Strategy ’08

Obama vs. the other guy, 2008

Bob Kerrey Needs to STFU

Could their be a guy who consistently does damage to Democratic hopes as often as Bob Kerrey? Well, today he comes up with not one, but two big doozies. In Politico’s “Seven Worrisome Signs for Barack Obama,” Kerrey, of “I’m supporting Hillary but love that Barack’s middle name is Hussein” fame, does enough to banished from Democratic parties forever. First:

“John McCain is a known quantity,” says Bob Kerrey, who thinks Obama will ultimately prevail. “You don’t look at John and say, ‘Who the heck is he?’ he’s a veteran, he’s a guy who got pretty banged up in Vietnam. He can deal with crisis. There’s some uncertainty about Senator Obama.”

NOOOO!!!!! Bob, come here buddy. Come here, I won’t hurt you, I promise. SLAP! You idiot!

Every single horrible, damaging, conventional-wisdom media crap frame about McCain reinforced by…a Democrat? I plan on writing more in the coming days on the notion of McCain as a “known quantity,” the most damaging single frame of this election thus far (sneak preview: take a poll on the street and see how few people know that McCain was divorced, has 8 homes, and was involved in an S&L scandal in the 80s). So, no Bob, McCain isn’t a known quantity.

But what’s his justification for supporting that frame? He was “banged up” in Vietnam – which not only makes him a known quantity, but makes him tested in a crisis. Okay, thanks, done, that’s all we need to know. McCain is someone we can completely trust in a crisis not to be impulsive, war-mongering, or unstable, okay Bob. But it’s Obama that we’re uncertain about.

Think that’s bad enough? In the last “worrisome sign” – a sense that Americans want divided government and may worry about handing over the Congress & White House to Democrats (a totally bogus argument upon which I’ve seen NO evidence that it exists anywhere outside the minds of Beltway reporters), Bob drops this one:

“The country’s still pretty divided… people may want a divided government. They want change but I’m not sure that the Democratic agenda has the support of a majority of Americans.”

Have you read a single poll lately yet?! The Democratic agenda doesn’t just have the support of a majority of Americans, but the VAST majority of Americans. And Bob, show me some tangible evidence that people may “want a divided government.” You say it, but is there any reason to believe it?

I’m reminded of that scene in “Knocked Up” in which Seth Rogen finally tells off Katherine Heigl’s sister at the end so that he can handle the birth without her. His sentence was essentially exactly what I want to say to Bob Kerrey:

“Back. The. F*ck. Off.”


August 11, 2008 - Posted by | Uncategorized | ,


  1. To answer the question in your first sentence: Harold Ford, Ed Rendell, Lanny Davis …

    Comment by GDH1 | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  2. Good points, Greg, but let’s be honest, no one really takes Harold Ford that seriously as a “senior statesman” for the Democratic Party. Ed Rendell is like the drunk uncle you like to have over because he says funny things. And Lanny Davis is…well…he’s Lanny Davis.

    But Kerrey actually ran for President and has been considered in some circles to be a “serious” guy.

    Comment by dansac | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  3. The whole Politico piece was a hit job, another “Obama is doing terribly despite being ahead of McCain in every poll” screed by the MSN. Bob Kerrey certainly didn’t help things any.

    Comment by smashartist | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  4. Eh, who cares? Clinton and co. are continuing their struggle against the inevitable POTUS.

    By the way, I’m totally psyched about the possibility that John Kerry might be the VP choice. It would fill every box and would feel almost redeeming after Bush’s disastrous presidency.

    Comment by Suzie Q | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  5. Huh? John Kerry? Where did you hear that?

    I certainly hope not – “change” isn’t best represented by the previous guy who lost the nomination. I love Kerry, but he’s old news.

    Comment by dansac | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  6. But, he adds to the “not Bush” narrative. He can serve as a symbol of what could’ve been and what could be now. Plus, he has great foreign policy experience and can come up against McCain’s “hero” narrative.

    Comment by Suzie Q | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  7. Suzie – gotta disagree. We saw what was done with that “hero” status. In 2004 the GOP successfully whipped out the anger of millions of people and convinced them to hate the “flip-flopping, lying about Vietnam” John Kerry. We don’t need that baggage (no matter how unfair it is) on the ticket.

    Comment by dansac | August 11, 2008 | Reply

  8. I read this and had to do a rolleye. Really, he does need to STFU….

    Comment by icebergslim | August 11, 2008 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: