A whole raft of other bloggers, pundit types, and media notables have weighed in the flap over Barack Obama’s praise of Ronald Reagan, including John Edwards, who I think is entirely correct of course here.I would just ask that others consider this latest dustup in context with these moments and wonder why the senator from Illinois lapses into rhetoric and actions that end up complementing anything that could come out of the RNC playbook when “crunch time” arrives. Yes, I know he’s a bit “green” after all on this stage, which isn’t his fault entirely, but it’s bad enough when the Repugs trip all over themselves with their “Gipper love” – I can’t think of a word to describe how unseemly it is when a Dem engages in it also.
Update: Wow, Markos, way to take a shot at John Edwards and totally ignore Obama's habit of resurrecting right-wing talking points which you yourself have noted in the past (and you even managed to plug your book in the process...dag, what a pro).
If Obama is talking about "a party of ideas," why does he have to talk about Reagan? Why does he have to talk about bad, truly awful ideas? Why doesn't he look back into his own party's history and talk about the social compact forged by prior Democratic presidents? Or wouldn't that play well with the "Lieber-crat" wing of the party which Obama gravitates to at least as much as HRC (I know she isn't innocent on this either, but I cannot possibly imagine why you would EVER defend that bunch).
No comments:
Post a Comment