-
The Obamas have specifically answered the family care questions actually. The daughters are cared for on a full time basis by their grandmother -- Michelle's mother -- and continue with their routine in Chicago. Michelle says she flies back home frequently to be there for them. I am under the impression that her schedule is less busy than his. Clearly, they do not get to see their father that often, and seem to relish the time that they can all be together.
I think it would do Sarah Palin good to talk about her child care arrangements, just as the Obamas did. I do not necessarily think the press should push it, as there are more vital concerns in regards to her record and her positions on a variety of issues. But she must know there are many people wondering about how she plans to care for a family and take on one of the most grueling jobs on the planet: campaigning for Vice President. I do not think it is sexist to wonder about these things, especially if she is breastfeeding (sorry, men can't do that).
I wish we didn't have the "Mommy Wars" but we are stuck with it. I have a feeling it is rooted in the doubts every Mom feels for the choices they have made. It seems that there is always a tradeoff, and no choice is without its downsides. Therefore, we lash out at each other to mask our own self doubt in whether or not we have made the right choice. Obviously, a presidential campaign will not be a good platform to re-fight the Mommy Wars. So perhaps in a couple of years, we can then have a reasoned discussion on the heart wrenching choices Moms and Dads must make when they become parents.
Posted at September 7, 2008 4:09 PM in response to Sarah Palin and the Mommy Wars
-
Okay, I am really tiring of the "where was this man in 2004?" routine. There is no way in hell he could have given that speech in 2004. 9/11 had only happened 3 years before, and the country was still traumatized by it. The President hovered at a 50% approval rating throughout 2004. The American people still backed the Iraq War. The economy was still chugging along reasonably well. Most importantly, Katrina and its aftermath had not happened yet. Let's not even begin to get into all the GOP corruption scandals that surfaced mostly after 2004.
Look, I thought Kerry made mistakes in 2004, but people need to put themselves back into the time and place of that election year. I think the better question was why another Democrat in 2004 didn't give an attack dog speech of the caliber of Kerry's speech last night. Maybe what was missing for Kerry in '04 was a surrogate like Kerry today to do some of the tough contrast work for him.
Posted at August 28, 2008 12:05 PM in response to Back By Popular Demand: John Kerry!
-
Clark is the one who put the Obama campaign in damage control for a week. Kerry has delivered the message they wanted delivered. I mean, nice wishful thinking, but it's simply not true that Clark is a better surrogate since his carelessness gave an opening to McCain and the GOP.
Posted at August 7, 2008 3:40 PM in response to Kerry: With Friends Like This...
-
First of all, Matt Stoller has not proved to be a sound thinker or political tactician. He backed a candidate in Georgia against Barrow, as a "real progressive", until it was discovered that she had a 100% rating with the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, and had been given a chairmanship in the GOP-controlled Georgia State Senate (an indication of her playing ball with them). That is part of his fool hearted attempt to target "Bush Dogs" whom are in difficult districts to win. He hasn't a clue about the local situation, and swoops in like a carpetbagger with too little information coupled with too much arrogance.
With that background out of the way, John Kerry has been a surrogate for Obama since January 2008. He was effective back then, as he is effective now. He has been playing attack dog against McCain, especially good since it was a negative ad week from McCain. Obama has had a good week this week, and the polls have proved remarkably stable.
As to Clark, Kerry simply said he disagreed with his remark, and then turned the conversation to McCain's bad judgment, policy positions, and dishonorable campaign. The only ones making a stink out of it are disgruntled lefty bloggers; it did not make the news anywhere.
As for the Iraq poll, well events on the ground in Iraq are largely responsible: the violence went down. I do not think Iraq will be the overarching issue of the election, and Obama is still well positioned enough, so that he can shift to the economy and energy policy, where he has scored some points this week.
Posted at August 7, 2008 3:35 PM in response to Kerry: With Friends Like This...
-
He is referring to the terrorist bombings in Amman back in 2005 by Al Qaeda in Iraq.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Amman_bombings
It was a strategic blunder on AQI's part:
Jordanians reacted to the bombings with outrage. Hundreds of people in Amman participated in protests against the bombings, chanting "burn in hell, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi"
Posted at August 1, 2008 11:57 AM in response to A New Strategy Against Extremism and Terrorism
-
I am not sure why it is necessary to diss Obama OR Kerry in this thread. Kerry is the one who led on an Iraq withdrawal plan in 2006, the Kerry/Feingold amendment. Only 13 voted for it. Similarly, he led an effort filibuster Alito. He has led on energy, and has one of the top environmental records in the Senate.
I mean, you can't complain about the GOP when you keep coughing up their talking points about former Democratic nominees, now can you?
Posted at June 27, 2008 2:36 PM in response to Conservative Activist Grover Norquist: Obama Is "Kerry With A Tan"
-
Well, Obama has many excellent attributes as did Kerry. I believe he evened up the race overnight by decimating Bush in the debates.
Of course, Norquist wasn't referring to any of this, but the "elitist" meme with a racist twist.
Posted at June 27, 2008 2:33 PM in response to Conservative Activist Grover Norquist: Obama Is "Kerry With A Tan"
-
Greg,
If T Boone Pickens is really not going to do anything, then why did John Kerry's crewmates just attack him today?
T. BOONE Pickens, some angry Vietnam veterans would like a little of your time.
These are guys who served directly with John Kerry in Vietnam, and they have a T. bone to pick with you.
...
But your challenge was your challenge - and now five former members of Kerry's second swift boat crew have sent you a letter taking you up on it. A letter that makes this offer: "We . . . will bring with us a Navy/Pentagon certified copy of Senator Kerry's full military record and his writings and the movie footage you have requested. We will sit with you while you go through them page for page, frame by frame and answer any questions you may have."
Kerry crew members also note, tellingly, that SBVT never interviewed any of them before launching its political attack.
"We know the truth because we were there on the boat," they write. "We believe you will find this truth unavoidable . . ."
Swiftboating is not an issue in Kerry's re-election campaign in Mass. The GOP Senate candidate already said he wouldn't touch it. So what gives here? I am intrigued. And, frankly, I am not sure I believe Pickens or anyone in this article that they aren't going to fund another smear campaign against a Democrat.
Posted at June 20, 2008 12:13 PM in response to Will There Even Be Any Scary Right-Wing Groups Swift-Boating Obama?
-
As Jim Webb has pointed out, VIPs going to Iraq are treated to a "dog and pony show". It is true that senators and other elected officials do need to go to Iraq from time to time to thank the troops from their state for their service. But a VIP Tour of Iraq is not a way to learn what is happening there. A careful reading of statistics, hearing from the troops themselves (stateside or in letters), and an analysis of the political situation there is FAR MORE helpful to learn what is going on. Of course, if John McCain did that, he wouldn't be able to act like his position on the war is a realistic one.
Posted at May 27, 2008 9:45 AM in response to McCain Challenges Obama To Visit Iraq
-
John Kerry actually has a record to back up this essay -- are you saying he can no longer say anything about voters' rights because he lost an election?
The only way to win these battles is BEFORE the polls open; unfortunately, the DNC did a poor job to get that job done in '04. I am in Georgia, where there is a voter id law and a history of voter suppression, and what John Kerry says on this matters to me. I guess it's easier to trash someone than to reflect on the issue at hand, which is so important.
Posted at January 16, 2008 7:56 AM in response to Let the People Vote
