A President Like Caroline Kennedy's Father*
25 Comments Published by Augur on Saturday, January 26 at 8:59 PM.
An op-ed by Caroline Kennedy titled "A President Like My Father" will run in tomorrow's New York Times.
This is important for the following reasons:
First, it reinfuses comparisons between Obama and JFK into the national debate. Perhaps we will even see legendary speech writer Ted Sorenson commenting on his perception of the commonality between the two inspiring leaders. In fact, Obama is the only Presidential candidate Sorenson has ever compared to his old boss. Sorenson has been described as JFK's twin soul.
Second, Bill Clinton has an almost creepy fettish for all things JFK. He wanted to run when he was younger, because Kennedy did. He fostered lore that his handshake with Kennedy was the passing of a magical torch from one leader to the next. His enormously petty behavior in South Carolina will lead some pundits to mention, hopefully repeatedly, that Bill Clinton has tarnished his legacy by engaging in the kind of classless, unpresidential rhetoric that cheapens the American civic faith, and fractures the party. It will become clear that Bill Clinton is purposefully harming the party in a gamble to help Hillary. His already-short-fuse could be further shaved down, leading to even more gaffes/hateful bursts in the coming week.
Third, think of how much it would have done to undermine the comparisons between JFK and Obama had Kennedy's daughter endorsed the Hillary Clinton Industrial Complex.
Fourth, it reminds America that Teddy Kennedy hasn't yet endorsed, and puts greater pressure on him to make his endorsement, which is rumored to favor Obama. The Clinton's worked him hard to at least stay quiet, but perhaps the increased scrutiny and a few glasses of Scotch will serve as a lubricant of sorts for getting Senator Kennedy to make his private preferences public.
Update: Thanks to my friend Nick for directing me to Andrew Sullivan's commentary on Caroline Kennedy's endorsement.
Update 2: Time reports, Teddy is Ready!!
*Disclaimer: Please note that the author is too blinded by his loyalty and devotion to Senator Obama to even be in the neighborhood of the ballpark of being objective or reasonable.
This is important for the following reasons:
First, it reinfuses comparisons between Obama and JFK into the national debate. Perhaps we will even see legendary speech writer Ted Sorenson commenting on his perception of the commonality between the two inspiring leaders. In fact, Obama is the only Presidential candidate Sorenson has ever compared to his old boss. Sorenson has been described as JFK's twin soul.
Second, Bill Clinton has an almost creepy fettish for all things JFK. He wanted to run when he was younger, because Kennedy did. He fostered lore that his handshake with Kennedy was the passing of a magical torch from one leader to the next. His enormously petty behavior in South Carolina will lead some pundits to mention, hopefully repeatedly, that Bill Clinton has tarnished his legacy by engaging in the kind of classless, unpresidential rhetoric that cheapens the American civic faith, and fractures the party. It will become clear that Bill Clinton is purposefully harming the party in a gamble to help Hillary. His already-short-fuse could be further shaved down, leading to even more gaffes/hateful bursts in the coming week.
Third, think of how much it would have done to undermine the comparisons between JFK and Obama had Kennedy's daughter endorsed the Hillary Clinton Industrial Complex.
Fourth, it reminds America that Teddy Kennedy hasn't yet endorsed, and puts greater pressure on him to make his endorsement, which is rumored to favor Obama. The Clinton's worked him hard to at least stay quiet, but perhaps the increased scrutiny and a few glasses of Scotch will serve as a lubricant of sorts for getting Senator Kennedy to make his private preferences public.
Update: Thanks to my friend Nick for directing me to Andrew Sullivan's commentary on Caroline Kennedy's endorsement.
Update 2: Time reports, Teddy is Ready!!
*Disclaimer: Please note that the author is too blinded by his loyalty and devotion to Senator Obama to even be in the neighborhood of the ballpark of being objective or reasonable.
He beat HRC 2:1 baby!!!! I believe again!
I just saw this on the Outside Report, which is written in part by a South Carolina resident:
"Because there are so many people spinning in their graves right now. The Democratic Party.a white man's party..THE white man's party of South Carolina..just chose a black man as its Presidential nominee and standard bearer by large margins. I can honestly say, I'm proud of my home state (for a change). Obama won almost every county in my state. He won Edgefield, the home of Strom Thurmond. He won Charleston, the home of John Calhoun."
Pretty fucking cool.
I agree with Augur. Caroline Kennedy's endorsement is one of the few that actually matters.
The timing is perfect, which obviously was the plan. When February 5th voters begin to think about the election for the first time, they will see the resounding endorsement (and thus an equally powerful rebuke of Clinton) by Kennedy on Sunday morning. Much was made of the Republicans' playing nice at the debate on Thursday, and that's because the majority of Floridians were getting their first look at the candidates. In the same way, the results from SC, the endorsement of Kennedy, and other endorsements that will inevitably follow this week will give Obama momentum that he has not had before, right when Feb 5th voters are taking their first look.
But can Obama close the gap in just over a week? And can he fight off the Clinton machine? The gloves will really come off over the next week. The Clintons will make Karl Rove look weak. They will destroy the Democratic party if they have to.
