It’s been a pretty amazing weekend for Barack Obama. After winning the South Carolina primary by 28 points, he managed to score the endorsements of Caroline Kennedy, who said he has the ability to inspire Americans much as her father did, and Sen. Ted Kennedy, who had been neutral but was so upset with the Clinton campaign’s tactics that he phoned the former president and gave him an earful.
Hillary Clinton isn’t entirely without the support of Kennedys. Her campaign released a statement from Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Robert Kennedy’s daughter, who said she and her siblings back Hillary.
New York Times on Ted Kennedy’s endorsement:
Both the Clintons and their allies had pressed Mr. Kennedy for weeks to remain neutral, but Mr. Kennedy had become increasingly disenchanted with the tone of the Clinton campaign. He and former President Bill Clinton had a heated telephone exchange earlier this month over what Mr. Kennedy considered misleading statements by Mr. Clinton about Mr. Obama, as well as his injection of race into the campaign.
Mr. Kennedy called Mr. Clinton on Sunday to tell him of his decision.
Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.
We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country—just as we did in 1960.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
By Conservative Yankee, February 3, 2008 at 8:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Mike, Maani isn’t worth the effort of pushing a computer key on this issue. His “obsession” with Hill-the-business-shill, Walmart Whore, Tyson Scab, backer of unlimited visas for mid-level jobs, and supporter of FALN terrorists, is the stuff that keeps this country in the “status quo” mode.
Once again, you fail to note that while Obama opposed the war earlier than most, as a Senator he has voted to continue funding it each time a new bill has arisen. As well, Ted Kennedy ALSO opposed the invasion initially, and voted against the initial resolution. Yet he, TOO, voted for every bill that continued to fund the war - as well as re-authorizing the Patriot Act (twice) and fully supporting the Real ID Act (twice).
Obama calls himself an “agent of change. So why would he value the endorsement of perhaps the most entrenched “insider” Senator in the whole country?
But her alcoholic uncle Ted is a murderer who hasn’t ever paid for his crimes, and that’s disgraceful. Shame on the people of Massachusetts who keep electing this killer to Congress. The memory of young Mary Jo should haunt them for the rest of their lives. I grieve for her parents.
By DennisD, January 28, 2008 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Two Kennedy’s - that will at least give Obama Hyannisport.
All aboard the empty rhetoric express powered by Kool-aid. It will take far more than “inspiration” to dig us out of the hole Bu$h Inc. is leaving behind.
Some solutions to our problems would be a real change of pace. So far I haven’t heard any.
Are you capable of anything other than unfounded accusation? Not only do I like Caroline Kennedy, I have worked with her on fundraising events in NYC. She is a truly wonderful, caring, generous person. I also admire and respect her for the work she has done on behalf of children’s and other issues.
That does not change my belief that her endorsement was written in the same totally insusbstantial tone that Obama’s rhetoric is offered.
Great comments Ada. And, despite the obvious (and increasingly desperate attempts) to trash him at every turn, Americans ARE deciding what kind of America THEY want to live in, and it’s wayyy different than what we’ve seen for the past 2 decades…
We need to start believing in the common good. It’s the only thing that’s gonna save us.
By Sharon Ash, January 28, 2008 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush was unqualified but charismatic and he also brought change. We changed from a budget surplus and we now have a $9 trillion national debt. We changed to a nation that supports torture. We changed from being a country hated in a few places to hated throughout the world. Approximately 6 million more Americans got to change their socioeconomic status and move into the ranks of poverty. Another 9 million Americans got to be added to the role of the uninsured. New Orleans got changed and never fixed. We got our constitutional rights changed. We got to change the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and carry their blood on our hands. Thousands of our troops have had their bodies and minds forever changed by the Iraq War. The changes brought by the Bush Administration could go on and on, but the point is all this talk about change is just blowing in the wind and a big distraction that keeps people from taking a hard look at the people talking change, and the people and the money behind them. Show me what you have done and show me what you plan to do and how you plan to do it, everything else is just hype!
