Do as I say, not as I do?
With his state's critical primary in two short weeks, Democratic Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh -- a strong supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton -- has been leaning on the Hoosier State's freshman House members to stay on the sidelines rather than endorse Sen. Barack Obama.
Obama is hoping to win the outspoken support of Reps. Brad Ellsworth, Baron Hill and Joe Donnolly. He campaigned for them ahead of their 2006 Democratic sweep, and their districts sprawl across the southern half and central heartland of Indiana -- white, working class areas that favor Clinton. Even a good showing in those districts could be enough for Obama to take the state, given his strength in Indianapolis and the largely African American north near Chicago.
In an interview today, Bayh said he has appealed to Ellsworth, Hill and Donnolly to stay out of the race until their voters have spoken. Clinton will take all three of their districts, he said.
"Why should they get crosswise with some of their friends if they really don't need to?" asked Bayh, perhaps the most powerful elected Democrat in the state.
Come on, Evan.
Comments
Not to worry. Barry has Graham Richard in his corner claiming that Obama will stop the plant closings such as Tokheim ...anyone who remembers the circumstances knows that the entire company went under. I only wish that the Dems would not use an Obama commercial decrying the exporting of American jobs to reinforce Obama's Messianic casting out of the plant closings.
Scary politician ...and I don't mean hizzoner.
Why won't Sen. Obama debate in IN? He and Sen. Clinton have only debated 4 times, not 21. Could it be that he sees where the tide has turned, and it is where voters are demanding answers, not hope, inspiration, and his most oft repeated response to debate questions: Me too! Sen. Clinton! (I've heard, "I agree with Sen. Clinton" so many times, it's doubly appalling to me when he tries to tell me -- and all of you -- just how bad, bad, bad she is.) Unfortunatley, it seems he is now going where he hopes his vagaries will not be tested (that would be questioned publicly) -- anywhere Sen. Clinton and national TV are not in the same room with him. Surely IN wants to know how the candidates will help families caring for children AND aging parents; help with the cost of gas (I paid almost $60 for gas last week!); help with an economy that is not only keeping families down but also dragging them backward? I trust the rest of the country does, too! DEBATE!
Which of these debates are the four that you count?
1 April 26, 2007 - Orangeburg, South Carolina
2 June 3, 2007 - Manchester, New Hampshire
3 June 28, 2007 - Washington, D.C.
4 July 12, 2007 - Detroit, Michigan
5 July 23, 2007 - Charleston, South Carolina
6 August 4, 2007 - Chicago, Illinois
7 August 7, 2007 - Chicago, Illinois
8 August 9, 2007 - Los Angeles, California
9 August 19, 2007 - Des Moines, Iowa
10 September 9, 2007 - Coral Gables, Florida
11 September 12, 2007 - Charlie Rose Yahoo Debate
12 September 20, 2007 - Davenport, Iowa
13 September 26, 2007 - Hanover, New Hampshire
14 October 30, 2007 - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
15 November 15, 2007 - Las Vegas, Nevada
16 December 4, 2007 - Des Moines, Iowa
17 December 13, 2007 Johnston, Iowa
18 January 5, 2008 - Manchester, New Hampshire
19 January 15, 2008 - Las Vegas, Nevada
20 January 21, 2008 - Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
21 January 31, 2008 - Hollywood, California
22 February 2, 2008 - MTV Myspace Debate
23 February 21, 2008 - Austin, Texas
24 February 26, 2008 - Cleveland, Ohio
25 April 13, 2008 - Grantham, Pennsylvania
26 April 16, 2008 - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
And what questions do you figure we'll hear answers to that haven't been aired in the last 26 debates? Something about Hannah Montana posing nude?
Or are you expecting someone to ask Hillary how to trade cattle futures successfully, so as to avoid foreclosure?
Are you expecting Hillary to explain how she's going to answer the phone at 3 AM when she is so confused and tired - to hear Bill explain it - that for months, she repeatedly talks in the morning and the middle of the day about how she AND HER DAUGHTER were exposed to sniper fire? Oops. I guess you would tend to forget your daughter getting shot at.
Are you expecting Hillary to explain how she's going to stand up to the Chinese cheating on a trade deal, even though she didn't stand up to Bill cheating on a marriage?
Are you expecting Hillary to explain how she will get North Korea to back down, by breaking into tears?
Are you expecting Hillary to list her legislative accomplishments over the past 35 years, which mostly amounts to renaming a post office?
If I were Obama, I'd refuse, too. When he complains that the questions don't deal with the hard issues that voters are concerned about, Hillary says "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen." It's not the heat he's complained about, it's the lack of food.
There ARE substantive differences between Obama and Clinton.