Despite the momentum, I still believe Clinton has the slight (very slight) edge over Obama. It's still to early to tell whether Obama can win blue-collar white men/women and Latinos.
IMO, the biggest blunder of the Clinton campaign happened today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqd2dfjl2pw&eurl=http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/
Bill should hope that this gets lost in the coverage. These comments prove that the Clintons had a race strategy after Iowa. This is not going to sell to Democrats.
By the way, if Clinton pulls this out. McCain will destroy her. And I dont many true Obama supporters who would be angry about it.
This IS pretty cool. Caroline Kennedy's endorsement coupled with this big SC win is tremendous. I expect though this won't be the last. Many people were probably waiting until after SC to endorse. I expect both Ted Kennedy and/or Gore to finally swing their weight around now that Feb. 5th is here. Obama has proven he can go the distance!
I also think Romney would judo chop Hillary.
On the blunder, Scarborough said it was like Clinton was asked about the superbowl and responded with "Barack Obama is black"
UIUC leader, I'm seeing more and more republicans get very excited about Obama. I wonder if that will hold up during a general when his liberal positions are more of a matter of public discourse
Chris - I heard some rumors about gore a while back. i hope he's willing to act as the kind of surrogate who can hit bill back just as hard as bill is hitting our barackstar
Caroline Kennedy's endorsement is one of the few that actually matters.
Caroline Kennedy's endorsement coupled with this big SC win is tremendous.
Ok, trouncing Hill in SC is big but cmon... who the fuck is Caroline Kennedy? If she wasn't JFK's daughter she'd be just another Kennedy making a living off her family and family connections. And so she is the daughter of JKF. Honestly what does it matter? Would anyone be getting their shorts in a bundle if Michael Reagan endorsed McCain following SC?
kofi,
You may be right, but in my opinion, Caroline's endorsement only fuels the narrative that Barack is the next Kennedy. He will be the person to carry on the legacy of JFK. His death still stings for most (especially Democrats), and thus Caroline's endorsement could channel that emotion into a positive bump for Obama. Much the same way that Republicans try to achieve the Reagan mantle, Democrats have been looking for the next JFK since they endured the depths of Carter. It's about personality, it's about inspiration, it's about hope. Some people vote for these reasons, others dont. Its just a question of which group is larger. I'm not convinced that Obama will nab the nomination (primarily because he has yet to convince traditional working class Dems). But at the end of the day, Barack can be what Bill never was: the next Kennedy.
Anyway, that's just my take. Endorsements usually dont matter, but when it crafts the larger narrative as Caroline's does, it could actually play a role.
JFK pushed for lower taxes. JFK supportd the death penalty. JFK used black ops or the guise of 'advisors' to take on communism in cuba, latin america, and south east asia. JFK propped up the Baathist coup in Iraq.
Barak Obama is no Jack Kennedy. But then none of the Democratic nominees are.
I don't have much to say about Caroline Kennedy's endorsement other than to say it doesn't impress me that much.
Worse, I can't shake the feeling that this was a win for the Clintons.(cuz it's clear they are running as a package deal-ugh). Of course, Obama won, and won big but now coming out of this primary, Obama looks like the "Black Candidate." Even though the win tonight shows that the nasty brand of Clinton politics didn't help Hillary much (because they drove white voters into Jon Edwards camp), it could be effective in a larger battle for the delegates.
I think it's very much an open question about what this win means for Obama. The nastiness has just begun.
Kofi,
Your missing the point. Barack's policy positions dont make him the next JFK...its his message, tone, and demeanor.
Allan,
You make a good point. Going into SC, I was convinced that the Clintons would lock up the nomination when the media framed an Obama victory as a race war.
But the numbers tonight change that dynamic. The Clintons tried to turn it into a race war, and they might succeed in the end. But the exit polls show something quite different. Barack tied Hillary Clinton for the white male vote (Edwards won), and he exceeded expectations for white women. While Obama's huge margin is due to the overwhelming African American vote, he did quite well with whites overall (25%) - in SOUTH CAROLINA - Strom Thurmond land.
Not even the Clinton spinsters could reframe SC. She got beat by 28 points.
But I still agree with your point. Obama's campaign has to do a better job of preventing the Clintons from framing as a racial divide. In my opinion, his campaign has done a dismal job at this so far. But then again, I think his campaign's mistakes and tactical errors are obvious to most everyone. They are lucky Bill overplayed his hand.
Your [sic] missing the point. Barack's policy positions dont make him the next JFK...its his message, tone, and demeanor.
It's not about policy... it's about looks....?
....
.......
for real?
Kofi -
1) a progressive running in 2008 is going to be a lot more fucking progressive than one running in 1960.
2) when you ask people who remembered kennedy, or even students of history and political science what words come to mind when they think of kennedy, it's things like: inspiration, american renewal, optimism, youthful vigor, unity, etc. Obama taps into the same appeal. That's Nick's point.
