Barack Obama - a John Kennedy for our times

[babylonsister]

Barack Obama - a John Kennedy for our times
One man has captured the heart of the new America
William Rees-Mogg


It is hard to see who can stop Senator Barack Obama becoming the next President of the United States. He has built up an excitement such as no candidate has created since President Kennedy in 1960. He is, in my view, a better speaker than Kennedy. Like Kennedy, he combines personal magnetism with a strong appeal to American idealism.

Like Kennedy, he is young and speaks for the new generation of American politics. By ordinary political reckoning, 2008 ought to be the Democrats' year. In 2006 they captured both houses of Congress in mid-term elections.

There are, of course, hypothetical events that could change everything. There could be an attack on Mr Obama himself, but he is protected by the Secret Service. There could be an action by al-Qaeda, which would refocus American anxiety on the threat of terror.

But al-Qaeda is itself highly political. It would probably not be in its interest to secure the election of Senator John McCain. Al-Qaeda may be unpredictable, but it would be a mistake for it to interfere in American politics, even if it had the capacity to do so.

At the start of the primaries, when all eyes were on Iowa and New Hampshire, Senator Clinton was the frontrunner for the Democratic Party nomination. She had the organisation, she had the money, she had the name recognition, she had the professionalism; she even had Bill Clinton, even if he is something of an unguided missile.

But those days are now long ago. Senator Clinton has fallen behind Senator Obama in almost all of these factors, except for Bill Clinton's support. Senator Obama has captured the public's imagination, and gone ahead in the polls, but he also has more money, a better organisation and valuable endorsements from all sectors of the Democratic spectrum. He is now ahead in delegates.

more...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/william_rees_mogg/article3386292.ece

[floridablue]

1. It is a shame I don't have a Richard Nixon to vote for.

When I look at a Presidential candidate I look at who will be in the administration. No way do I see the Obama followers of the same quality of leaders as the Kennedy administration.

[babylonsister]

2. Richard Nixon, you're waxing nostalgic about him? Ugh. nt

[floridablue]

4. I was being sarcastic

While musing what role Jesse Jackson Jr might have in the administration.

[Faygo Kid]

11. Ah yes, "The Best and the Brightest." Remember that book? I do.

The same gang that got us caught up in Vietnam. Kennedy admittedly had brilliant young advisers, but I am sure you will admit they were imperfect. As they were, and hubris put us into that damned war.

I think Obama can do at least as well as McNamara and Rusk (I do hope he can come up with a George Ball, however).

[Justyce]

3. I find it outrageous that they're comparing Obama to JFK....

other than the good motivational speeches, I don't see the comparison.

[Lopebalaguer]

10. JFK had a lot of experience, including fighting in a war n/t

[bluerum]

5. The dems cling to majorities in the house and senate by their fingernails.

Republicans can still block, at will, almost any legislation. And they frequently provide the idiot in chief the cover that he needs to veto legislation. See CHIPS etc.

This topic should be of particular interest to any democrat. I believe that Karl Roves collusion with the Attorney Generals office to oust uncooperative state AG's was at its core an effort to firewall against a tidal wave of democratic house and senate victories in 08.

There are a number of key elections this cycle, and I have not heard one peep from the candidates about this important issue.

Act Blue-Top House Elections 2008
Wikipedia Senate Elections 2008
Wikipedia House Election 2008

The white house without house majorities will give us another administration like Bill Clintons. Hobbled and not able to put forth a cohesive democratic agenda.

[JPZenger]

6. Great Column About Obama vs. Clinton's War Advisors

Here's a great column about which people are advising Clinton about foreign policy and Iraq War vs. which people are advising Obama. Clinton has a team of hawks, which explains her resistance for many years to come out against the war. It is not just about her initial vote on the war, it is about what happened in next couple years.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/hillary-heeds-hawks-how-_b_85853.html

[JPZenger]

8. More About Obama's Foreign Policy Advisors

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/16/03717/7565/805/457864

[Faygo Kid]

12. You should post these together as their own thread in General Discussion: Primaries.

You would spark an - umm - lively debate. But one that should be had.

[Rene]

7. Obama is absolutely no JFK or RFK or MLK for that matter.

Those were seasoned, well experienced men who had served their nation....and were men of action not words.

[Forrest Greene]

9. We're Gonna Be In Bigger & Bigger Trouble

...until we wake up from our entrancement with the 1960s.

Sure, a lot of people got laid, & the fashions encouraged the style & whimsey of the individual, & gas costa a quarter a gallon. Please keep in mind that what most people know about those fabled, attractive years is an artificial construct of the corporate media.

It's Now, now.