Dear Al: It's Time to Put That Nobel Prize to Work

"If Sen. Clinton wants to take the debate to various places, we'll join that debate. We'll do it on our terms and in our own way but if she wants to make issues like ethics and disclosure and law firms and real estate deals and all that stuff issues, as I've said before I don't know why they'd want to go there, but I guess that's where they'll take the race.''

-- David Axelrod March 4, 2008

"Faced with many legitimate questions about Senator Obama's long-time relationship with indicted political fixer Tony Rezko, the Obama campaign has chosen to lash out at Senator Clinton....Instead of making false attacks, we urge Senator Obama to release all relevant financial and other information related to indicted political fixer Tony Rezko."

-- Howard Wolfson March 5, 2008


Remember all the flap around Barack Obama's evocation of Ronald Reagan just before the Nevada caucuses? Where Obama made his mistake was in not calling to mind the only really smart idea from the Reagan era, the so-called "11th Commandment," which holds "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican."

This must stop. And it must stop before the Pennsylvania campaign becomes fully joined. If the Clinton and Obama teams don't understand that we no longer live in an era where ad hominem attacks evaporate into the mists of time after an election, then I suggest that they take a quick refresher course on the Internet Tubes from Senator Ted Stevens. Those halcyon days when you could eviscerate an opponent on Monday and lock arms with him (or her) on Wednesday are long gone. EVERYTHING sticks. And, in the words of that great political analyst Michael Stipe, "everybody hurts." Except John McCain.

Here's what needs to happen: immediately after the Mississippi primary on Tuesday, both candidates must be called to Washington for a sit-down at the DNC. The convener of this gathering is Chairman Howard Dean, but the actual host is former Vice President (and new Nobel Peace Prize winner) Al Gore. Also attending are Jimmy Carter, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, superdelegates all. Obama and Clinton need to go alone, without staff. This makes it more likely (but certainly won't guarantee) that what happens in that room, stays in that room.

The end result of that session should be a definitive public statement, voiced by Al Gore at a press conference, flanked by both candidates. It would go something like this:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm pleased to say that we've had a very productive discussion here today about this Democratic presidential campaign and that both Senators Clinton and Obama have agreed that our prime objective is to defeat John McCain and see one of them take the oath of office on January 20th, 2009 as the 44th president of the United States. Speaking on behalf of Chairman Dean, President Carter, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid, as well as the vast majority of uncommitted superdelegates, we are very proud of these candidates. Either one would make an excellent Commander-in-Chief.

However, we expressed our concern to both of them that moving forward their campaigns must remain positive and focused on defeating John McCain, rather than undermining each other for purely short-term gain.

With that in mind, we uncommitted superdelegates -- and this includes the proxies of more than 200 others -- have made it clear today that while we applaud the continuation of this campaign into Pennsylvania and beyond, we will move as a bloc toward the first candidate who is the recipient of negative television, radio or direct mail attacks, as well as negative rhetoric from candidate surrogates or the candidates themselves.

Of course, every presidential candidate deserves the chance to make his or her case. But that case must now become a distinctly positive one about each candidate's own strengths, as opposed to his/her opponents' perceived vulnerabilities. Let me be clear: I fully recognize that politics, as the old maxim goes, "is not beanbag." And I say this as someone who has fought hard to win campaigns in the past. I've said harsh things and, certainly, harsh things have been said about me. But this is a vastly different situation than we have ever found ourselves before. It is late in the campaign. One of these two candidates is now certain to be the nominee of our party. And we, as Democrats, can not allow our personal differences to cripple that nominee in the fall campaign against Senator McCain. That is why we are here today and that is what we have all pledged to ensure, as we go forward together toward victory in November. "

Unlikely? Perhaps. But so is the situation that we're in. I can't help thinking of that line from James Goldman's timeless play, The Lion in Winter, delivered memorably on film by Peter O'Toole as the war-weary Henry II:

"We are the world in small. A nation is a human thing. It does what we do, for our reasons. Surely if we're civilized, we can put away the knives. We can make peace. We have it in our hands."

Comments

[patrice37]

David, you're sounding like a kindergarten teacher. Leaving aside for a moment the fact that only one side in this race is lobbing the slurs and lies that you find so shocking, what makes you think that the party should applaud the continuation of this disaster into Pennsylvania? This is not a matter of playing the game like good boys and girls. It's a matter of settling on a candidate before the party exhausts all of its money and salvaging some good will among all the people who took the trouble to vote. How about the superdelegates promise to move to the candidate who has the insurmountable lead in elected delegates? How about they stop indulging Bill and Hill's fantasies?

[texanna]

Well, I enjoyed the daydream except for the part about "...make an excellent Commander-in-Chief." Personally, I'm electing a President and NOT a CIC. One of the things I want the next President to do is change the face of our foreign policy from being the Dept of War to the Dept of State. That would be one of the major things that differentiates us from Republicans, and that what the rest of this campaign should be about -- what differentiates us from Republicans. Also, I'd leave Harry and Nancy out of the conversation, I really don't think they've got much to say. Or, if they do, they've been holding it in really well so far. So, I guess it's down to Dean, Gore and the two candidates -- I'm good with that. Let's set this meeting, immediately!

[Chris Weigant - Huffpost Blogger]

Please, please edit this post. Save us from Italics Hell in the comments! After "Lion In Winter" please stick in a (/em) or (/i) tag. Click your ruby red shoes together, and voila! Please...

[Sanjong Thapa]

isn't the founder of The Weather Channel going to sue Al Gore for fraud because he has told people that CO2 emissions have something to do with temperature?

[bogus11]

Al has lost all crediblity since his Nobel Prize win. The recent spreading of the comparison of GB's green home and Al's hydrocarbon hog sickened me.

[Argoth]

Whether or not Al Gore is the leader of this talk, something of this fashion has to be done.

[CTtransplant]

Oh, boy, do I agree! Clinton is getting SO out of hand it isn't funny!

[westview]

Oh Please, give me break. Al Gore settle the fight before all the states have a vote??? I love Gore but he needs to do what he is wisely doing now. Stay out of it. He did not fight for his own seat in the White House, he gave it away. He is not in a position now to stand up and tell either candidate to give up. If some dems don't like the fight now, why did they back Obama jumping in when we had a good candidate who we now see is a stong candidate? Obama could have waited in the Senate as he originally planned when he said in taped interviews he was not experienced enough yet to be president. Clearly Kennedy just could not stand the idea of another economically successful Clinton presidency or a woman in the presidency so he pushed Obama into the water early.
Now we have a real party spilt brought to us again by our top party splitter, Ted Kennedy. If Obama was a more seasoned politician he would have stayed out for a future run. Al Gore can't fix this and niether can Carter, or Dean or anyone else. Now it has to be a fight to the finish. It may or may not result in a win for the party in a year we should have won but that is the fault of the party, not the voters, for setting it up that way. Now that they set the wheels in motion, the cart they loaded onto the track has to make it to the finish line.

[Kasandra]

I'm with you on asking Al to help although I think he's already helping. Just because we aren't hearing the results of that help only tells me that they are doing a good job of keeping the lid on behind the scenes. Where I stop agreeing with you is the public announcement. It's dramatic but not purposeful.

[grendl]

You know, it would've been nice if Al Gore, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis had fought as hard for the nomination as Hillary has. Not that I'm advocating her GOP style tactics...but in a way that really is a change from the way Democrats have run their campaigns the last twenty years.

They were like sitting ducks in a shooting gallery, waiting for someone to spot their weaknesses, real or fabricated. And dammit if the GOP didn't spot them, or make them up. Hillary loses a few states, okay eleven primaries in a row to be more accurate, and she doesn't sit back and watch the ship sink. She blows a hole in the bow of the ship she's racing.

It's really incredible to watch her. Jason Vorhees, the hockey masked, chainsaw wielding lunatic in the "Friday the Thirteenth movies, Michael Myers and Freddy Krueger combined weren't as tenacious.

It's been my complaint about the Democrats over the last thirty years. They act like they don't have the stomach for war, in the political arena. They act civil, and shocked ( like that shot of Tom Daschle following the theft of Florida in the 2000 election in Fahrenheit 911) when the GOP pulls one of their nasty stunts.

I wanted Democrats to learn the power of fear as a motivator, but it seemed to be beneath them. A vulgar tactic used only by the right, catering to the basest instincts of the American electorate. As much as I agree with that assessment on some level, I can't deny it's effectiveness in swaying a populace. Fear works. Beating the Republicans, the Democrats have to understand that.

