Politico

If you want to make high-brow small talk at one of President Barack Obama’s cocktail parties, don’t bother brushing up your Shakespeare. Try reading Urdu poetry.

As POLITICO’s Ben Smith points out in his blog, Obama showed off his intellectual flair by evoking a standard of Pakistani culture in a recent interview with Dawn, a popular English-language newspaper in Pakistan.

“‘I would love to visit. As you know, I had Pakistani roommates in college who were very close friends of mine. I went to visit them when I was still in college; was in Karachi and went to Hyderabad. Their mothers taught me to cook,’ said Mr Obama.

‘What can you cook?’

‘Oh, keema … daal … You name it, I can cook it. And so I have a great affinity for Pakistani culture and the great Urdu poets.’

‘You read Urdu poetry?’

‘Absolutely. So my hope is that I’m going to have an opportunity at some point to visit Pakistan,’ said Mr Obama.”

It may sound somewhat esoteric, but this ancient form of mystical and oft-times philosophical love poetry has been popular in Pakistan and parts of India for centuries. And there are a few things to know before you try to impress the poetry-lover-in-chief.

One of the most popular poets was Mirza Ghalib, whose work dates from the mid-19th century. The still-popular art form usually features the story of a lover scorned by his beloved. And there is almost never a happy ending. “Often the beloved is often a total witch,” says Gwen Kirk, a University of Texas master’s candidate in the subject of Urdu poetry. “She breaks the lover’s heart all the time; she neglects him. It’s all about the process of trying to get closer to the beloved, and it’s got a lot of Sufi and mystical elements as well.”

The ghazal is the most common form of Urdu poetry, and, like sonnets, it follows strict rules of form: four to 12 couplets with a meter and rhyme scheme. But the similarities end there. Couplets in an Urdu poem can sometimes be completely unrelated to each other, each delving into themes that range from unrequited love to the meaning of life.

Fear not if your Urdu — one of two official languages in Pakistan — is a little rusty. Obama likely reads one of the many translated compilations of the texts, according to Kirk. Or if he is a truly savvy Urdu poetry enthusiast, he may choose to listen to the poems recited or sung, as it is commonly performed in the region.

Obama’s admission that he shares an affinity with the “great Urdu poets” may get him further in the region than most think. The language and poetry are commonly associated with Pakistan’s and India’s Muslim population, according to Kirk, and it remains intensely popular in the region — poetry recitals sometimes attract gatherings of thousands of people.

“It does show a willingness to understand that part of the world,” says Kirk.

And in general, it gives Obama further credibility as a supporter of the arts. Not only is he one of three American presidents to have poetry read at their Inaugurations, but he reads the stuff, too!

Want to dig into Urdu poetry? Here’s an example of what awaits you:

To hell with all hindering walls and doors!
Love’s eye sees as feather and wing, walls and doors.
My flooded eyes blur the house
Doors and walls becoming walls and doors.
There is no shelter: my love is on her way,
They’ve gone ahead in greeting, walls and doors.
The wine of your splendor floods
Your street, intoxicating walls and doors.
(Translated by Shamsur Rahman Faruqi and Frances W. Pritchett)

[Read more →]

President Barack Obama’s announcement Wednesday offering limited benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees failed to quell growing anger in the gay community that gay rights issues were getting short shrift at the White House.

In fact, Obama’s promise to offer ancillary employee benefits — such as long-term-care insurance and the right to use sick leave to care for domestic partners — while still denying more valuable benefits, such as health insurance and retirement funds, may have further agitated gay and lesbian activists who were already fuming over other perceived snubs.

Obama said he also favors extending health and retirement benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees but that such a move is currently prohibited by the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which passed in 1996.

“Are they kidding us? Domestic partnership benefits WITHOUT health insurance because of DOMA?” gay fundraiser and activist David Mixner told POLITICO in an e-mail. “It is like rubbing salt in the wound.”

“From what you describe, it seems to me to fall very far short,” said C. Dixon Osburn, a gay activist in Washington. “A patchwork approach that doesn’t amount to a full array of benefits one would want or expect … does not seem like a very good olive branch.”

