I know, I know, dear readers. You’re asking: “Don’t you mean David Yepsen?”
No. David Yepsen is showing signs of maintaining his status as the Resister’s Terry Branstad (nicknamed Governor Braindead by many Iowans), Iowa’s former governor who, during the latter two terms of his four-term stint, actually got paid while governing in a catatonic state. Sound familiar, David? Although Branstad was at the top of a list awaiting a personality donor, the P.D.A. (Personality Donor Association) could not find a suitable match during his reign as Governor. (Note: Yepsen is also on Iowa’s P.D.A. list, two spots behind Senator Grassley.)
In 1999, former Iowa Governor Terry Branstad is captured in a catatonic state at a P.D.A. endorsement event for Lamar Alexander.
Using one of Yepsen’s recent columns, “Early signs of Democrats’ Terry Branstad,” let’s highlight some areas that indicate he’s aspiring to Terry Branstad status:
Sign 1: Culver's address lacked new initiatives or ideas. It also needed a dash of spine-tingling rhetoric or some Churchillian warnings about what will happen if we don't make changes.
David, how could you forget? “Spine-tingling rhetoric” has been trademarked by Iowa’s Political Master of Horror, Rep. Steve King, and any dehumanizing comparisons by a politician are subject to litigation. (e.g. If a politician were to compare a political columnist to a sheep, this would violate the fair use act for both parties involved.) Churchillian? It’s okay to use contemporary leaders who, if we don't make changes, espouse warnings of impending doom (e.g. If we don’t win the War in Iraq, the terrorists will bring their brand of evil to America and steal jobs from hard-working Americans.)
Sign 2: Instead, Culver is fond of telling, and re-telling, audiences that he wants Iowa to "achieve the greatness we all know is possible." (Some of us are waiting for him to achieve the great speech we all know is possible.)
Yepsen uses the omniscient narrator (pretty presumptuous, David; thinking you’re "all-seeing," eh?) in an attempt to be clever, taking a jab at the new Governor’s skills as a rhetorician. (It’s clear David’s delusional and is projecting his own shortcoming of writing the great speech "only he knows is possible".)
Sign 3: To be fair, the Culver era is just starting and he's shown a capacity for growing and getting better at his work. Even Gov. Tom Vilsack, an attorney with a trial lawyer's good gift of gab, gave some rough speeches after he first took office. Practice with the teleprompter will help. (So will adding a speech writer to the staff.)
There you go with the omniscient narrator again, David. Are you hinting that Chet should retain you as his speech writer, so you can infuse some “spine-tingling rhetoric” and pepper his speeches with Churchillian warnings of doom?
Sign 4: But let's not be too negative about Culver's inaugural.
WTF? Did you read the first two-thirds of your column before you wrote this, David? By the way “let’s” is a contraction for “let-us” and it appears that you’re the only one being the Negative Nancy here, eh Eeyore? (Maybe you should add a writing coach to your staff.)
Sign 5: There was only one ominous note to Culver's big day. A winter storm blew into the state, ending a lengthy period of warm, balmy weather. Let's hope that isn't a political omen for him.
Prophesizing, are we? I think the superfluous use of the omniscient narrator has gone to your head, David – a sure sign that you may be joining Terry Branstad in the not-so-distant future…