Democratic primary polls for upcoming races. Averages based on several polls, as can be found at Realclearpolitics.com:
Florida: Clinton +18.8
California: Clinton +12.6
New York: Clinton +22.7
New Jersey: Clinton +18.6
The other Feb. 5 states have yet to have polls in the field due to other primaries and other factors. Now, Illinois is on Feb. 5, and if Obama doesn't win that he might as well go home. But the Clinton machine is winning, and winning big, and Obama still has to prove he can come back from a serious deficit in several states and win. And unlike SC and the single state primaries, he can't just hang out and talk to everyone. He has got to hope that his campaign can be better than the experience Clinton machine and can pull it out for him based on advertisements and other nonpersonal events, essentially things that DO NOT play to his strength. He will get a bump from SC, but not a 20 point bump.
Obama still has a lot to do and a lot to prove and is more than a little behind.
Also I did some checking...called the Vatican and other religious leaders. Turns out that Barack Obama is not the Christ, Buddha, Mahdi, Moses, or any other form of savior. The same was actually also true of JFK. And, Augur, as a student of history and political science, I would use none of those terms for JFK. I would generally use words like "overrated" and "got credit for things that was not his." Things like that.
What I think too many people have been ignoring in this race for the democratic nomination is the Edwards wild card. I think the man is flippin brilliant. He's playing the darkhorse gambit and so far it looks like he's got a shot at making it work. It's no secret that he's no Clinton fan and that he almost certainly prefers Obama. He's staying in for the long haul because he knows that he's sniping voters from Clinton and helping Obama by chipping away at Clinton's base. If Edwards can get about 15% of the delegates total he can effectively prevent Clinton from getting the 50+1 she needs and if he throws his weight behind Obama as I suspect he will he could be a kingmaker and the next VP which would line him up for a presidential run in 2016 or when Obama gets assassinated, whichever comes first (yes I realize that was harsh, but even Obama worries he'll be hit).
I agree 1000% with Hanno. Edwards has been running an absolutely flawless campaign for Vice-President of the United States.
Not necessarily VP. There have been rumors Obama might name Edwards Attorney General. Which I think would be pretty effin' awesome.
When was the last time a nominee was determined in that manner? I mean in that the leader didn't get the 50%+1, and then, say, the 2nd place candidate ended up receiving the backing of the loser(s') delegates and becoming the nominee.
Why would Edwards as "Attorney General" be "awesome"?
I ask not from a political perspective, because I will invariably disagree with that. However, what aspect of his background, his experience, his education, specifically makes you think he would be a good AG?
He has no criminal background, either as a prosecutor or defender. His work is entirely in the civil arena, and then dealing with corporations or medical malpractice. Given the apparently narrow focus of his legal career, how would those skills and background be pertinent to his role of giving legal advice to the president?
You're missing the point J. Prescott. Edwards is young, good looking, and well-spoke (who doesn't love that charming hint of the south in his voice). With his tone and demeanor, he would look like a really awesome AG.
Democratic primary polls for upcoming races. Averages based on several polls, as can be found at Realclearpolitics.com:
Florida: Clinton +18.8
California: Clinton +12.6
New York: Clinton +22.7
New Jersey: Clinton +18.6
Prescott,
Those polls are certainly interesting, but, if I recall correctly, the exit polls in South Carolina suggested that most people didn't make a decision until the final five days before the election and most of those went for Obama. So I'm suspicious if we can read much into those polls other than those who decider early tend to go for Clinton.
Still, it is still Clinton's nomination to lose.
Actually, when I think about JFK, I remember that my father and his buddies hated his guts and that my uncle had Vaughn Monroe records that mocked the entire First Family....
Bobby, now, he had some serious guts and class.
JFK got us into 'Nam, for which I will never forgive him. He also abandoned the Cuban counter-revolutionaries and was caught in a lie by Kruschev in the Francis Gary Powers U-2 incident. For all practical purposes, he incited the Cuban missle crisis by putting IRBMs in Turkey.
He did drastically lower tax rates, thereby giving us the money to do both the Great Society and Vietnam for a little while.
Other than the Moon shot, if JFK had not been assassinated, he would have ended up as a historical footnote when his younger brother got the job.
As far as Obama goes, I feel that while we wouldn't make as much progress toward freedom for his term, he would not be the complete disaster for the country that Hillary would be. Anything that staves off the Lizard Queen, even for four years, is a blessing.
Tom Trumpinski
Alan -
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_primary-234.html#charts
That is a link to Real Clear Politics chart of poll results. Based on that, around January 14th or two weeks before the election, Obama got that sizable margin. What you said may be true, but the polls suggest otherwise.
Just Like Her Daddy and Worse
The Princess Royal of the Kennedy clan, who has herself accomplished nothing in life except being born to wealth and privilege, has draped her father's moth-eaten cloak on Barack Obama, who, in her father's White House, would have been a footman or cook. Say what you will about Obama, he got there himself without the benefit of a rich daddy or corrupt political machine. He may be more unprepared to be president and more disastrous for this country than was JFK, but we hope, at least, that he will be impervious to "love notes" from middle-aged political camp followers who are still trying to be influential without ever being relevant.
"I agree 1000% with Hanno. Edwards has been running an absolutely flawless campaign for Vice-President of the United States."
Based on recent events, I would like to recant my earlier statement.