Caroline’s “endorsement” in The New York Times was among the most “childish,” lightweight and insubstantial things I have ever read. It is of a piece with Obama’s admittedly inspiring and intoxicating, but ultimately weak, rhetoric.
As for whether TK’s endorsement will have any effect, we’ll “cross that bridge when we come to it” (LOL).
As for standing for “world peace,” ALL candidates in BOTH parties would probably like this (okay, there are a couple of blatant warmongers in the GOP, but set them aside). If what you mean is that Obama is “anti-war,” this is not entirely true, and even HE said so. What he said was that he was against “stupid” wars, like Iraq. But he is quite bullish (if not exactly hawkish) in various ways - no less so than either Hillary or Edwards. Indeed, his actual positions on Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan et al are no more or less hawkish than the other Dem candidates.
All the candidates believe in diplomacy before action, so I’m not sure that Obama can be singled out here.
The problem is that one CANNOT “look beyond the words” because there is so little beyond them - at least, so little that is all that significantly different from what other candidates are offering re policies and positions. I am also less than impressed with “his track record to date,” which includes, among other things, initially premising his entire candidacy on his anti-war stance, and then voting for every bill to continue funding the war. This also speaks to his alleged “consistency.” His “history of grass roots organizing” tells us nothing about, and is actually irrelevant to, hos he might govern. His “vision,” such as it is, and like his track record, is not all that different from others’.
Don’t get me wrong. I like Obama, and would support him if he became the nominee. But I am not convinced that, despite his admittedly inspirational and intoxicating rhetoric, he offers all that much more or different than Hillary or Edwards.
Let the best person win. It is good to have different opinions, so that one could or should decide what one stands for. Obama candidacy is very good for the party. He is not a divider, but a uniter.Give young man a chance to express his next generation opinions. One thing is certain, he stands for World peace, {not at any cost}, see has statesmen.
By Ada, January 28, 2008 at 1:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I disagree with those who claim he is a lightweight—Obama is the most substantial candidate the American people have seen in a long, long time.
But don’t take my word for it—look beyond the words, and see who it is who supports Obama, why they do, his track record to date, his history of grass roots organizing, his vision. You will see a man of consistency, of substance, of wisdom, great compassion—and sincerity.
To those who are trying to use race and gender to muddy and grotesquely simplify the political waters, I say that I would vote for Obama even if he were White. I would vote for him even if he were a Woman. The time is now to rise above the pigeonholes, and it begins with each individual voter. Vote for the America you WANT to live in, not the America the cynics will tell you is the best we can do.
Ultimately, I think the people of the U.S. are smarter than to elect Obama. But looking at the pre-election campaign from abroad, from Eastern Europe,the near abroad of the post-Soviet Union and Putin’s Russia, one is struck that Obama is another American caprice, a kind of Bush from the left, but a complete lightweight and, alas, completely inexperienced in anything but rhetoric. If he is elected, all the world will stand amazed of how the U.S. has become “lighter than air” in the brain. This is not to say that I want to see Bush and Chaney still leading the country, but I fear that with Obama in the opposition, the neocons will continue in office.
By Conservative Yankee, February 3, 2008 at 8:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Mike, Maani isn’t worth the effort of pushing a computer key on this issue. His “obsession” with Hill-the-business-shill, Walmart Whore, Tyson Scab, backer of unlimited visas for mid-level jobs, and supporter of FALN terrorists, is the stuff that keeps this country in the “status quo” mode.
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Jeb, Chelsea!
No fucken thanks!
Report thisBy Maani, January 28, 2008 at 9:33 pm Link to this comment
MMC:
Once again, you fail to note that while Obama opposed the war earlier than most, as a Senator he has voted to continue funding it each time a new bill has arisen. As well, Ted Kennedy ALSO opposed the invasion initially, and voted against the initial resolution. Yet he, TOO, voted for every bill that continued to fund the war - as well as re-authorizing the Patriot Act (twice) and fully supporting the Real ID Act (twice).
Obama calls himself an “agent of change. So why would he value the endorsement of perhaps the most entrenched “insider” Senator in the whole country?
Peace.
Report thisBy lilmamzer, January 28, 2008 at 8:07 pm Link to this comment
Caroline is and always has been a babe.
But her alcoholic uncle Ted is a murderer who hasn’t ever paid for his crimes, and that’s disgraceful. Shame on the people of Massachusetts who keep electing this killer to Congress. The memory of young Mary Jo should haunt them for the rest of their lives. I grieve for her parents.
Report thisBy Kiwi, January 28, 2008 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment
We changed from a budget surplus and we now have a $9 trillion national debt.
With pretty much nothing to show for it.
Report thisBy Kiwi, January 28, 2008 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment
We changed from a budget surplus and we now have a $9 trillion national debt.
With pretty much nothing to show for it and no end in sight
Report thisBy GrammaConcept, January 28, 2008 at 5:13 pm Link to this comment
I heard:
“Cowards die many times before their deaths, the valiant only taste of death but once”.......
For further consideration,I submit:
.....Cynics die many times before their deaths…....
Please, be careful, the children are watching….
And Thank You, Caroline..
Report thisBy DennisD, January 28, 2008 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Two Kennedy’s - that will at least give Obama Hyannisport.
All aboard the empty rhetoric express powered by Kool-aid. It will take far more than “inspiration” to dig us out of the hole Bu$h Inc. is leaving behind.
Some solutions to our problems would be a real change of pace. So far I haven’t heard any.
Report thisBy Maani, January 28, 2008 at 1:35 pm Link to this comment
Mike:
Are you capable of anything other than unfounded accusation? Not only do I like Caroline Kennedy, I have worked with her on fundraising events in NYC. She is a truly wonderful, caring, generous person. I also admire and respect her for the work she has done on behalf of children’s and other issues.
That does not change my belief that her endorsement was written in the same totally insusbstantial tone that Obama’s rhetoric is offered.
Peace.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 28, 2008 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
Great comments Ada. And, despite the obvious (and increasingly desperate attempts) to trash him at every turn, Americans ARE deciding what kind of America THEY want to live in, and it’s wayyy different than what we’ve seen for the past 2 decades…
We need to start believing in the common good. It’s the only thing that’s gonna save us.
Report thisBy Sharon Ash, January 28, 2008 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush was unqualified but charismatic and he also brought change. We changed from a budget surplus and we now have a $9 trillion national debt. We changed to a nation that supports torture. We changed from being a country hated in a few places to hated throughout the world. Approximately 6 million more Americans got to change their socioeconomic status and move into the ranks of poverty. Another 9 million Americans got to be added to the role of the uninsured. New Orleans got changed and never fixed. We got our constitutional rights changed. We got to change the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and carry their blood on our hands. Thousands of our troops have had their bodies and minds forever changed by the Iraq War. The changes brought by the Bush Administration could go on and on, but the point is all this talk about change is just blowing in the wind and a big distraction that keeps people from taking a hard look at the people talking change, and the people and the money behind them. Show me what you have done and show me what you plan to do and how you plan to do it, everything else is just hype!
Report thisBy QuyTran, January 28, 2008 at 11:30 am Link to this comment
Ted Kennedy as his mate then both of them will be going in…dead water !
Report thisBy Maani, January 28, 2008 at 8:49 am Link to this comment
Caroline’s “endorsement” in The New York Times was among the most “childish,” lightweight and insubstantial things I have ever read. It is of a piece with Obama’s admittedly inspiring and intoxicating, but ultimately weak, rhetoric.
As for whether TK’s endorsement will have any effect, we’ll “cross that bridge when we come to it” (LOL).