Obama said Wednesday that he wanted to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, calling it “discriminatory,” and that he supports legislation to give same-sex partners of Federal employees equal benefits as heterosexual couples enjoy.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

“Hundreds of Fortune 500 companies already offer such benefits, not only because it’s the right thing to do, but because they recognize it helps them compete for and retain top talent,” he said.

Gay leaders have been in a slow burn through much of the spring, distressed about the Obama administration’s failure to press for immediate repeal of the military’s don’t ask, don’t tell policy prohibiting openly gay men and women from serving. Some also chafed at the White House’s refusal to suspend forced discharges of gay military personnel.

The concern escalated to a public furor after the Justice Department filed legal briefs in recent days defending the military policy and DOMA. Justice officials explained that they were required to defend the laws, but many gay leaders said the briefs used unnecessarily inflammatory language, particularly by citing legal precedents from cases that related to incest and underage spouses.

“I think there is more palpable anger in the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] community at the perceived inaction by the Obama administration than I have felt directed at any prior administration. I think that’s in part because the expectations were high and the response so far has been low,” said Osburn.

In a conference call with reporters Wednesday, Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry insisted that Obama’s action on benefits demonstrated aggressive leadership.

“This is a first step, not a final step,” Berry said. “It’s an example of practicing before preaching. I believe the president is taking bold action to do just that.”

Berry, who is Obama’s highest-ranking openly gay appointee, said Obama has been “very clear” that he would like to do away with don’t ask, don’t tell. However, Obama did not mention the issue Wednesday.

Berry insisted that Obama’s Wednesday announcement had nothing to do with the withering criticism the administration has faced from gays and lesbians in recent days. Some leaders in the community are urging their members to boycott a June 25 Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Washington.

Berry acknowledged that some benefits announced Wednesday by Obama, such as sick leave to care for a same-sex partner, have been permitted on a case-by-case basis in the past.

“What the president is doing today is making this no longer optional. He’s making it mandatory,” Berry said.

But Osburn said the measures were not enough.“The administration, by its failure to move on our issues — they are quickly losing credibility with our community,” he said.

[Read more →]

Chicago made its case for hosting the 2016 Summer Olympics during a presentation to members of the International Olympic Committee meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland.

The White House has staked a lot on the bid by President Barack Obama’s hometown, and on Wednesday morning, bid leaders played a video taped by Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, who is leading the administration’s Olympic effort.

“The Obama administration is fully committed to the Olympic and Paralympic Games and has the highest regard for the Olympic movement and its ability to effect change around the world,” Jarrett says in the video, according to a transcript. “The support we have committed to provide Chicago is unprecedented for a U.S. bid city.”

On Tuesday, Obama announced the formation of a new White House Office of Olympic, Paralympic and Youth Sport, which was intended partly to offset a key Chicago disadvantage in its high-stakes, big-money competition against the other finalists vying for the 2016 games: Rio de Janeiro, Madrid and Tokyo. Unlike the national governments of most other cities that compete to host the Olympics, the U.S. has long lacked a federal sports agency and is barred from directly financing the Olympic Games.

Yet in the video, Jarrett says, “The White House will utilize this new office to ensure the seamless integration of the federal government and its resources to support Chicago’s planning and operations.”

The administration did not answer questions Wednesday about the staffing or budget of the new office, which will be housed in the White House Office of Public Engagement, of which Jarrett is a leading official.

[Read more →]

Former professional football player Jay Riemersma announced Thursday via YouTube that he had filed papers to form an exploratory committee that will allow him to fundraise for a possible bid in Michigan’s 2nd Congressional District.

Riemersma, a Republican, is seeking to replace nine-term Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra, who is running for governor in 2010.

Riemersma said he will make a final decision regarding 2010 “later in the summer,” after speaking with voters in the district.

“They want leaders with the strength to stand up to higher taxes, Wall Street bailouts and out-of-control spending,” Riemersma said in the video. “People have encouraged me to consider running because I have the strength of my conservative convictions and will show leadership in these difficult economic times.”

A former tight end for the National Football League’s Buffalo Bills and a star player at the University of Michigan, Riemersma has worked for the conservative Family Research Council and coached high school football in Zeeland, Mich., since his retirement.

