Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

John Edwards and Barack Obama and Travis Childers, Together At Last

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter

Events move too quickly. I was prepared to write this morning only about the GOP's increasingly sticky wicket and what it portends when John Edwards, with daring belatedness, up and endorsed his party's surefire nominee last night and thereby became the political centerpiece du jour. I wish he had checked with me first; but that's OK, I'll fit him in.

Actually, unlike the hordes of talking heads that crawled before a camera to wax profoundly on the Edwards endorsement, I question how much of real worth there is to say about it, other than renoting the obvious: the Obama campaign outsmarted the Clinton campaign once again, and but good.

I almost felt sorry for Hillary. There she was, all primed and pumped to exploit her little victory in West Virginia on network television, when boom, out popped the news of Edwards' new adventure. It was a tactical stroke of Obama's genius that had all the pundits wondering if the timing was intentional. Well, gee, I don't know. Was the timing of Eisenhower's final assault on Europe intentional?

Other than that, there was speculation aplenty about Edwards' move as an application of further pressure on undeclared superdelegates -- who, let's face it, seem lastingly impervious to that sort of thing -- and of course lots of meditation on whether the endorsement would help Obama in Kentucky and beyond. The fact that no endorsement in the history of the Republic has ever really done the recipient any perceivable good dissuaded the pundits not from this latter speculation, but it was jolly good fun to ponder anyway.

No, Edwards' endorsement, along with NARAL's, was that of an exquisitely timed and well-executed pincer movement on an already dead campaign: "The reason I am here tonight is that Democratic voters in America have made their choice and so have I," said Edwards with retrospective finality.

In short, aside from grabbing the evening's headlines away from Hillary and keeping the proper focus on Obama, Edwards' endorsement was an exhortation to party unity, nothing more.

Which could, of course, help tremendously downticket, which leads us to what I had wanted to write about in the first place: Mississippi's 1st Congressional District election. It was the third, explosive confirmation of late that things, to put it mildly, are looking rather good for Democrats.

I knew they were looking explosively bad for the GOP when I saw former Miss. senator Trent Lott in an interview the other day discussing the upcoming election. He sniffed and snorted with that air of otherworldly unconcern he always demonstrates when he's in full panic mode -- Special election? Well, uh, yeah, I've heard there's one around the corner. As I recall, however, that's solid, traditional Democratic territory. It was only a fluke we ever held it. Nevertheless our prospects are looking good.

His remarks really did suck all the suspense out of it for me. I knew, at that very moment, that Republican Southaven Mayor Greg Davis was absolute toast.

But what a marvelous breakfast he made by Wednesday morning. The GOP had thrown its own special version of Hillary's "kitchen sink" into defeating Travis Childers, especially deploying the nightmarish bogeyman of Jeremiah Wright. Woe to our nation should the antiAmerican Grand Conspiracy of Obama, Wright, Childers & Co. ever come to fruition, charged the GOP, to which Northern Mississippians responded en masse: Up yours. You shall spook us no more. "Boo!" is so 2004.

And, as the New York Times reported, the GOP invested in the race those whose reputations now represent the party's very soul, "sending Vice President Dick Cheney to campaign for Mr. Davis, along with Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas; President Bush and Senator John McCain recorded telephone messages that were sent to voters throughout the district."

All -- each and every one -- were soundly repudiated by voters. The tactics of fright-wigged fearmongers were dispatched by a comfortable margin of electoral sanity. Nothing could bode better for the GOP's autumnal devastation and doom.

Which -- and this is why I was eager to write about the 1st District thing -- opens the reasonable plausibility of Barack Obama, as we approach the fall, proposing some version of FDR's "100 Days."

The similarities between 1932 and 2008, in the electorate's mind, at least, are increasingly striking, and so may be voters' receptivity to a general-election campaign conducted on a platform of immediate and frenetic but thoughtful action once in office, backed by a solid and unbreakable Democratic majority in Congress.

From busting the plutocratic hold on tax policy to imperial retraction to moving healthcare reform to the forefront, such a thematic campaign could add the much-demanded substance to Obama's rather vague promise of revolutionary "change."

It would lend a sense of focused purpose again -- of definite objectives, (perhaps) achievable goals and spirited national unity. Pleasant indeed would be the feeling that we're all part of one country again -- a fair, humane and honorable country, again.

It worked for Roosevelt and launched a 75-year coalition that, Lord knows, could use some rejuvenation.

 

Please respond to P.M.'s commentary by leaving comments below and sharing them with the BuzzFlash community. For personal questions or comments you can contact him at fifthcolumnistmail@gmail.com

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter




Who's the veepee?

Wanna speculate on who'll be Obama's choice for running mate? Clinton? Edwards? Dodd? Webb? A relative unknown? White? Black? Hispanic? The suspense is killing me. The Democrats simply MUST win this one, and do it convincingly enough so the bushie thugs can't falsify the count as they did in 2000 & 2004.

Well, having devolved from

Well, having devolved from skeptical to cynical and fully expecting the Democratic Party to screw this up in spectacular fashion, recent events force me to conclude with all certainty that Hillary Clinton will be chosen as Obama's running mate.

"Why?" you ask.

Just as in 2004, a typically liberal state has ruled to allow gay marriage.

In an election year.

I've no problem at all with the ruling, but, let's see... what can be done to energize the disenchanted Republican base... hmmmm... Gay marriage! And... and... Hillary Clinton!

Perfect storm!

Giving full voice to my paranoia I also must ask, "Rove, you insidious bastard! How did you pull this off?"

(Disclaimer: I fully approve of gay marriage. Yahoo! But couldn't it wait until Christmas?)

