Obamarama
Hey, I agree with Edwards on something: Obama is “living in never-never land.” That may be the only thing, though, as Edwards is all over the place in this “wide-ranging, free-wheeling” ABC interview:
In a wide-ranging, free-wheeling interview with Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards with ABC News Friday afternoon, the former North Carolina senator labeled “ridiculous” comments made by the Obama campaign that seemed to link former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s assassination to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s vote to authorize the use of force against Iraq, embraced Sen. Barack Obama’s politics over Clinton’s, and said an anti-Obama flier from a pro-Clinton union was “misleading” and “deceptive.”
…
Friday morning at a forum for undecided voters in Independence, Iowa, Edwards repeated his implicit criticism of Obama, saying any candidate who thinks he or she can invite corporate America to the table and achieve real results for Americans “is living in never-never land.”
So he believes Barack Obama lives in never-never land?
“If he believes that, yes,” Edwards said. “It’s a little hard for me to tell sometimes based on the way he talks about this. I’ve heard him say he would give stakeholders a seat at the table. I assume he’s talking about oil companies, drug companies and insurance companies.”
OK, maybe I don’t exactly agree with whatever kind of point Edwards is trying to make, nice turn of phrase though. Edwards is reportedly now in a three-way tie with Hill and Obama. Wonderful news. I’d say they’re all in Never-Never Land (that’s actually a proper noun, ABC, needs to be uppercase), but mainly because their idea of moving America forward involves $$$ giveaways; socialized medicine; hamstringing U.S. business; onerous policy based on questionable science and less likely results; surrender and abandonment; and trying to make terrorists like us more.
Meanwhile, the Oprah revolt continues, as Oprah fans gag on her Obama spoon. LA Times:
Winfrey’s website has been buzzing for weeks with angry postings about her involvement in the Illinois senator’s campaign, something Hollywood, which always keeps its eye on the public mood, is bound to notice — this is a town, after all, that measures success by weekly grosses and daily TV ratings.
One posting on her site, Oprah.com, accused the talk diva of being a traitor. (By Thursday, that message string had attracted more than 12,000 views.) Another poster told Winfrey to “stop pushing Obama down our throats.” (There were 3,000 hits logged on that one.) Another said: “Do you really know Barack Hussein Obama? Scary & something we have to take into consideration!” (There were more than 4,000 views for that.)
“First of all I want to say that I am a HUGE Oprah fan,” one poster wrote. “I love what she stands for. She is a strong woman changing the world. However, I have been extremely disappointed with her recent touring with Barack Obama. It is a manipulation and an abuse of her power and influence on the American culture.
“Let the American people form their own opinion, Oprah.”
Hey, Clooney’s smarter than I thought. Not by much, but:
George Clooney, who also supports Obama and is a longtime friend of the senator, has been reluctant to campaign in person, not because he’s worried about the effect on his film career but because experience has taught him that a celebrity’s presence can hurt a candidate.
In a dinner-party conversation in Rome recently, Clooney said that Obama’s people have been urging him to go out on the trail. “I’ve told them that having me out there would hurt more than help. I know they don’t see it that way.”
Meanwhile, as Obama and Hillary vie over whose globe-trotting tourism constitutes the most meaningful experience, Obama gets in this dig at ABC:
“One of the things that I think I offer in this race is. . . the way (Michelle) put it is, ‘We still remember what it’s like to be normal.’ But I think that’s part of what happens when you’re in Washington for a very long time — you lose touch with that.”
Interesting remark from someone who is campaigning in part on his unusual experience as a multi-racial child of black Kenyan and white American parentage raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. Have to say as a white American of Australian parentage raised in Southeast Asia, deposited on these shores at age 18, with a lot of friends in similar circumstances, “normal” is something you never quite feel. And that’s why I think I am the non-candidate best qualified to be secretary of state. Or war. Whatever.
Topics: pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:21 am on Saturday, December 29, 2007
3 Responses to “Obamarama”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
“Edwards repeated his implicit criticism of Obama, saying any candidate who thinks he or she can invite corporate America to the table and achieve real results for Americans “is living in never-never land.” Hmm - does anyone see the irony here? This is a statement John Edwards makes of fellow Americans. But isn’t that what he says we are now supposed to do with our enemies in Iran and al Qaeda? Aren’t we supposed to win them over by sitting down and talking to them? Oh wait, But we are not supposed to talk with Fox News (can’t talk to them or hold a debate on their channel - too evil). I am so confused with your rhetoric, Johnny Blow Dry!
December 29th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
You’ve got to hand it to Obama - he really does try to break the mold of the machine politician, the ones who don’t care what the polls say or how many attack ads that come out for a candidate, so long as the people that vote on their command come out, fill out the ovals/flip the switch/press the touch-screen and tally their usual favorable result so they can continue being a machine politician and do nothing but for his own works.
Then, when I look even further at Obama and who he has going for him, and who is running the operation alongside him, and what rumors preclude him, and it turns out he’s just as much a machine politician as the next guy - only he shades that tendency with charisma and an appeal for change. Sometimes those appeals are the velvet glove that envelops and iron fist.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:21 pm
PIMF correction:
envelops an iron fist