In November 2008, he signaled his politics when he penned a letter to the editor in the Holland Sentinel titled, “How could Christians vote for Obama?”

In that letter, Riemersma argued that faith should “permeate every aspect of our lives.”

“Too many Christians shroud their God-given light with misguided intentions and uninformed choices,” Riemersma wrote. “Moving forward to the next election, I implore all Christians to base their vote not on a political party or a polished politician but, rather, on biblical principle.”

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

If he runs, Riemersma would face a crowded Republican primary in the western Michigan-based 2nd. State Rep. Bill Huizenga announced a run in December, and state Sen. Wayne Kuipers is reportedly considering entering the race.

The district is one of the most Republican in Michigan, but in 2008, Sen. John McCain carried it by only 51 percent to 47 percent, down considerably from former President George W. Bush’s 60 percent in 2004.

[Read more →]

The Grand Old Party is suffering from low self-esteem. According to a new poll from Gallup, 38 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents have an unfavorable opinion of their own party, compared with just 7 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who have an unfavorable opinion of their party.

And politicians who may aim to heal the partisan rift have their work cut out for them: 78 percent of Democrats view the GOP unfavorably, while 85 percent of Republicans view the Democratic Party unfavorably, the survey found.

“Although it is generally well-known that the Republican Party has an image problem today (after all, the Democrats have control of the White House and both houses of Congress), these findings reinforce the depth of that problem by pointing out the degree to which Republicans themselves have a lower opinion of their party than Democrats do of their party,” a Gallup analysis said. “The only saving grace, perhaps, is the finding that Democrats are slightly more positive in their opinions of the Republican Party than is the case the other way around.”

The poll found that among all Americans, the Democratic Party has a 19-point advantage over the Republican Party when it comes to their images.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

In a sort of free association, the survey found that for the entire U.S. population, when Americans think about the Republican Party, the top four categories of images that come to mind first are “unfavorable,” “conservative,” “favorable,” and (in a tie) “lost their way” and “caters to the rich.” The top four categories of images of the Democratic Party are “liberal,” “favorable,” “for the people/working, middle, lower class” and “socially conscious/progressive.”

Asked who was the leader of the GOP, 10 percent of Republicans said Rush Limbaugh, 10 percent said Newt Gingrich, 9 percent said Dick Cheney, 6 percent said John McCain and 17 percent said nobody.

[Read more →]

Health care overhaul? No problem.

Climate change bill? Bring it on.

The item on House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s agenda that has the least chance of getting enacted in the 111th is tardiness reform. 

The punctilious Maryland Democrat has been crusading on the issue since the session began — largely to no avail — even making a floor speech on the topic last month.

Last Friday, Hoyer’s floor manager stood sternly before a meeting of House Democratic chiefs of staff to demand they light fires under their bosses, who often lollygag on the way to the first votes of the day.

“She said the leader was tired of having to hold votes open for 10 or 15 minutes longer than was necessary — she was very serious about it,” said a staffer who was in attendance.

The response?

“We laughed,” said the aide.

Bachmann Bemoans ‘Gangster’ White House

Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann has a big problem with the government’s involvement with the bankruptcies of GM and Chrysler, saying the forced closure of nearly 2,000 car dealerships amounts to Tony Soprano strong-arming.

Speaking on the House floor late Tuesday, Bachmann paraphrased a conservative columnist, saying:

“Now we’ve moved into the realm of gangster government. We have gangster government when the federal government has set up a new cartel and private businesses now have to go begging with their hand out to their local — hopefully well-politically connected — congressman or their senator.”

“We need to call this for what this is, my colleagues. We need to call this for what this is. Call it out. The American people need to get outraged and figure out that it could be them next,” she added. “We now have an imperial presidency where the president has appointed various czars reporting directly to him.”

Bachmann’s language may be fringe, but her message is strictly mainstream.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of reps — led by Hoyer and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) — formally introduced a bill that would halt the dealership closing plan, which has the approval of President Obama’s automobile industry restructuring panel.

Reid: GOP Holding Up Leahy Nominee

Is the GOP holding up a nominee for the U.S. Sentencing Commission to get back at Pat Leahy’s handling of the Sonia Sotomayor nomination?

That’s what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) suggested on the Senate floor Wednesday, my colleague Manu Raju reports.

“William Sessions of Vermont — we’re told that this held up because Sen. Leahy is from Vermont, so they are holding it up, and they don’t like how Chairman Leahy is handling the Judiciary Committee is what we have been told,” Reid said.

Leahy infuriated Senate Republicans this week by setting a July 13 hearing date to begin Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation proceedings.

The GOP said it needs more time, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday that Leahy’s decision was “puzzling” and that the nominee’s questionnaire “suffers from several significant omissions.”

It’s unclear who told Reid that the GOP is seeking retribution for Leahy’s handling of Sotomayor, and aides were checking it out.

How to Walk, Chew Gum And Confirm Sotomayor

Senate Dems are having some fun at the Republicans’ expense, passing around a helpful guide for conservatives who say the Sotomayor nomination is moving too fast for them to deliberate and do their day jobs.

It’s called a “A Handy How-To Guide for Republican Judiciary Members: Special Mastication and Ambulation Edition,” and it provides mocking, step-by-step instructions on how to walk and chew gum at the same time.

One excerpt: “Walking is accomplished with a strategy called the double pendulum.”

Conrad Whacks Liberals (And Carrie’s Recorder)

My colleague Carrie Budoff Brown reports:

A spokesman for Health Care for America Now, a major liberal advocacy organization, said Wednesday that it does not support Sen. Kent Conrad’s alternative to the public insurance option. Conrad has been floating a proposal to set up nonprofit cooperatives that could compete with private insurers.

But Conrad said he doesn’t really care what they think.

“I am unaware that HCAN has any votes on the floor on the U.S. Senate — they have no votes on the floor of the U.S. Senate,” he said. “And I am dealing with votes in the Finance Committee and the floor of the U.S. Senate. I am frankly not terribly interested in what these myriad groups all think. I am interested in what people who vote think.”

At this point, the miffed Conrad swung his arms so violently, he knocked Budoff Brown’s voice recorder to the marble floor outside the chamber.

[Read more →]

How much faith should the faithless put in Barack Obama?

The president said in his inaugural address that the United States is “a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and nonbelievers.” And in his commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame, he said that the Golden Rule binds “people of all faiths and no faith together.”

While the atheist community appreciates the shout-outs, George W. Bush offered similar acknowledgements of nonbelievers during his presidency. And like Bush, Obama has repeatedly invoked religion in his speeches. The latest dose came Thursday in Cairo, in his speech to the Muslim world, during which Obama talked of the “Holy Quran” and invoked this Quranic supplication: “Be conscious of God, and speak always the truth.”

But while atheist advocates railed against Bush, they seem willing to give Obama a pass on his God talk — at least for now.

Nathan Bupp, director of communications for the Center for Inquiry, says that many nonbelievers view Obama’s invocations of faith as nothing more than a “symbolic gesture” used to aid his quest for social justice.

“There is a sense where secularists are politically savvy enough to do this,” says Bupp. “They realize [Obama] is not doing what he’s doing for Pat Robertson-type reasons.”

Over the past several years, in large part in response to the Sept. 11 attacks and the Bush presidency, the American atheist movement reached its rabble-rousing zenith, underscored by the publishing success of anti-God manifestos like Sam Harris’ “End of Faith,” Christopher Hitchens’ “God Is Not Great” and Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion.”

In Obama, the community saw a prospect for change.

But now, Ed Buckner, president of the American Atheists, wonders whether advocates and activists may witness a one-step-forward, two-steps-backward phenomenon with Obama.

While grateful for the new president’s cap-tipping, Buckner says, “The fact that our best shot of making things better still goes around saying God stuff all the time in some ways maybe makes it worse.”

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), the highest-ranking U.S. politician to claim unbelief in a higher power, cautions atheists not to put too much faith in a religious politician — even one raised by a secular humanist mother.

“Underneath it all, he is a pretty standard Christian, go-by-the-book kind of person,” Stark says of the president. “Look at all the stuff he is trying to do in the White House. I mean, come on. I think that is probably not constitutional.”

