When doing pretour press for the long-awaited Bamboozlepalooza tour, Scott McClellan hyped the event saying, “The President is going to be going all across this country, reaching out to the American people and engaging them in this national discussion.”

So, on day 16, who was the first person President Bush reached out to?

THE PRESIDENT: And so now I’m going to talk with some other people about it, starting with my mother.

Let’s be honest though. His mother wasn’t there because she is afraid of losing her Social Security benefits. The real reason was…

MRS. BUSH: I’m here because when else can I see my two oldest boys?
THE PRESIDENT: How about a little better answer than that, will you?
MRS. BUSH: That’s reason number one.

Concern about energy-efficiency is not a fringe issue. Consider:

Sixty-seven percent of NASCAR fans think buying a fuel-efficient vehicle is patriotic.

Eighty-five percent of NASCAR fans think it’s important for the government to raise the fuel-efficiency average in U.S. vehicles to 40 MPG.

The White House wants to make sure people are fully aware of how wonderful and magnanimous we are. To ensure suffering countries know exactly whom to thank, the administration has tried to aggressively brand relief efforts so the U.S. gets maximum credit for its generosity.

To this end, the administration strongly advises overseas workers to sport little lapel pins and baseball caps which proudly declare “USAID” and “From the American People.”

But as Al Kamen of the Washington Post discovered, that American pride isn’t exactly home-grown. Each of these bits of pro-America propaganda carry a tag that says:

“Made in China”

Any political strategist worth his weight in polls should know when to let dying stories just die. Yet nearly a month after Frank Luntz got served by the Think Progress Team, the influential conservative strategist came back swinging. Painting himself as just a “pollster and wordsmith” who happens to “have a particular interest in language,” Luntz defends himself against the bullies in the blogosphere who questioned his quest “to use words to brighten a debate that has been darkened.” Frank, we really didn’t want to have to do this but….

Luntz asks, “What words do people understand? What’s the clear, common-sense way to say what you mean? And how can politicians best educate and express their ideas?” When it comes to the deficit, Luntz gives his simple answer — exploit a tragedy — in his playbook: “September 11 changed everything. So start with 9/11….Without the context of 9/11, you will be blamed for the deficit….The trick then is to contextualize the deficit inside of 9/11.”

My cost/benefit analysis of becoming totally hysterical over the Terry Schiavo case:

– Costs: Makes it nearly impossible to have a meaningful discussion about the moral question of euthanasia, a nuanced, complex issue and one of the important unresolved contemporary ethical debates.

– Benefits (for some): Gives conservative politicians an excuse for grandstanding, creates another divisive wedge issue, and deflects attention from flailing privatization plans, ethics scandals, Medicaid cu… — Terry Schiavo!! Terry Schiavo!!

Case in point: over at The Corner (the National Review’s blog), Kate O’Beirne lashes out at the “phonies and frauds who represent modern feminism” (and also happen to disagree with her about Schiavo). O’Beirne’s inaccurate description of the case: “At the behest of her husband who has ‘moved on’ with his life, a young woman will be killed. Not allowed to die – but killed just as you or I would be if we were denied food and water.”

No. The actual debate is this: Schiavo’s doctors say she is in a “‘persistent vegetative state,’ meaning damage to her cerebral cortex has made her incapable of emotion, memory or thought.” Schiavo’s husband says she told him on several occassions that she didn’t want to live in such a state. Schiavo’s parents want her to live because they “believe she responds to them” and because they disagree with the practice of euthanasia. Partisan hysteria shouldn’t block us from addressing the vexing moral questions tangled up in this case.