On the Red Phone

To hear Larry read his post, click the play button below

Here's an idea for an Obama ad: a montage of Clinton's Sybillish personalities that have surfaced during the campaign with a solemn voiceover at the end saying, "Does anyone want this nut answering the phone?"

How is it that she became the one who's perceived as more equipped to answer that 3 a.m. call than the unflappable Obama? He, with the ice in his veins, who doesn't panic when he's losing or get too giddy when he's winning, who's as comfortable in his own skin as she's uncomfortable in hers. There have been times in this campaign when she seemed so unhinged that I worried she'd actually kill herself if she lost. Every day, she reminds me more and more of Adele H., who also had an obsession that drove her insane.

A few weeks ago, I started to feel sorry for her. Oh Christ, let her win already...Who cares...It's not worth it. There's not that much difference between them. She can have it. Anything to avoid watching her descend into madness. So I switched. I started rooting for her. It wasn't that hard. Compromise comes easy to me. I was on board.

And then I saw the ad.

I watched, transfixed, as she took the 3 a.m. call...and I was afraid...very afraid. Suddenly, I realized the last thing this country needs is that woman anywhere near a phone. I don't care if it's 3 a.m. or 10 p.m. or any other time. I don't want her talking to Putin, I don't want her talking to Kim Jong Il, I don't want her talking to my nephew. She needs a long rest. She needs to put on a sarong and some sun block and get away from things for a while, a nice beach somewhere -- somewhere far away, where there are...no phones.

Comments

[snruB]

HuffPost's Pick

Pretty good, Larry. Pretty...pretty....pretty good

[tester]

Yes, Rush Limbaugh's pick too!!

[KevinCostner]

Rush Limbaugh likes Clinton, haven't you been paying attention?

[getrealalready]

Hey, how does snruB's post win HuffPost's pick??!
No offense to snruB...

[madfeline]

Amen.

[California]

Depends on the perceiver. Obama's nervousness may be due to the fact that his nicotine patch isn't working, but he certainly makes me uncomfortable watching him in the "debates." Twitchy and then robotic.

Also, Obama's CV is that of someone on the rise, not someone who stays and learns the job. He started his political career by leveling the playing field, hiring an election expert to challenge all of his opponents, even the popular incumbent, a black woman activist named Alice Palmer. Ran without opposition, but then he says we should trust his lack of experience, he can hire help.

Why was he off campaigning for Senator after one year? Bored with policy? Clinton seems to be comfortable in her own skin, a person whose interest is in serving people, not in being a rock star. She spent her first two years in the Senate learning the ropes, keeping a low profile. She has a deep knowledge of Congress and the Executive branch, and out of law school worked with the Judiciary.

The neat thing about Obama is that change can be whatever you want it to be. Another empty suit like Bu$h who needs on-the-job training, foisted on the American public by the corporate media. The same media that sold her Bu$h over Gore, over Kerry. After the mess gets cleaned up, I'd love to have an Obama with more Senate experience in the Oval Office.

[naturesway]

Very nicely stated.

[SuburbanMalcontent]

By your thinking we should have never elected Kennedy or Lincoln. Or Bill Clinton for that matter! Because we all know that when if the red phone rang that background in running Arkansas, a state that practically wasn't even in the 20th century, was definitely enough to handle the situation. The fact of the matter is that no amount of experience can prepare you for the White House. It's a job that's uniquely one-of-a-kind. Every President this nation has ever seen has had to "learn on the job." That's why such qualities as clear judgement, coolness under pressure, and solid grounding are what's important. Sadly none of these exist in the "woman with a thousand faces."

[Goldie9]

"Senate experience" does not necessarily prepare anyone for the Oval Office. Otherwise, Strom Thurmond would've been a great candidate for you lovers of Washington "experience"... or McCain will do in Strom's absence, I guess.

There is no job equal to the Oval Office. Everyone has to learn that job, and Hillary will not be prepared on her Day-1 either. Maybe if Hillary spent about 8 years as Obama's VP, she could learn a few things about the mind of a true leader, and then she may be ready to lead for a change.

