With friends like this, who needs enemies?
Just how stupid is David Geffen? Or maybe not, maybe he’s a right-wing plant among prominent Obama supporters -- with the remarkable ability to bring down both Clinton and Obama in a single swoop by reinforcing bootstrapped, fortune-backed Republican Party talking points about Hillary ("polarizing," "too ambitious"). He, after all, with his Hollywood background in communications, would know that his words to the most salivating member of a salivating press corps (Maureen Dowd, master of the trivial) are worth far more to McCain and company than a couple thousand bucks is to Obama.
As a Senate colleague, before even considering the claim staked to a new kind of politics, Obama needs to disavow Geffen’s comments completely, and actively deny their truth. He is correct that he does not need to apologize for them, because neither he nor an official member of his campaign said them, nor should he dignify the absurd demand by the Clinton spokesperson that he return Geffen’s contribution by even mentioning it. But he needs to get back on a high plane by saying he completely disagrees with the comments as reported, that Senator Clinton is no more ambitious than any other candidate who believes he or she can make a good President -- "we better be ambitious" -- and is not a polarizing figure because the right-wing message machine says so; and hopes every one of his supporters will refrain from any more character assaults and concentrate on who will make the best candidate and President (among a fantastic field of capable Democratic candidates) based strictly on the best solutions to the issues facing the country. In more or less, or better yet exactly, those words. It's a shame he has not already, and that caution induced no doubt by more incompetent consultants -- I would expect a lot better work from David Axelrod -- has hurt him already. It's early, though, thankfully.
Hillary should say something conciliatory, too. They need to draw their differences out without attacking the other's character. Even the attack on the other's positions during the primary should be carefully worded, too, to make room for the course reversal that one of them will have to make. After all, it is going to be one of the two of them.
As a Senate colleague, before even considering the claim staked to a new kind of politics, Obama needs to disavow Geffen’s comments completely, and actively deny their truth. He is correct that he does not need to apologize for them, because neither he nor an official member of his campaign said them, nor should he dignify the absurd demand by the Clinton spokesperson that he return Geffen’s contribution by even mentioning it. But he needs to get back on a high plane by saying he completely disagrees with the comments as reported, that Senator Clinton is no more ambitious than any other candidate who believes he or she can make a good President -- "we better be ambitious" -- and is not a polarizing figure because the right-wing message machine says so; and hopes every one of his supporters will refrain from any more character assaults and concentrate on who will make the best candidate and President (among a fantastic field of capable Democratic candidates) based strictly on the best solutions to the issues facing the country. In more or less, or better yet exactly, those words. It's a shame he has not already, and that caution induced no doubt by more incompetent consultants -- I would expect a lot better work from David Axelrod -- has hurt him already. It's early, though, thankfully.
Hillary should say something conciliatory, too. They need to draw their differences out without attacking the other's character. Even the attack on the other's positions during the primary should be carefully worded, too, to make room for the course reversal that one of them will have to make. After all, it is going to be one of the two of them.
posted by KISSWeb | 12:36 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home