I've blogged recently about abandoning Obama for Hillary because we gotta win in '08 and my Nader days are over and if it has to be the profoundly compromised Clintons so be it.
That would at least be sane. As compared to, say--RUDY.
But tonite, lounging on my couch, I catch Obama on Cspan in Manchester NH on Labor Day. He showed signs of dropping the professorial detachment thing he's been doing and letting passion loose, which I have been theorizing he's been holding back for tactical reasons, but was beginning to doubt it.
But he did it. He got emotional. And the way he worked the rope line afterwards--it was beautiful. Every hand he touched was his forever.
So just assuming--hoping, praying--that he's been keeping the big guns of emotion out of action until now for tactical reasons and he's about to switch to inspiration, here's my advice:
Hillary can do tough. She can do smart. She can make us feel, in the absence of the lift of a driving dream, that she is the one who can win. But she can't do inspiration. If Obama can, and is going to, here is what he should say:
"I don't have a well-oiled political machine. I don't have a history at the top of the Washington power pyramid with all the advantages that come with that. So if I am going to win this thing it will be because you and you and you turn out in your towns and neighborhoods and work for something more than just beating the Republicans. It will be because you and you and you are willing to work for a whole new beginning in our political life.... etc...."
But then he has to say:
"If, at the end of the day, Hillary wins than so be it. I will gladly turn on a dime and support her in the general election. Her machine can deploy me as they will. There will not be one ounce of resentment. Her heart is in the right place and I trust it. Our country will be infinitely better off with any Democrat as president... etc..."
He has to say both those things all the time. For one thing, it counters her "I'm above all our squabbles ploy." But most important: it's true.
Get ready for Queen Hillary and Prince Barack, and those of you who think Obama has too much integrity to accept Clinton's offer to be VP on her ticket are only fooling yourselves. He doesn't care about what you think, and how else is he going to get the experience everyone says he lacks?
Supporting a candidate is a huge deal. Look at the endorsements. People endorse candidates whose political path is simiar to theirs or whom they believe in. Obama is still very young and cannot afford to taint his political future by backing a mean-spirited politician like Hillary Clinton.
But fact of the matter is, this time in 2009, we'll be blogging about US President Barack Obama.
Not one is willing to confront the sources of our problems. Well, Kucinich tries but he isn't considered worthy of a hearing by the party machine.
Edwards. If the Republicans had any real mud to fling, they
would have hurled it with all their might during the last election to. Fag, hypocrite in
a big house, Breck girl. The Republicans gas
bags embarrass themselves. Obama is not electable
and that is just us at our worst perhaps. Clinton
doesn't deserve the office and that is us at our
most discerning. If you don't want to commit a nader again, vote for Edwards. Do it for all of
us.
Ask Democrats, which of the Republican candidate they would vote for as President. That's how you determine the electability of a Republican candidate. As much as Democrats Love a candidate, they cannot determine his/her electability. Because it will take defectors to get elected.
When you say a Democratic candidate who's pulling the largest crowd, raising the most money and most donors from people in both parties and came third among Republicans choice for President ahead of McCain, Brownback and Huckabee is not electable, is like starting a new business that you want to very successful, but at the same time ignoring the research data.
Mr. Zengotita I read your stuff regularly but on this one, you are so wrong. If you like HRC and all she stands for, you do not like change and have no clue as to what a fresh start for America looks like. It is that simple.
HRC is old school, too divisve, too hawkish, too set in Washington conventional ways. The Clintons are too tainted. If Senator Obama buys into this HRC and DLC crap about supporting the Clintons, he is finished. I know, pray and hope that he is too smart a man to bow to this nonsense. It is Obama 08 or nothing. It is that simple.
And, make no mistake...foreign policy and national security will remain "their" issue unless the Democrats choose a nominee who has impeccable and unimpeachable credentials on both of these top issues.
Any guesses as to who that may be?
So are you still interested in credentials? I didn't think so.
Judgment, LizM is one thing that only Huckabee and probably Ron Paul have. But the bad or good news is that Republicans will not nominate either of them.
I guess I've been making myself about as clear as mud!!!
When I say that foreign policy and national security are "Republican issues" I mean that according to almost every poll you see on this says that the American people - in all their infinite...ahem...wisdon - believe that foreign policy and national security are "Republican issues". Got it!?
The only candidate running for President, in either party, who has impeccable and umimpeachable foreign policy and national security credentials that are wholly unmatched by any of his rivals is none other than Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
'Make Hope and History Rhyme'...Biden/Hagel 2008 It's written in the stars