Stark is referring to Obama’s White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, a continuation of a Bush initiative that troubled a number of freedom-from-religion types. Like Bush’s, Obama’s faith-based office has yet to make a practice of disallowing organizations that engage in religious hiring discrimination from being eligible for funds. The administration has simply said it will evaluate each organization on a case-by-case basis.

Though disappointed by this, Toni Van Pelt, director and chief lobbyist for the Center for Inquiry, thinks that now is the time for nonbelievers to tread lightly, “in a thoughtful way, to be successful and not suffer a severe backlash.”

As part of this, Van Pelt says nonbelievers are wise to keep their consternation in check, particularly over such things as rhetorical matters.

“I don’t want you to think that I am undercutting the importance of cultural messages,” she says, “but pragmatically, there are some really serious things that we need to focus our work on.”

And, to be sure, Obama has pleased many secular humanists with specific actions he’s already undertaken, such as overturning a last-minute Bush order that gave protection to health care providers who refuse to attend to medical requests on account of their personal beliefs. In addition, advocates say they have been heartened by Obama’s push for “evidence-based” science policy, as well as his individual selections for administration science posts.

Last week, the Secular Coalition for America, an atheist advocacy group, held its first-ever individual face-to-face with the White House. Ron Millar, the coalition’s acting director, told POLITICO that he met with Paul Montero, Obama’s religious liaison in the White House Office of Public Engagement.

Obama “is opening a little door to include us in, which we are very appreciative of,” says Millar, who says he anticipates a number of additional such meetings with the administration.

Among the concerns Millar says he touched on was proselytizing in the U.S. military: “That is something we really want to follow up with this administration, because we have not seen much there.”

In April, Joshua DuBois, the Pentecostal minister who now heads Obama’s faith-based office, met with representatives from the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination. Van Pelt, who was among the participants, says that she and others relayed their concerns over the discriminatory hiring practices of faith-based institutions receiving federal funds.

“We have stated what our position is,” Van Pelt says. “But, frankly, we’ve been told that they are listening. They have not been imparting much information to us. So it is kind of a wait-and-see attitude [on our part].”

Meanwhile, some nonbelievers are also nervously waiting to see whether Obama will appoint former Human Genome Project Director Frances Collins, a born-again Christian, to run the National Institutes of Health. Bloomberg News recently reported that Collins was the front-runner for the position, a prospect that troubles folks such as Harris.

But for the most part, atheist groups are keeping quiet on this, deciding that their best bet is to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

“The one important thing to recognize,” says Harris, “is [Obama] is just so much better than the last guy in the Oval Office that everyone is feeling so much relief for whatever change he is bringing that they are inclined not to gripe too much about all the delusion stuff he may be paying lip service to or holding over from the previous administration.”

[Read more →]

Last week, POLITICO handicapped some of the potential options for Bravo’s forthcoming reality show, "Real Housewives of DC."

But we also reached out to others in order to get their thoughts on potential candidates:

Ann Coulter: Jill Biden — these "Real Housewife" shows always have at least one woman whose husband acts like she’s 30 years younger than she is. And Michelle Obama, of course, because the shows benefit from having one "sassy" cast member…Also, they’ll need at least one trophy wife married to a big, unattractive pile of money. So the producers better line up John Kerry.

Tammy Haddad, Haddad Media: Housewives in Washington are not known as the “bare all” type. We still enjoy “the shock and awe” when Ali Wentworth riffs on anything! She is the most humorous and successful wife in town and she already has her own hit show as well as a seat on Oprah’s couch. The producers have to meet or do better than Ali, good luck with that.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

Margaret Carlson, Bloomberg: To get any drama, the producers would have to to go outside Washington to, say, Potomac, where they’ll find the McMansions and spas, indulged children and long fingernails, frozen smiles and coutry clubs that make the Real Housewives of New Jersey so intoxicating.

In the real Washington, housewives don’t have the discretionary income to be interesting. They are widowed by husbands working on the Hill or in the White House—or living off it—raising children alone, trying to snatch a few minutes listening to NPR while driving the carpool in a futile effort not be ignored at the rare cocktail party where someone might deign to talk to them. If they had money, they can’t hire help because their husband’s don’t want a nanny problem when someday they’re being vetted for the high government job they’ve abandoned their families to pursue.

