCain -- and that bodes ill in the final calculus.

Truly, Palin reminds me no one so much as a female Dubya, a smug, dumb wingnut who is very adept at pushing Christianist identity buttons. A talent no doubt, but still an eminently definable enemy. And this culture war thing inflames both sides. You can bet Obama raised some serious dough tonight -- I chipped in another Benjy. All the money will be well worth it when they show shots of these fucks on the convention floor ("drill now! burn the Constitution! smart people suck!") weeping in their diapers on November 5th.

Can't say I'm terribly worried as of yet, though it wouldn't kill me if this National Enquirer story pans out.

Palin Rocks the Mad House

Whatever else you can say about McCain's vetting process, you have to figure that Sarah Palin was picked for her personal story and political skills. And surely, all the mini-scandals aside, Palin will knock this speech out of the park, no doubt drawing from the insane energy generated by a bunch of identity-obsessed "movement" wingers. I'll eat my $700 shoes if Palin isn't charming, personable, and confident in her acceptance speech.

The press has set her up to succeed wildly today. In the weeks hereafter? Not so much.

Note to Democrats: Use the word "extremist" frequently in describing Palin. This word is quite effective.

Palin and the Tire Gauge

At a townhall, a voter asked Obama what the average American can do personally to conserve energy. In response, Obama suggested that inflating your tires as a way improving gas efficiency. Seizing on this advice, the McCain campaign decided to create and pass out "Obama tire gauge" to reporters. Get it? Me neither. But you can just envision these Maxim-reading little cretins sitting in McCain headquarters giving each high fives as they come up with the latest taunt. This tire gauge prank is emblematic of a myopic campaign that is defined by its insistence on winning hourly news cycles by any means necessary. Many of these efforts, like this one or the mockery of yesterday's DNC backdrop, involve idiotic frat boy antics that elicit giggles from right-wing mouthbreathers but end up only as fodder for the Colbert Report. Others, like those Hillary Clinton attacking Barack ads, are tactically savvy for a day or two, but serve little more than to fill up cable news dead time.

This sort of Animal House as political campaign is probably the only aspect of McCain's operation that's close in spirit to McCain's appealing 2000 run (there's a wonderful essay by David Foster Wallace in Consider the Lobster that captures the freewheeling, insurgent vibe of the Straight Talk Express; read it and weep at what's become of Mr. Maverick). And this impulsiveness speaks to McCain himself, a man of many virtues but whose disqualifying personal flaw is that he makes decisions on the fly, often as a gut reaction to a provocation.

The choice of Sarah Palin, it seems, is another product of McCain's impulsive, reactive decision-making and the thinking of a campaign that's effective in staying afloat primarily by being good at feeding the news media. McCain surely punk'd Obama for a news cycle or two, and he'll succeed in generating some excitement leading up to next week. But for what?

Thinking about it some more, this pick will almost certainly be a bad one. On August 25, 2008, when Wolf Blitzer went PUMA-hunting and the Democrats took turns mocking McCain's seven houses, this pick would win you a few newscycles. You can see McCain gather up his little advisors that day, wondering how he can poach the Hillaristas and get him some regular guy cred. Hey, how about that Palin? Regular gal. And the wingers like her. How about it?

But have they given thought to this? What's Palin's attack line on the campaign trail? What's McCain gonna say about Obama's readiness, when he can now respond, "you picked a woman a heartbeat away from the presidency, who's never visited Iraq, whose web page on foreign policy was blank space." It gives Obama an easy defense while highlighting Obama's seriousness of purpose in tapping Biden. Then there's the problem of making McCain's age fair game: "On his 72nd birthday, McCain decided that someone two years removed from being a small town mayor will be a heartbeat away from the presidency." What's more, don't they see the huge risk in trotting this neophyte out on the campaign trail in perhaps the most intensely watched and scrutinized campaign ever? And the whole thing looks desperate, especially to Hillaristas fixated on "qualifications." I've seen Hillary dead-enders, and ovaries aside, I just don't see them getting psyched about a beauty pageant winner.

There are the long-term benefits of grooming a GOP future star as McCain's not likely to win. But I'm not sure that's what McCain's really thinking about.