Why are they the only ones who can use fear.

Oh, because the Democratic Party is the party of decency. We want to win this based on hope, and issues, and the future...

So did Michael Dukakis and John Kerry, and Walter Mondale.

Barack has shown he can get down in the political mud, and fight Hillary. He's put up a great fight, but you can tell how uncomfortable he is doing so. He knows who the real bad guys are, and constantly tries to reiterate commonalities between his and Hillary's campaign platforms. She's the one who turns on him, stinging him like the scorpion riding the frogs back whos carrying it across the pond.

Why would you do that, the frog asks. It's my nature, the scorpion replies. As they both die.

He has to realize, once and for all Hillary is not is friend anymore. They won't be friends after this election. If he wants what he says he wants it's time to sit back waiting for the next attack and call her out on the shit she's pulled. There's no rising above it, this is where political wars are won and lost. Someone slings mud, or swiftboats you, how are you going to fare against the GOP, who use clusterbombs?

We need to see the fight in Barack. Castigating Hillary for her ambition is a waste of time at this point, Pandora's box has been opened, and the unleashed hellions from inside are kicking ass and taking names. He needs to point out that Al Qaeda doesn't attack the suburbs at 3:00 a.m , so why the fuck are you showing a Brinks home security commercial, with little white girls asleep in their beds.

Al Qaeda doesn't get up until 7:00. And nowhere in the ad is there one image of a terrorist organization, or nuclear threat. All domestic images, and a door opening into the room ( without the light on )

They're playing on fear of a black man in this country, it's time to show them just why they should fear a white woman, gone mad with ambition, like Lady Macbeth, with the blood of Iraqi casualties on her hands.

Or don't and watch the election slip away, by continuing to rely on a prevent defense, and a precarious delegate lead.

Makes me no never mind.

[KDH]

Democrats don't abide by GOP rules. Especially Reagan's rules. Never have, never will.

[Thorn]

So you're advocating that either Clinton or Obama should be the Democratic nominee? That's pretty revolutionary stuff, pal.

[army193]

David what plant do you live on? Hillary crossed the line on commander-in-chief and they will be ready on day one. It's only Hillary and McCain...If she thinks we will be so desperate to elect her in 2012 since she plans to have McCain win...this lady is delusional...

[Thorn]

(David lives on a plant? That sounds fun.)

[AuntSally]

One thing that bothers me about this post is the portrayal of appalling behavior as equally distributed between the candidates. I've seen Sen. Clinton take deep, broad shots at Obama -- wth very little by way of the reciprocation from him.

So I agree with your sentiment, with one important correction: It's Sen. Clinton that needs the come-to-Jesus meeting; Sen. Obama is already there.

[DavidK08]

you saved me a post.

[Frank Dwyer - Huffpost Blogger]

Can you really imagine Al Gore thinks or would ever say that he's "proud" of Hillary Clinton or that she would make an "excellent" Commander-in-Chief? The last I heard Gore was against the war. He surely doesn't think Clinton or her venerated buddy John McCain have somehow accumulated some vague life experiences that nudge them over her Commander-in-Chief "threshold." Neither one has the judgment or, apparently, the character to be President. McCain, remember, voted against the bill outlawing torture, sang bomb-bomb Iran, and says we might have to be in Iraq--at an estimated cost of 12 billion dollars a month--for 100 years. All you need to know about Clinton is that believes the Republican nominee with that record and those exploded Neocon ideas is more qualified to lead the country than Obama. If Gore allowed himself to tout such a foolish, superficial plan, he'd have to win another Nobel to gain back any credibility at all. What Gore needs to do is endorse Obama, so that Clinton's truly monstrous denigration of her Party's likely nominee can be brought to an abrupt and humiliating halt. And he needed to do that a week ago.

[Mariel]

On Meet the Press today, the panel agreed that hal of the Dem voters want Hillary, for their own reasons (they are women, less educated, over 50, sometimes Hispanic, rural, blue collar, often out of work) and the other half of the Dems (more affluent, better educated, city people, black) want Barack. It seems a very strong divide like this is not going to be resolved by anyone sitting them down to discuss it. I am at a loss how this can be resolved, as it seems like we have class warfare within the Democratic party.