Working mothers are too harried to be interesting. Some are borderline felons, leaving a child in the car with valet parking, slipping him a couple twenties, arming him with a Map of the States and a tape of Elmo while meeting with a source in a hotel lobby. (that’s me, btw).

The most famous Washington housewife was Elizabeth Taylor who, after marrying Sen. John Warner, said her life became sitting home alone in a caftan, eating hot fudge sundaes waiting for her husband to get home.

Kathy Kemper, Institute for Education: Rima Al Sabah is the only spouse I can think of that is a player. Most spouses are just that — only spouses, no portfolio inherently. Nice, interesting, but on spouses’ coat tails.

[Read more →]

Like Madonna, Britney and — in certain circles — Lamar, Rep. Zach Wamp has finally reached one-name status.

Twice.

Tennessee voters who sent the Republican to Congress 14 years ago knew him as the man behind the catchy campaign slogan “Wamp Congress.”

“We used it as an action word, as in Congress needed to be whomped by Wamp,” said Wamp, explaining that his campaign played off his unique last name in order to get voters familiar with its tricky pronunciation. “I’ve been called ‘Waamp’ and ‘Whomp’ and ‘Zamp’ and everything else.”

Even the Germans from Volkswagen, whom Wamp helped recruit to build a $1 billion Chattanooga plant, still call him “Vamp.”

But back home campaigning for his 2010 gubernatorial bid over the Memorial Day recess, he introduced himself to Tennesseans as “just Zach,” a liberty he can take, thanks in part to the old slogan’s success.

“Now I get recognition with just the name Zach,” Wamp said. “I feel that if it’s Zach, they feel like they know me better.”

Wamp — for the record, it’s pronounced “Wahmp”— is not the only lawmaker who has spent much of his career correcting constituents.

Nearly 25 percent of Capitol Hill lawmakers have surnames that are hard enough to pronounce that they’re listed in the Congressional Quarterly pronunciation guide used by the clerks on Capitol Hill. Among those on the list: House newcomers Reps. Dan Maffei (MUH-fay) and John Boccieri (bo-CHAIR-ee) as well as Sen. Mike Crapo — no crap, just CRAY-poe.

Having a unique name used to be a political liability.

But election records suggest out of the ordinary increasingly appeals to voters. The names of incoming freshmen have grown more unusual over the years, thanks in part to a combination of the nation’s increasing diversity and, in the age of Barack Obama, a rising generation of voters with a greater appetite for unique names.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

//

Only three of 65 freshmen elected to the 111th Congress have surnames that are included in the U.S. Census Bureau’s 100 most common last names.

And over the past four Congresses, common names in the freshman class have been decreasing, from 25.8 percent in the 108th Congress to just 4.6 percent in the current class.

“Historically, it’s been a tough road to hoe when you have a name that is new, foreign or different,” said national branding expert Philip Davis, the mastermind behind PODS, or portable on-demand storage for moving. “That’s why we have so many presidents with similar last names — people gravitate toward what is familiar. But on the coattails of Barack Obama, that’s changing.”

House reading clerks, who get pronunciation guides weeks in advance of the new Congress, spent a “good deal of time” practicing the names before the 111th Congress even began, according to Don Myhill, spokesman for the Office of the House Clerk.

But Capitol Hill hasn’t entirely adapted to some of the tongue twisters.

Freshman Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-Va.) has given up correcting constituents and sometimes even Capitol Hill colleagues.

“On the campaign trail, it was a mess,” Perriello said. “Now they just call me ‘Congressman.’”

The last straw came during a campaign visit to Crystal Cathedral. Pastor Maurice Carter introduced the candidate to the congregation as “Mr. Tom Perry Ellis” and continued to refer to him as “Mr. Ellis” — as if he were the namesake for the clothing line.

The congressman politely let it pass.

“I was cringing,” said press secretary Jessica Barba. “We’d heard a lot of variations on the trail, but that was a little painful.”

To counteract, the campaign released an advertisement featuring voters butchering the name.

“How you pronounce my name isn’t what’s important; knowing what it stands for is,” Perriello says in the ad.

It’s not just the lawmakers who have to suffer through the mispronunciations. Their press secretaries and aides also deal with the headache — and the humor.