Absolutely Agree Obama Needs to Put Some Meat On the Bones

Red, Will - hi! :)

Being inspirational has gotten Obama a long way - but to quote Fred Dalton Thompson (Remember him - who apparently ran for President b/c his LAW & ORDER shooting schedule cut into his afternoon naps?), "You gotta have a plan, son!"

Viable plans for fixing the economy, ending the war, paying down the deficit and restoring Our Precious Civil Liberties while offering genuine National Security (yes, I really do think of Civil Liberties in that way) will show the undecided that Obama is not the tabula rasa Hillary's surrogates have accused him of being. If Obama can manage the nuances w/out leaving Faux Noize sound bites they can take out of context to pillory him with, I think most undecided/independent voters are sick enough of The Georgie & Hil Mideast Horror Show to give him a chance to prove he can deliver on his promises - which the Clintons certainly did not when THEY had the White House.

Clearly it won't convince the "Hillary or NOTHINGGGG!!!" fanatics like Thomas M, Neva Stolz, Alibe50 or Yman - but like the Confederates, they're ALREADY praying for a McCain-Lieberman ticket to show their "across-the-aisle" cred. (So.... all you DLC Rethug Lite "Centrists" would be equally at home w/a Hitler-Stalin ticket then, b/c it also "reaches across the aisle"...?)

We've even got the sourpuss

We've even got the sourpuss Supreme Court needed for an historical repeat!

Putting Substance Into A Vague Promise Of Revolutionary Change

"Which means that on the 5th of November it'll be Obama in a landslide." "Based on?" "His having promised us that as president he'll end the Iraq War, negotiate with Iran plus turning things around here at home. "And upon taking office his making good on that promise." "And then what sort of world?" "It'll be up to us."

Hey, ...A journey of 100 Miles....

Begins with just one step. We'll see.

"When people seek freedom, they are always impatient".

Ralph Bunche, Statesman

Strike while the iron's hot

I think Barack will have to promise something similar to what you suggest before November, and deliver on it next year. It will do two things, 1) secure his election, and 2) the sweeping election of downticket congressional seats in Congress - enhancing a fully Democratic Party government to run the bums out of town. If in the first year he can deliver on beginning the end of our occupation of Iraq, pass a significant health care reform, reduce catastrophic deficit spending by raising taxes on the wealthy while reducing Federal spending...why I'd say that would be a good start. Nailing Bin Laden would be icing on the cake and a real smack down on the Bush legacy (and exposure of thier lies). As a start he should immediately restore Habeas Corpus, close GITMO, and pursue investigations into wrongdoing by the former administration and the GOP. That list would overwhelm Congress, but I'm sure we can think of a few key players Congress should go after.

Harmonic Convergence..........

It appears, at long last, that there is a "method to the madness'!

In the Obama/Edwards situation, the very first impression I had was one of, "what absolute perfect timing"---if you wanted to "take back the gusto" from an opponent---whether engineered, or not! And on prima facia, this appeared to be so; but then, the media being what it is, and doing what it does, wasted no time dismantling all this goodwill with quips that "it has the appearance of the boys ganging up on her", and was this all "pre-planned" to undermine her recent "resounding" victory in W.V.?

When are we going to stop letting the media 'bend' reality for their own sinister purposes? Particularly, that vile Pat Buchanan, who immediately began to try to spin it as---"so what are they (Obama/Edwards) gonna do---if they don't take .....KENTUCKY!!?? (Can we please take time to smell the roses----please??) Since, he reasoned, Kentucky has MANY of the same demographics as W.Virginia. They have also gleefully ignored the simple facts that the futile, (and fruitless) "victory" in W.V. has MANY precedents for Obama in this campaign alone.

Where was all this talk of 'resounding', and 'tremendous thumping', and 'amazing victory' with Obama's recent landslide win in N.Carolina? It was barely discussed in all the hype of Hillary's narrow 1.5 pt. victory in Indiana. It should also be noted that of the 30+ states that Obama has won, he, in no less than 8 of them, has scored similar (or greater), such victories?

Given the more relevant, and portentous Democratic victory in Mississippi and the way the Repug-controlled media gave it only a passing notice, and the way they obviously tried to recalibrate the profundity of Edwards endorsement, it may still be a bit too premature to celebrate the festivities.......just yet.

Red - you expect objectivity...from PAT BUCHANAN?!?!?!?

Dude! Let me write you a prescription... ;)

Lala for Secretary of Fun - !
...oh, wait, she can't serve b/c she's Canadian.... :(

Yo!..Greetings, Doc Prod...

To answer your question....NO!...I expect COMPLETE DISMISSAL OF PAT BUCHANAN !!

This myopic, nasal falsetto, barbaric, tribalistic java man's day has come and gone. For MSNBC to allow this miscreant a public forum EVERYDAY to platform his not-so-subtle, delusional dogma of hate---is unforgivable.

Its one thing to have a bias skew of Obama's campaign, but, the thing that irks me about him is...he is forever lecturing the progressive audience...ON WHATS BEST FOR US in situations that, frankly, his Repug-Heavy ASS has ABSOLUTELY no right to venture an opinion on whatsoever.

He wore his welcome out at FAUX when, (even they), could no longer tolerate his prehistoric Nixonian/Reaganite rantings of Repug philosophy.....unceremoniously tossed his butt out on his ear. Given that he ADDS NOTHING to the discourse on MSNBC, except, his own blurry views of events, its time to do likewise there.

Besides WE could use the additional air time for Rachel Maddow...since she only gets a minute here or there, AFTER they finally wised-up with Tucker Carlson!

BTW-Does the Tiki bar let you sub-lease there?