Friday, January 15, 2010

"Droopy Dog" And "Eeyore" Equals...

Last night I was watching a video of President Obama. My partner walked through the room and said, "What in the Sam Hill are you doing"? (or words to those effects). I responded, I saw this piece by, Mary Katherine Ham, with this description:
On the ol' Inspiro-meter, I'd say the president has hit that rarely reached sweet spot right between Droopy the Dog and Eyeore. Note, in particular, the deadness in his eyes as he closes out his appeal.

How could I NOT watch the ad?

And now, so can you:

Ms. Ham is right on target.

It is to the ad above that State Senator Scott Brown said to Obama, Scott Brown: Obama Not Invited To This Party. Whoa. There's more:
Surging GOP Senate candidate Scott Brown yesterday warned President Obama to “stay away” from the Bay State during his roiling race against Democratic rival Martha Coakley and not to interfere with their intensifying battle in the campaign’s final days.

“He should stay away and let Martha and I discuss the issues one on one,” Brown said. “The machine is coming out of the woodwork to get her elected. They’re bringing in outsiders, and we don’t need them.”

Coakley’s campaign showed signs of panic as they scrambled to get a last-minute appearance by Obama to bolster their effort before Tuesday’s election.

Some polls are showing the Senate contest far closer than any pundits expected, and Coakley in danger of losing her clear shot at the historic seat.

Coakley said yesterday she hasn’t heard from the White House. “I welcome his support, but we’ve got a lot of support here in Massachusetts (and) I think he’s got a lot on his plate in Washington,” she said.

Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs said yesterday that the president had no plans to visit Massachusetts, even though he realizes “there’s a lot at stake in the election.”

But sources said Coakley is pushing for a Sunday event with Obama as the race remains glued to the national spotlight.

“We would love to see Obama any time,” said Boston City Council President Michael Ross, a Coakley supporter who attended her event at Dorchester’s Kit Clark Senior Center yesterday. “Any time the president of the United States comes it will remind Democrats to get involved.”

Considering Obama's continually tanking poll numbers, not to mention the swing to Brown, I imagine Senator Brown would love to see Obama come there to stump for Coakley, too, right? Oh, yeah:
But Republican consultant Charlie Manning said a visit from a president with tanking ratings would make Coakley look desperate as upstart Brown enjoys a last-minute boost from climbing poll numbers and media momentum.

“It’s sort of like trying to bail out a boat that’s already sinking. I don’t think they can fool the voters of Massachusetts this time,” Manning said.

National interest in the race centers on an impending vote on health-care reform - championed by the late U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

A Brown win would be crushing for Obama, who would lose a 60-seat Democratic majority in the Senate, said Larry J. Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

In addition to a rally headed by former President Bill Clinton planned for tomorrow, Coakley’s team circulated a heartfelt plea from Kennedy’s widow, Vicki, last night asking supporters for help. They’re also rumored to be pushing for a potential event with Caroline Kennedy, daughter of the late President John F. Kennedy.

“It’s a real fight at this point in time,” said U.S. Rep. William Delahunt (D-Quincy). “We’re doing everything we can to help.”

Brown urged Coakley’s campaign to keep the race about local issues instead of national figures.

“It’s me against the machine,” he said. “And it always has been.”

No doubt Brown has that right.

But the other thing he has right is highlighting Coakley's support for a Healthcare Bill opposed by TWO-THIRDS of the country, not to mention the possibility of Cap And Trade (which might as well be called, "Cost and Tax"), also opposed by two-thirds of Americans.

I don't know what the outcome will be on Tuesday. Previously, I had thought Coakley would be good, but then she keeps opening her mouth and demonstrating how clueless she is (no terrorists in Afghanistan? Really?? Oh, that's good news. I wonder why she knows this and no one else in the entire country does?). To support her just because she is a woman isn't good enough. She has to be a good choice, the best choice, too. If Brown can put the brakes on this Senate Run Wild, well, I can support that. Someone needs to do it, that's for damn sure.

What I do know is I will be watching with great anticipation come Tuesday night!


Anonymous said...

I started to watch that video, Rev, but it put me to sleep immediately.I applaud you for having the courage to watch the whole thing! yawwwwwwn

The more I hear Scott Brown, the more I like him. He reminds me a bit of Sarah Palin, direct, no-nonsense, doesn't play any games. (And I can almost feel generations of my ancestors rolling over in their graves at my approval of Republicans! gasp!)

And the more I hear Martha Coakley, the more I don't like her. I read Bronwyn's Harbor's great post at NQ. Dorothy Rabinowitz's article was eye-opening, that's for sure.

I do hope Scott Brown wins, if for no other reason than his vote will stop the health insurance giveaway, aka Obamacare. And, if he does win (which could be iffy with the expected voter fraud that will be taking place) it'll be interesting to see the backlash when the Dems try to delay his swearing in.

I would have loved to have another woman in the Senate, especially one who supported Hillary Clinton all the way. But, as you said, it has to be the right person, otherwise we'll end up with another Nancy Pelosi (who I hope will be unseated by Carly Fiorina).

Wait, I have to go look in the mirror. Is this really ME who's wanting and supporting Republicans??? Now I KNOW the world has gone completely crazy.

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

LOL, SFIndie - I know EXACTLY what you mean. Even Jeralyn Merritt at is opposed to Coakley. Her opposition is on the basis of her legal decisions in MA, which are indicative of how she would do in the Senate, I think.

Honestly, we are seeing already what happens when you vote for someone based solely on ONE thing. It ain't looking so pretty.

And you are absolutely rigt - Coakley COULD be another Pelosi, and that is just unacceptable.

At least Scot Brown is pro-choice, unlike Reid, or Tim Kaine, the new DNC Chair. Or Bob Casey, or Kerrey, or...Ahem. He does seem like a solid, down to earth kind of guy, and if he can keep this horrendous healthcare bill from passing, and is at least even-keeled in his decision making, then fine by me.

Of course, I would LOVE to have more women representing us in Congress. But we need GOOD women to do that, not just ANY woman.

I'll pass along your comment abt BH's post - she will be delighted!!

nazareth priest said...

FYI, Rev. Amy:
Found this on another site (Spirit Daily):
As a human person, a Catholic, and a religious priest, this outrages me.
This goes into the WTH department...just another reason to think otherwise about Ms. Coakley, yeah?

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Thanks for this, Nazareth Priest - I think...I believe I was still in Boston when this was playing out. I certainly remember this case.

Just shocking.

It really makes one wonder why she was willing to cut that kind of deal?

And then there is the Fells Acre case, another one I know well because I did a lot of prison work in those days. I didn't know the brother, but I knew the sister and mother - their being released WAS the right thing to do, though Coakley fought the brother being released.

So, she lets go the guilty, and wants to incarcerate the innocent. There's something wrong with that. We already have enough of an upside-down world with this Admin., we don't need someone adding to it...