One big issue is war. The biggest reason food prices and gas prices are skyrocketing is because Dubya's spending so much money in Iraq, and it's all money borrowed from foreigners. The dollar lost 75% of its value, compared to the Euro, in the first 5 years of the Dubya administration.
Hillary voted for the Authorization for the Use of Military Force but now says she didn't know it was an authorization to use military force. That's surely as presidential as Dubya ignoring the memo that told him Al Queda was planning 9/11. Obama was in a tight state-level race at the time, against 7 opponents, but he publicly came out against the war, even though it might have cost him the election.
Hillary voted to authorize Dubya to invade Iraq. Obama voted against it. Hillary has even started talking about nuking Iran for attacking Israel. Is there a mutual defense pact in place? Would Israel come to our defense? For that matter, did Israel come to our assistance when we attacked Al Queda in Afghanistan? No. They stood shoulder to shoulder with France.
Hillary's idea of change is simply having HER sit in the oval office instead of Dubya. Obama doesn't want to drive that same train down the same old tracks; he argues for changing the way politics is done.
The last half of Hillary's "35 years of experience" was spent NOT getting universal health care passed. She's a fighter, you know, and she thinks you can get people to vote your way by kicking them in the groin. I think that people vote against their best interests just to spite you, if you do that.
Obama's arguing that we need cooperation, instead of fighting. His campaign slogan isn't "Yes, He Can", but "Yes, WE Can." Sometimes, he says, the best ideas don't originate from Democrats.
When he was in the Illinois senate, he went to the GOP leaders and said, "You know, if we videotaped ALL police interrogation, you wouldn't see so many confessions thrown out because the judge suspects they were coerced." And he went to fellow Democrats and said, "You know, if we videotaped ALL police interrogation, they wouldn't be able to coerce confessions." And he got both sides to vote to require ALL police interrogations be videotaped, even though the cops were all up in arms over it.
It worked the same way when Dan Quayle was in the Senate. He was the most-hated Republican. Ted Kennedy was the most-hated Democrat. But together they came up with the Jobs Partnership Training Act, probably the best law passed by that Congress, that gave Democrats the jobs bill they wanted, and gave Republicans the assurance that industry would be getting people trained in the jobs industry had trouble filling.
If you are a fighter, though, you grab an issue, grab the other guy by the scruff of the neck and say "Vote my way, or you're gonna be sorry". And it sounds like you want a fighter, fighting for lost causes, rather than someone who actually can get something done.
It's not the president, after all, who passes the laws. Congress does that. So you won't hear candidates telling you how they're going to help families caring for children AND aging parents, or help with the cost of gas, or help with an economy that's dragging them backward. All you will hear is proposals - and we know that Hillary can't get laws passed, even when it's universal health care.
While it's OK for Bill to go into Nevada, and remind Republicans that they can vote in the Democratic primary and then switch back to their old party and vote in the GOP primary too, or go on NPR and talk about how his racist comments weren't racist and then deny it a couple of hours later, if anyone says even the slightest thing about Hillary, she breaks into tears. "That hurt my feelings."
Why would ANYONE voluntarily go into a "Heads she wins, tails he loses" slug fest, when his whole point is that we should be working together to find solutions, even if it's something the other guy comes up with, instead of fighting?
Actually, I'm hoping to hear Sen. Obama give a specific plan on how he will change Washington. And I'm hoping to hear Sen. Clinton give a specific plan on how she will close the gap between income and expenses in the U.S. -- and not re-hash all you have re-hased again.
Also, I understand the strategy of not getting into a debate you can't win, but I also understand how it reeks of: NO WE CAN'T! It's simply not a strategy I would be supporting if I were supporting Obama. But, hey, to each his or her own.
Further, it is short-term in the scheme of things and it does not give me great pleasure to say this, but as MA resident, I know how important it is to understand if there are any nuts and bolts behind inspiration.
I supported Gov. Patrick, whose ability to inspire prompted me to give inspiration over substance a chance for the first time in my life. I WAS WRONG! One year later, inspiration is not translating into legislation.
Edited excerpts from Joan Vennochi column, Boston Globe, March 30, 2008: ...Gov. Patrick is ready to write a new chapter in his political life. From "Together we can," it's "Me, me, me." The Gov. traveled to N.Y. to shop a proposal for an autobiography the same day state legislators took up casino gambling, A CENTERPIECE OF HIS ECONOMIC AGENDA. A trip on that day for that purpose proves one thing: politically speaking, the great communicator is deaf...The House isn't as opposed to gambling as the final tally indicates... there's a much bigger war at stake. It's not over slots. It's over change - the kind Patrick promised voters as a candidate for office...It's about Patrick's ability to advance an agenda...[Note: On a state level I could afford to be wrong. On a national level, I cannot.]
I'm sticking with the policy wonk (Sen. Clinton)!
Actually, I