From the department of hopelessly trite wordplay: Obaminations

It could have made a great sitcom in the Oscar Madison and Felix Unger vein. Jokes about doing dishes molded into politicized versions about the fiscal policy needed to pick up after eight years of possibly the messiest houseguest in the history of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.



But, alas, it wasn’t meant to be.

New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, a conservative Republican — who voted with his party 77.4 percent of the time (according the Washington Post’s voting profile of Gregg) — finally came to a conclusion anyone devoting three seconds of intelligent thought about his appointment as Secretary of Commerce had long ago: This probably is a bad marriage.

Maybe even worse than Pam Anderson and [insert egomaniacal cock rocker here] or Liz Taylor and absolutely anyone.

Gregg certainly would have represented a nearly essential foodstuff in the Cabinet of rivals Obama has been shopping for since his election last November. But in a slot so entrenched in some of the most divisive differences between Democrats and Republicans, it never seemed like a good fit.

As a fair trade disciple and so-called fiscal conservative — a label I’d argue really doesn’t apply to 99.9 percent of those who have served in the government in any capacity in the last eight years — Gregg would have clashed with almost everything Obama would want to do. He certainly wasn’t in love with the nearly $800 billion centerpiece of the president’s economic recovery plan. Although he abstained from voting on the first Senate version of the bill, I imagine he was itching to jump into the ideological fray — and not on Obama’s side.

I don’t doubt that Gregg is intelligent and well qualified for the position at Commerce, which is pretty damn important. He sat on the Budget Committee and, judging from some of the things the man says — aside from the less-than-intellectually-striking football metaphor he used to explain his reasons for withdrawing his nomination — he seems to have a good head on his shoulders. The problem is this: There are a lot of smart, well-qualified people in Washington that are so stymied by their own ideological convictions, and so entrenched in party politics, that they act as nothing more than an anchor point used to tow the party line.

Obama’s attempt at bipartisanship has run into this trap at nearly every turn, and the Gregg back-out is just another bullet for those armed with the antiquated “Obama is all fluffy hope and no practical change” weapon — I guess the antiquated part is just wishful thinking on my part. They’ll say, “Bipartisanship is a dream, and a stupid one.” I think that’s probably wrong.

But, for me, the worst consequence of this rehashing of mostly failed campaign rhetoric is that it doesn’t fit at all into the mosaic my mind is starting to piece together about the Obama Presidency. He strikes me as a pragmatist — something I can appreciate in a politician, especially a new-era Depression one. When Obama says things like, “When the town is burning down, you don’t waste time discussing political affiliations; everyone grabs a hose” (an admittedly rough paraphrase of a pretty damn good statement regarding the current Washington situation), it shows he’s just a man willing to do what it takes to find a solution that works.

However — like many — I’m not sure this Gregg decision reflects that particularly pragmatic side of Obama, either. I would say it’s more a product of the president’s want to be the new Abraham Lincoln, emancipating Americans from financial slavery — only, this Emancipation Proclamation would actually need to free people from foreclosure and job loss, not just make it sound like that’s the case. (Or maybe, in this quagmire, the simple gesture may be enough?) And that’s fine. Lincoln is Obama’s hero. No one is stopping me from pecking the keys on this computer, like my heroes did — most likely on typewriters, actually.

The fact is the Gregg situation would likely have been framed exactly in the manner I suggested earlier — a man finally coming to the realization that the situation simply isn’t going to work out. That is, had there not been any other missteps in the nomination process. Now, it all seems like a symptom of a bigger problem for the president [1], and I have no illusions about this not being the way the Gregg story will be framed by a healthy portion of DC pundits. The only “win” for the Obama Administration is that Gregg’s withdraw had absolutely nothing to do with tax problems.

I guess there may be one other positive way to look at Obama’s nomination woes: In a time when we’re losing jobs by the hundreds of thousands, it’s comforting to know someone is still hiring.

[1]: I think this problem may be nothing more than another projection of Obama’s pragmatic leanings. It sounds a little crazy, right? Well, think about this: Obama overlooked (maybe not intentionally, but maybe subconsciously) some things about nominees that even some crazy Washingtonians saw as very highly qualified for the positions they were slated to hold. He thought, regardless of other circumstances, these people were the practical choices for their positions. Is this an expression of a pragmatic focus on progress and productivity? I tend to think so.

Other jokes and notes that didn’t fit into the semi-adult tone of the previous piece:

- I’m about as shocked about Sen. Gregg backing out of his nomination as I would be if you told me Joaquin Phoenix was now trying to legally marry a dead squirrel he scrapped off of a mountain road.

- I found myself at a lesbian poetry reading the other night. I felt as out of place as Tom Daschle at an H & R Block.

- A fake news headline: President Obama having a harder time filling his Cabinet than most unemployed Americans.

- I’d also like to propose a moratorium on the media’s use of the phrase “mea culpa.” (Not a joke, just a suggestion.)