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, January 28, 2008 at 8:25 am Link to this comment
Jatihoon:
Wasn’t Bush ALSO a “uniter, not a divider?” I’m not making a direct comparison here, but haven’t we heard this before?
In a related regard, you might find this interesting:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/28/opinion/28krugman.html?_r=1&hp;=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
As for standing for “world peace,” ALL candidates in BOTH parties would probably like this (okay, there are a couple of blatant warmongers in the GOP, but set them aside). If what you mean is that Obama is “anti-war,” this is not entirely true, and even HE said so. What he said was that he was against “stupid” wars, like Iraq. But he is quite bullish (if not exactly hawkish) in various ways - no less so than either Hillary or Edwards. Indeed, his actual positions on Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan et al are no more or less hawkish than the other Dem candidates.
All the candidates believe in diplomacy before action, so I’m not sure that Obama can be singled out here.
Peace.
Report thisBy Maani, January 28, 2008 at 8:18 am Link to this comment
Ada:
The problem is that one CANNOT “look beyond the words” because there is so little beyond them - at least, so little that is all that significantly different from what other candidates are offering re policies and positions. I am also less than impressed with “his track record to date,” which includes, among other things, initially premising his entire candidacy on his anti-war stance, and then voting for every bill to continue funding the war. This also speaks to his alleged “consistency.” His “history of grass roots organizing” tells us nothing about, and is actually irrelevant to, hos he might govern. His “vision,” such as it is, and like his track record, is not all that different from others’.
Don’t get me wrong. I like Obama, and would support him if he became the nominee. But I am not convinced that, despite his admittedly inspirational and intoxicating rhetoric, he offers all that much more or different than Hillary or Edwards.
Peace.
Report thisBy jatihoon, January 28, 2008 at 8:04 am Link to this comment
Let the best person win. It is good to have different opinions, so that one could or should decide what one stands for. Obama candidacy is very good for the party. He is not a divider, but a uniter.Give young man a chance to express his next generation opinions. One thing is certain, he stands for World peace, {not at any cost}, see has statesmen.
Report thisBy Ada, January 28, 2008 at 1:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I disagree with those who claim he is a lightweight—Obama is the most substantial candidate the American people have seen in a long, long time.
But don’t take my word for it—look beyond the words, and see who it is who supports Obama, why they do, his track record to date, his history of grass roots organizing, his vision. You will see a man of consistency, of substance, of wisdom, great compassion—and sincerity.
To those who are trying to use race and gender to muddy and grotesquely simplify the political waters, I say that I would vote for Obama even if he were White. I would vote for him even if he were a Woman. The time is now to rise above the pigeonholes, and it begins with each individual voter. Vote for the America you WANT to live in, not the America the cynics will tell you is the best we can do.
Report thisBy Eso, January 27, 2008 at 11:33 pm Link to this comment
Ultimately, I think the people of the U.S. are smarter than to elect Obama. But looking at the pre-election campaign from abroad, from Eastern Europe,the near abroad of the post-Soviet Union and Putin’s Russia, one is struck that Obama is another American caprice, a kind of Bush from the left, but a complete lightweight and, alas, completely inexperienced in anything but rhetoric. If he is elected, all the world will stand amazed of how the U.S. has become “lighter than air” in the brain. This is not to say that I want to see Bush and Chaney still leading the country, but I fear that with Obama in the opposition, the neocons will continue in office.
Report thisBy cyrena, January 27, 2008 at 10:45 pm Link to this comment
Another indication that Americans are tired of the dirty nasty shit that has taken over and turned us into the slime pit of the world.
Go Teddy….
Go Barack Obama..
Go ‘we the people’...who wanna be united again…
Report thisBy waxman, January 27, 2008 at 10:41 pm Link to this comment
DON’T RIDE WITH HIM NEAR THE WATER OBAMA…
Report this