[Phaedrusnyc]

Goldie: Senate experience does not necessarily prepare anyone for the Oval Office. Very true. But politcial experience of any kind is usually considered a prerequisite (which is why Ross Perot and Ralph Nader were summarily dismissed.) California is one of the first people on HuffPo to bring up Obama's disturbing tendency to look for a promotion after three years in any given job. My own job counselors tell me that one of the reasons I have a tough time finding permanent work is because I never stay in one place for too long (I like coming in, improving things, and then finding something more interesting, I admit it). Why does that not apply to Obama, who made a run for Congress fewer than four years after first being elected (unopposed) to the Legislature, then three years after THAT ran for Senate (also basically unopposed, since Alan Keyes had only a few months to run and is, face it, a carpetbagging nutjob who doesn't even have the respect of his own party.) Now, three years later, he's at it again. This sounds very much like the naked ambition Clinton is often accused of (and deservingly so.) Why isn't it being discussed as much?

[rinpochet]

Maybe he can't use it but I hope someone can. It's brilliant!!

[rationalthought1]

Larry, very very creative and, like Curb Your Enthusiasm", very funny. But I think you have a real point. An ad that visually displayed Clinton's multiple personalities - affect and mannerisms that run the gamut from Blanche DuBois to Howard Beal - might really convince the electorate that all we really have to fear is Hillary herself. She's revealed herself by who she has hired to represent her and run her campaign. Wolfson and Penn are sleazy, Karl Rove disciples. I hate the fear and hocum that the Republicans have been using to manipulate the ignorant. I would be a hypocrite if I tolerated it in the Clintons just because they were democrats. I'm sorry that the first serious female contender for president has to be a power mad, control freak. That's a shame since there are many brilliant skilled women who aren't and who could better help bring us together.

[spyboyz]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAfunny

[keemia]

This post is so not cool, and I'm not a Hill supporter.

[jsinclair]

I think its pretty funny. As for the "is it appropriate?" idea....well, think of it like an SNL skit. It's a lot more appropriate (and, imo, more amusing) than the "debate". Or Obama and Jackson / Sharpton cartoon.

Humorists take it out there. It's what they do.

[Shaddup]

Comedy is not pretty.

[TexanJane]

You nailed it, Larry. She's a McCain-loving nut-job. ENTIRELY too unstable to make any of us feel safe.

[clemo]

Nailed it, he did.

You should write here more often Larry. We need your spot-on humor to survive witnessing the dysfunctional drama of the Clintons.

[doc1400]

Larry nailed it because if Clilnton gets elected she will be the same kind of paranoid, vindictive, MONSTER that Richard Nixon was.

[HGalal]

After HRC"s wins in the Super Tuesday (II) contests, I honestly question how Ohio and Texas can support a message of "fear" and "bigotry", versus a message of universal hope.

By this, I mean very specifically HRC"s running of the now infamous "3:00 A.M. ad" and her coy inability to answer a simple question as to Obama"s faith during a news interview.

Respectively, HRC had claimed for months, to no avail, that she had more experience, and thus better qualified, than Obama to become President. That point, apparently resonated so well with voters euphoric for Obama, that her campaign decided it was time to go all out negative and play the "fear card", days before the Ohio / Texas contests.

Further, her roundabout answer to the question of Obama"s faith only lent fuel to ludicrous speculation, especially coming on the heels of a "timely" photo release (by the Drudge Report) of Obama in traditional Somali attire.

Between these two factors and a few other kitchen appliances hurled at Obama, HRC resorted to what the Clinton team knows best: destroy the enemy at all costs in order to gain victory.

My deepest regret is that voters in Ohio and in Texas fell for the negativity.

With those shallow victories, HRC has embarked on a road to the nomination that will stop at nothing in pursuit of the Presidency.

Along the way, Obama will have been destroyed, the Democratic Party will be in utter disarray, young new enthusiastic voters will shun politics, an opportunity to refocus the country"s urgent priorities will have been lost for decades to come, Independents will migrate to the Republicans and McCain will win the Presidency.

Thank you very much Hillary, and I hope you enjoy the sweet thrill of victory.

[Larenzo]

Ummm....isn't there such as BAD experience? I think that is what we face. Obama is too young and new to be corrupted by the lobbyists.

[petra2]

he has top advisors that are lobbyists!

[TAC]

HGalal -- Very, very well written and astute post. Yours too, Larry :-)

[citizenoftheworld]

BTW The media is under reporting or not reporting
the fact that Obama is ahead in Texas