>Following are commentary about political news stories I found while checking my Yahoo email.
Ok, am I the only person who is puzzled about why presidential candidates seek the “endorsements” of celebrities and high-profile people and families?
Who gives a rip if the Kennedys support Obama? And now, he’s chosen Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg to be part of a team to choose his Vice Presidential running mate. Really? Do the Kennedys hold that much influence in the 21st century? While I understand that in the 60’s, America was in love with the fairy tale that portrayed the Kennedy family in all their “Camelot” glory, we now know that JFK was a womanizer and unfaithful to his wife** and that there were many missteps in his presidency. I had been fascinated with that presidency and the assassination for a long time, but now, I think it’s time to let the past be the past.
Also, consider this: If Obama wants his candidacy and presidency to be all about “change,” why is he looking to the past, by way of the Kennedys, for guidance? Interesting, don’t you think?
Let’s be honest. The only reason Obama would consider having Hillary Clinton be his running mate is because he doesn’t want to lose the voters she garnered, all demographics in which he lacks support considerably. Also, there has been a lot of chit-chat in the blogosphere about Clinton backers saying they will vote for McCain before they cast a ballot for Obama. So maybe it would be prudent for Obama to ask Hill along for the ride, if for nothing else than to keep the support she has all in the name of “party unity” for the Democrats.
I, for one, wholeheartedly agree with this Yahoo story about a proposed Obama-Clinton ticket being a possible nightmare. Very telling, I think, are Michelle Obama’s and Samantha Powers’ remarks highlighted in this story. ***
It goes without saying, but during your presidential candidacy is not the time to have a close friend and fundraiser be convicted of fraud. ****
**Not that presidents being unfaithful is exclusive to Kennedy or any political party. To me, it is a reflection of character.
***Also, obviously there will be animosity between rivals… when does it cross a line? Attacking one’s stance on policy is one thing, but is name-calling and saying you want to rip someone’s eyes out really necessary?
****So this isn’t new in the world of politics, either. But this and the Rev. Wright thing coming to light in a relatively short period makes me wonder about Obama’s associations. Of course, I’m not too thrilled about those of most other politicians, either. I’m just sayin’….