Thursday, April 24, 2008


Who Would Jenna Endorse? All she said is that she may not support McCain and is open to the Democrats. She didn't pick one. If the buzz and chatter is to be believed, most of the Republicans who crossed over and voted for Hillary were doing it to help defeat Obama so McCain could run against her (and the GOP's preference to face Hillary in the election is documented).
From Larry King:
KING: Do you have a favorite between the two, the two Democrats?

LAURA BUSH: My favorite is the Republican.

KING (pointing to Jenna): Yours too, I would imagine.

JENNA BUSH: I don't know.

KING: A-ha! Are you open to...

JENNA BUSH: Yeah, of course. I mean, who isn't open to learning about the candidates and I'm sure that everybody's like that.

Actually, Jenna honey, everybody is not like that, but it would be nice if it were true. We don't know who Jenna would endorse, but there have been several Obama endorsements from prominent Republicans. Do check out this editorial piece from Susan Eisenhower (Ike's granddaughter): Why I'm backing Obama

More recently, Susan's sister-in-law and the daughter of Richard Nixon, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, not only endorsed Obama but has donated the maximum amount allowed to him (serving to cancel out Tricia's donation to McCain). I wonder if David Eisenhower is feeling like he's part of a bad sandwich?

Douglas Kmiec. Prominent legal scholar, former Catholic University dean, advisor to Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, legal counsel to 2 Republican presidents. His formal Obama endorsement.

Lincoln Chafee. His Obama endorsement maybe not as big a surprise as the others. He was a liberal (moderate) Republican, and has left the Republican party to be an Independent. His record doesn't look very Republican to me (with a few exceptions).

More on Obamacans:
USA Today
NY Sun


DrDon said...

I just hope all the folks backing Obama aren't disappointed if he wins the nomination and election and still somehow doesn't create another golden age of America. While Obama may well be the best candidate in a field of weak offerings, Susan Eisenhower's support of him, like many of his supporters, seems to be based on the idea of Barack Obama rather than the man himself. She doesn't cite even one specific proposal of his that will actually imporve anything in America. Rather he has simply become the de facto candidate of "hope" and "change."

I heard about hope and change a couple of years ago. There were sweeping changes to congress during a "throw the bums out" election season and the freshman classes of the Senate and House were touted as young, energetic agents of change.'s that working out so far? Amazingly enough, all the candidates keep talking about is changing the culture of "Washington politics as usual." Wasn't that already supposed to be fixed when a slew of incumbents were voted out a few years ago? Of course it didn't change because people seeking power act much differently than people who have power.

Again, I certainly think Obama may be the best of the worst and I believe that having an articulate, charismatic, and optimistic president for a change can help to improve our standing in the world and maybe even help our nation shrug off its collection depression. But when it comes down to it, there are concrete changes that need to be made in this country and some of those changes are painful ones. Is Obama going to be up to task of leading people through those changes? Will he be willing to be unpopular to do what's needed and what's right? And will the people who support him now turn their backs on him if real change means sacrifice, belt tightening, and a fundamental alteration of the American mindset instead of four years of "happy days are here again?" I don't know.

I wish him, or whoever the next president is, a lot of luck. The world has changed around us and all the talk of hope and change isn't going to bring America back. What might is sacrifice, living a little bit more for tomorrow instead of today, and some honest soul searching about our weaknesses as well as our strengths. Unfortunately, this type of insight has not been much in evidence in the America of the past 40 years.

MichaelBains said...

I heartily agree with Everything said by the good Doc. The only caveat I'll propose is one which I get sick of hearing myself, but which I think is none-the-less fairly substantial: The Democratic Majority is miniscule and not even close to Veto-proof.

{sigh} Here's hoping they get it, and then Get It enough to use it.