Thursday, January 31, 2008

Ah, Come On!

I am a huge fan of Jon Stewart, and watch his show every night. Last night, he had on Peggy Noonan, the former Reagan staffer. Naturally, the departure of John Edwards from the race came up. And, like everyone else on tv, they started talking about how great it would be if he endorsed Obama, and if the presidency came down to McCain and Obama, two people of vision, integrity, blah, blah, blah.

OK - first of all, McCain is no visionary, and is certainly NOT the maverick he has been painted (or proclaimed himself) to be, not in the past 7 years anyway. We know he supports the war, he supports Bush, and his take on immigration is different from other Republicans. And this makes him a great choice for president WHY?? Dont get me wrong - what McCain has endured in his life is truly courageous and remarkable. But, he, too, is just a flawed man, who cheated on his wife and married his mistress. Oh - don't hear much about THAT, do you?? Nope.

And Obama. Obama who is ratcheting up his negative attacks on Clinton, sending out flyers in CT and other states filled with false information on Clinton's record (like that she supported NAFTA - Heeellllooooo - she wasn't even in the Senate when NAFTA passed!!!), etc., etc. And this is the media proclaimed savior?? Obama has told Edwards he wants his endorsement, even though the two are not particularly close. The NY Times said Edwards admires him, but I also saw yesterday (in Newsweek, I think it was) that the Obama campaign had spurned Edwards' attempts to contact Obama for THREE WEEKS recently. Now, all of a sudden, Obama has called him twice this week. Wow. Yeah, he's no politician. Cough, cough.

In full disclosure, Clinton, too, has been talking to Edwards, but apparently HAS been doing so fairly often. According to the same article referenced above (and I use the term loosely since it is not formally cited), Edwards has become impressed with Clinton, and the way she has run her campaign. That she has talked about many of the same issues all along, instead of throwing in poverty yesterday like Obama did, should put HER at the top of the list. IMHO, that is...

But for Jon Stewart to jump on this bandwagon makes me sad. Just one more person on tv piling on against Clinton. Not that I cannot take any criticism of Clinton, of course I can. I understand why some people don't want her running. But one thing you CAN say about Clinton is that there are NO surprises with her. She has been vetted, and scrutinized, more than any other candidate in this field, or in many campaigns. She has been under the microscope for YEARS now, and she continues to do good work despite it all.

So, Stewart wants a McCain v. Obama. I can see THAT at the first debate. McCain: "Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy. I served in the Navy with Jack Kennedy. Sir, you are NO Jack Kennedy!" And he is not. Not even close. Kennedy was, quite literally, battle-tested when he ran for president. Obama, not so much.

Sheesh - I don't wanna have to quit Stewart, either. But this, added to his truncating the video of Bill Clinton the other day over the "fairy tale" comment to make it LOOK like he was talking about Obama's whole candidacy (and Stewart had played the actual one before, which is what made this more eggregious), just seems to be more like the "pundits" at MSNBC and CNN - "All Hail Obama!" And more of the seemingly incessant twisting of the facts to build up the media darling. Yuck. No, thanks.

(More on the whole Edwards thing - at Clinton's site,, people were commenting on her statement about John and Elizabeth Edwards. The outpouring of support for the Edwards', and the appreciation for Clinton's repsectful statement, were really touching. MANY people mentioned that she should have Edwards in her Administration, something I have said for some time. I have long said I think he would make an outstanding Sec. of Labor. Anyway, it was a tad different from the comments at the Obama camp, where the very first entry was an attack on Clinton. Oh, yeah - that Obama is a real uniter, all right. Seems like he has more in common with our CURRENT "uniter." Ahem.)

No comments: