More Mr. Nice Guy

While it does confirm and solidify my respect and support for Obama, this interview in the Washington Post kind of strikes me as an unintentional resignation of sorts. However unfair we may think the attacks on his timidity, negativity is really what he needs to slay the hydra that is Hillary, if that objective is in any way realistic at this juncture. I mean, if he’s not willing to go medieval on her, how’s he going to measure up against Mayor Nosferatu?

Those of us who are familiar with Louisiana politics and are looking for a silver lining may recall the Blanco-Jindal gubernatorial race of ’03. Many observers felt Jindal shot himself in the foot by refusing to go negative (although probably more attributed his defeat to racism, especially in the rural areas.) All it took was one lackluster Blanco term - and, to be exact, one of the most destructive natural disasters in American history - for Louisianans to change their minds about Jindal. He stayed true to himself, and all it got him was the state’s highest office, only after KatRita instead of before.

If Clinton gets knocked off in an uncommonly vicious general election (and we know how much Rudy likes a good fight), Democrats may very well seek someone with unassailable character and real, unrehearsed integrity in ’12. Assuming that Obama doesn’t get caught with a hooker or something.

Then again, provided that she isn’t the victim of political (or actual) murder next year, it’s easy to see the Dems playing it safe and allowing her to challenge a President Giuliani who will almost certainly have pissed off whoever in the world already isn’t by 2011.

They’ve played it safe before. John Kerry wasn’t the favorite going into Iowa, but it’s not hard to imagine what kind of reservations among voters propelled him to victory over pre-scream Dean. And let’s face it - Kerry did come relatively close to bringing down Bush. Hillary is that safe candidate, but with a hell of a lot more firepower. This is not an endorsement by any means, but we are electing a war president here.

That WaPo interview couldn’t have come at a worse time…Andrew Sullivan’s big Atlantic Monthly piece about why we should all get on the Obama train just went online a few days ago and is getting into mailboxes as we speak. Consarnit!

Darkness in the White House

“I just don’t think America’s ready for a black president.”

This country’s had two secretaries of state in the post-9/11 period. The current one is perhaps the closest adviser to the leader of the free world. Her predecessor is arguably more qualified to sit in the Oval Office than any of the current candidates on either side. What do they have in common, besides having held the office of the nation’s top foreign diplomat during the War on Diplomacy…I mean the War on Terror?

Sure, the black president may raise your taxes, but it ain’t like he’s going to do it with a switchblade to your throat. There will be no dice games on the steps of the U.N. with the presidents of Syria and Iran. Here’s my question…is America ready to be run by a power-mad, egomaniacal lawyer from New York with questionable ethics? The way things are going right now, we may not have a choice.

While we’re on the subject of candidates…what is it about sexagenarian politicians who look like basset hounds and/or chipmunks that the honeys just can’t resist?

Giuliani

Nothing like C-SPAN madness on a Saturday night. Anyway, social conservatives would be foolish to shun this guy on account of his personal life, views on abortion, etc. I would say that they should just, you know, evolve, but they don't, you know, believe in that stuff. You know?

This is pretty damning

Dear Mitt Romney,

Yeah...so I'm watching footage of you speaking at the Midwest Republican Leadership Conference. And I've come to the following conclusion.

You are about as vapid as I am. Seriously. Ever hear of a thing called substance?

That's it.

Love,

BP

More Obamabloggery

That middle name could be a serious liability if he gets nominated. He may want to go ahead and consider changing it to Jesus.

Then again, even if the GOP doesn’t use that against him, it’s inevitable that some talk show cro-magnon will get the idea to call him “Balack Osama.” Hopefully they’ll think that’s utterly tasteless and not clever enough. This is, however, the far right we’re talking about.

I only caught the very end of the program, but the general consensus is that Hillary took everyone else to school in the groundbreaking, earthshaking, Anderson-Cooper-improv-star-making CNN/YouTube debate. And a lot of people are huffing and puffing over Obama’s stance on talking to dictators. Perhaps they’d be less surprised if they had read my not-unfunny post from the other day about his diplomatic potential.

And while we’re on the subject, where did John Edwards get off making that snide remark about Sen. Clinton’s coat? Does he want to shake his new reputation as a fashion elitist or not?

The Reagan factor

Now that I’ve all but convinced you of the validity of an Obama nomination, let’s discuss a prospective running mate. I think I’ve come up with an idea that would almost certainly capture the left-leaning-independent and ill-informed-and-utterly-confused conservative votes. I propose the selection of a prominent liberal with dynamite crossover appeal — Ron Reagan.

Imagine the campaign ads in, say, an Obama-Giuliani race. “What ticket would you rather vote for? One that includes a man who was merely influenced by the father of modern American conservatism or a man who was fathered by the father of modern American conservatism?”