Political comedian Stephen Colbert recently introduced Maffei (D-N.Y.) on his show as Congressman “Muffie.”

After more than 15 years as Crapo’s press secretary, Susan Wheeler says people continue to vandalize the Idaho Republican’s Wikipedia page pronunciation key to make his name sound like “Crap-o.”

On the senator’s campaign signs, a bar with stars is often printed above the “a” in his name for “subtle assistance,” Wheeler said.

The job is fitting for Wheeler, who years ago used to debate Crapo’s nephew in Idaho high school debate tournaments.

“We used to purposely mispronounce his last name in the rebuttal,” she said. “How ironic that many years later, I’m the one correcting people’s pronunciation.”

In Boccieri’s office, spokeswoman Jessica Kershaw has resorted to handing out phonetic pronunciation guides before people introduce the Ohio Democrat on stage. Even lobbyists have butchered the name.

If constituents can’t pronounce the names, how can they remember them in the voting booth?

Political experts contend that once voters learn a catchy name by sound, rather than by sight, they’re not likely to forget it.

Eastern Washington University name, or onomastics, expert Grant Smith says voters often look to make meaningful connections with politicians’ names based on the phonetic sounds they make.

According to his research, candidates with the most pleasant-sounding names have won 84 percent of all presidential elections, based on a 20-part rating system that judges names by rhythm and sounds.

“It’s important to look at the relative comfort level of the names,” he said. “Voters like clear, distinctive rhythms.”

For instance, two-syllable names that alternate stronger and softer sounds, like Crapo and Clinton, score high, while choppier names like Dukakis score lower.

Although there are no solid data to prove it, sometimes the oddity of the name might contribute, at least in part, to a downfall.

John Manlove, a conservative Texas Republican who unsuccessfully sought then-Congressman Nick Lampson’s seat last year, said he’s already brainstorming new name plays in case he runs again.

“‘Manlove’ was prominent on all campaign material, and it would be in the future,” he said.

The owner of a leading communications firm outside Houston, Manlove even brainstormed a campaign jingle, putting the surname to the lyrics of Salt ‘N’ Pepa’s “Whatta Man.”

“It was just a case of time and money,” Manlove said.

Despite the slamming his name received in the blogosphere, Manlove contends it wasn’t his name that brought his bid to a close — it was the nine other Republican candidates vying for Lampson’s seat in the primary. Manlove finished third with almost 15 percent of the vote and said he got an equal amount of negative and positive attention for his name.

Even as Capitol Hill grapples with the names, we’ll very likely see more pronunciation pitfalls in the future.

People are becoming worse at pronouncing surnames, linguistic experts say, thanks to less reading and more shorthand communication, such as text messaging, which continues to grow.

“I tell clients to phonetically sound names out, but I find most clients don’t even know how to use the pronunciation key in the dictionary to sound out words,” said speech expert Deborah Boswell, president of Professional Speech Services in Alabama. “We’ll see even more problems with this as the next generation moves into corporate America.”

[Read more →]

The congressional cussing caucus is in need of new members.

The Capitol lost its prince of profanity when Rahm Emanuel left for the White House five months ago. But it’s not just Emanuel’s departure that has turned Congress less blue. Gone, too, are Joe Biden — whose F-bombs are now largely confined to the Naval Observatory — and Tim Mahoney, the Florida Democrat who lost his reelection bid after admitting to “numerous” extramarital affairs.

“He said f—- all the time,” recalls a former Mahoney senior aide. “He cursed people. He called Barney Frank names; he called everybody names. He called his friends names, his enemies names, and always with f——— and a———.”

Ah, the memories.

Even Dick Cheney, who famously told Pat Leahy to perform an anatomically impossible act, has sworn off the Capitol in favor of G-rated speeches and TV appearances.

So who’s left to sprinkle the salt on the Hill?

POLITICO put the question to members and some current and former staffers. The consensus: While there’s nobody who rises to Rahm-like distinction, there are a few stalwarts who still wave the foulmouthed flag.

Among them — for the moment, at least — is Sen. Jim Bunning, the irascible Kentuckian who has spent months bickering with the Republican leadership over his reelection plans.

