Tuesday, April 1, 2008

When to disagree with Froma Harrop and love it.

You get the impression that Froma Harrop has become much like Lou Dobbs, it ain't over until it is over and the fat lady finally sings (out of exhaustion?). We have to cater to Democratic voters' choices between an African-American who's only luggage seems to be Rev. Jeremiah Wright and being a junior senator from Illinois. As opposed to a woman who thinks she is better qualified to be president because she was first lady. But who has an excessive amount of baggage in her history. And it is excessive baggage that the GOP would love to make use of (inclusive of a photo showing a meeting between Rev. Wright and President Bill Clinton) should Senator Clinton obtain the nomination in the manner that Ms. Harrop describes.

I would like to remind Ms. Harrop of a few facts. Michigan and Florida chose to rush the primary season by trying to crowd Iowa and New Hampshire who are first to hold primaries and caucuses. Both Michigan and Florida were informed that if they did so, they would lose pledged delegates. As such delegates would not be seated at the Democratic National Convention in August. It was a Republican who reminded the Clinton and Obama supporters (on Larry King) that both Senators had signed agreements with the DNC as to the rules concerning primaries and to abide by them should Michigan and Florida decide to act on their own initiative of suddenly deciding to be among the early primary states. It was Senator Clinton who decided that she didn't care to abide by the agreement she made when she no longer enjoyed the "inevitable" front runner status. Well, in national polls, if not in the Pennsylvania primary, Senator Obama has a commanding lead over Senator Clinton. Given the fact that Senator Clinton is way behind in states won, popular vote and pledged delegates, the fat lady already sang for her some time ago. Senator Clinton is apparently too deaf to have heard that, or has chosen to be so stubborn as to ignore it. As a consequence, (again on Larry King) Senator McCain has all the time in the world to put together a "winning message" between now and November. And the GOP can use the cat fight that is the Clinton and Obama brawl against either of them.

That is why the supporters in the Obama camp want to put an end to the cat fight by telling Senator Clinton that she should "bow out now." Being far wiser heads in this, no they do not care to give the GOP more ammunition to use against them as the general election kicks into high gear. And yes, Senator Obama can survive "offensive" preachers such as Rev. Wright because there are people out there who could show old vid clips of "offensive" anti-abortionists interfering into the privacy of the family in the Terry Schiavo case. Of GW Bush making a red-eye flight to sign special legislation to force the courts to interfere into the privacy of the family vis a vis the Terry Schiavo case. Or they can point to the number of GOP politicians who come up on the stage to pass the Dr. James Dobson litmus test. Or they can point to "whisper campaigns" that one's belief does matter if you just happen to be "black," the father is a Kenyan and at least, nominally Muslim. As though in Obama's case, he should have chosen who his parents happened to be long before he was born, in order to be "properly vetted" for an eventual run for the White House. Or he should have carefully chosen the pastor who does not issue inflammatory statements as opposed to say Senator McCain who truly loved the endorsement of Rev. Haggee known for his inflammatory statements. Or they can point to "we love torture" letters such as written by Tom Hayes from Spokane, Washington and published in the Roundtable of the Spokesman-Review. Our enemies aren't going to abide by Geneva Convention agreements so why should we? Uh, because we are civilized? Because of our need to elevate our moral standing in the world? Because we may gain more allies against truly vicious enemies such as Al Qaeda if we can prove that we are at least better than they are and can be trusted to do the right thing in the face of the threat that they pose? Letters that say we should behave the same as our enemies can only remind the voters of what they do not want after 8 years of GW. This blog will certainly point it out. And further, continuing the cat fight between Obama and Clinton will not inform the voters that the eventual nominee is all that concerned about the issues that bother them most esp. if she is more concerned about getting the status of presidential nominee in the first place. For Obama's part, at least he does speak to voters concerns and tries to offer solutions. Not what it will take to "get him elected."

Froma Harrop should also take note that Lanny Davis being on Larry King last night, discussed how Senator Clinton won all those "big states." Big deal. She hasn't won the majority of states as did Senator Obama. And if she had, no doubt Senator Obama would have bowed out gracefully as did John Edwards. It is remarkable that Senator Clinton, the news media and her die hard supporters refuse to see the writing on the wall. We voters plan on electing one president. Either he will be a Democrat, or an independent or a Republican. No, I don't think that we are ready for a shrill voiced harridan who thinks she is entitled because she was first lady.


Dogwalkmusings said...

I get the feeling you like Hillary less than I do. Didn't think it possible.

The New Arch Druid's take on the news said...

LOL! I'll definitely have my points of disagreement with Senator Clinton when even though she has effectively lost to Senator Obama yet she insists on tearing the Dems apart just so she can have it "her way." I'll begin disliking her when her surrogates try spinning all of her "gains" well look at all the "wins" she made where it ends up she and they sound a lot like GW. There is a difference between adding a little padding to one's legislative record as I am certain that any politician is capable of. And going off into wonderland with the idea that all you have to do is win the "big states" and go to the White House come November. Wrong. Senator Clinton couldn't compete with Senator Obama in "most states." And a campaign strategy on a presidential level does require that you be as competitive in all states as you expect your opponent to be.