Bunning’s departure in 2010, it seems, would be a big loss for those who enjoy a little muttered profanity with their floor debates.

“When he sits in the back of the chamber,” recalls a former senior GOP aide, “there are a number of staffers who are on the floor who can hear him moan and swear at the other side.”

Bunning — whose office did not respond to calls for comment — doesn’t confine his cussing to the Senate floor. Asked in March about an internal poll on his reelection prospects, Bunning told reporters it was “none of your g—damn business.”

House Minority Leader John Boehner relies on a more barnyard sort of blue. Last fall, he called the financial bailout bill a “crap sandwich,” and he said it was “chickens—-” of Barack Obama to have voted “present” in the Illinois Legislature.

People who’ve worked with Boehner say he’s a casual cusser in private.

“He’ll puff his cigarette and say, ‘Holy s—-’ or ‘What the f—-?’” says the former aide.

During his run for the presidency, Sen. John McCain was dogged by his reputation as a hothead — a reputation reinforced with stories about his firing the F-gun at fellow Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Chuck Grassley.

On the other side of the aisle, it’s said that you haven’t really made it in Congress until you’ve been subjected to the serrated tongue of Rep. Dave Obey. The chairman of the House Appropriations Committee made news two years ago when he verbally drubbed Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich in a closed-door caucus meeting. So brutal was it, apparently, that some Democrats in attendance, including Rep. Maxine Waters of California, were moved to issue on-the-record statements of disapproval afterward.

Obey even found a place for a four-letter word (albeit a more mundane one) in the title of his autobiography: “Raising Hell for Justice.”

You can’t have a cussing society without a representative from New York, and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel fills that bill — even when the cameras are rolling.

When Jason Mattera, a conservative activist for the Young America’s Foundation, confronted Rangel in a House office building last year about his ethics issues, Rangel smiled and said, “Mind your g–damn business.”

But another New Yorker — Rep. Anthony Weiner — may be Emanuel’s real swear apparent. The congressman delivered an off-color performance a few years back at Rep. Earl Blumenauer’s annual comedy night that still has people on the Hill talking.

“Rahm was a bleeping giant in the field, and the congressman is honored to be on the same list,” says Weiner’s press secretary, John Collins.

Ohio Rep. Steven LaTourette has also made a go of barking with the big dogs, when he greeted Emanuel at a White House gathering two weeks ago with a series of four-letter salutes — an homage to the king.

Emanuel’s jersey was essentially retired at this year’s White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, where Obama joked that his chief of staff has trouble on Mother’s Day because “he’s not used to saying the word ‘day’ after ‘mother.’”

Language experts say it’s no surprise to hear that a hard-charging pol like Emanuel is known for talking a blue streak.

“If you want to look at the psychological variables related to swearing,” says Timothy Jay, a psychology professor at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, “the people who are religious, who are sexually anxious, who are high in what is called agreeableness or conscientiousness — those are people who don’t swear. Where you get swearing are people who are more like Type-A personality, impulsive, extroverted.”

Jay, an expert on cussing, says about one-half of 1 percent of a person’s daily word output consists of swearwords. That works out to a cuss-per-diem of about 90.

But put some Type-A types in the partisan pressure cooker of the Hill, and that number can climb dramatically. Earlier this year, a late-night meeting between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin turned profane — a fact that leaked out after staff, sent out to the hall, heard the yelling from within the speaker’s office.

But for the most part, Hill insiders and observers say that the bad language has been on the decline of late.

Part of that has to do with the makeup of the House.

“The speaker doesn’t curse,” says Kristie Greco, communications director for House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, “and I think she sets a tone in a lot of the meetings … that likely changes the dynamic and vernacular used.”

Greco adds: “There is less backroom boys’ club culture that might engender more cursing.”

In addition, Rep. Jack Kingston says that members are increasingly cautious of anything they say in this YouTube world.

“After the ‘macaca’ incident with George Allen, everybody is assuming everything you say and do is being tracked,” Kingston said. “Not that it is the cuss words they are looking out for but the whole language and the whole discussion in general. Usually you cuss when you are letting your guard down, and people aren’t letting their guard down as much these days.”

[Read more →]