Stay the Course

Modern presidential politics is overly personal, and has been for some time. This modern politics tends to focus on the actions of a candidate and how they can be manipulated to match superficial stereotypes that have been affixed to that image by the media.

Watching John and Elizabeth Edwards this morning, a new kind of personalization was introduced to the campaign. As a couple, the candidate and his wife spoke in a plain, grassy space with the sun at their backs and they told America of an intimate development in their personal lives. Elizabeth's cancer has returned, and is not curable. The moment was too real, in some respects, because it made every viewer a witness to the vulnerability of those who seek political power. I am not sure what Americans truly expect from their political leaders anymore, but the kind of vulnerability John and Elizabeth exhibited is rare and awkward and human.

Pundits and bloggers have already begun their cynical march of snide doubt and division on the matter, and this reaction can be expected, for it seems it is how one survives in America these days. But I couldn't help but wish, as I watched the Edwardses speak, that America would embrace the idea they were offering us: that honest public service is about sacrifice and hope in the name of ideas, in the name of some form of a cause that includes each and all. It is called public service because you are supposed to be a servant to the community, not just to your convictions or ambitions, but to a vision of building a community that includes every citizen, functioning in a system of order that balances both practical and impossible goals.

We are all so cynical, and so afraid to believe what leaders tell us anymore. The vision of community that has persisted from our political leaders for the past several years does not include everyone, it is a vision founded on group victory, on a selfish, singular faith without reason, and on delusions of success without planning that are always mightily crafted on the backs of others.

I have met John and Elizabeth and have worked for their past campaigns, and so my response to their press conference this morning was an instant, familial type of empathy. I am fully aware some will not respond that way. Some individuals will treat this situation as an opportunistic moment, a nasty reflex born out of the trail of deceits that liter our national landscape: the WMDs, the Mission Accomplisheds, the Patriot Acts, the Katrinas, the Walter Reeds.

We have been systematically trained to disbelieve all sentiment. We have been aggressively trained to view compassion as weakness. I don't know how to make that stop for everyone else, but I can make it stop with me.

The media has never questioned the substance of the family values of that stubborn 30% of America that adores George W. Bush and his divisive messianic visions. I am sure, however, that they will question the substance of the Edwardses family values in their decision to go forward with the campaign. Only Republicans are allowed to be resolute and principled, it seems. The significant difference is that George W. Bush is resolute in believing in his cronies and his God, but John Edwards is resolute in believing in a different America where all are included and lifted.

The shared faith of John and Elizabeth was evident today, and as they constantly "look for the silver lining" within the months to come that faith will sustain them. It was a living, implied faith and not sold as a slogan. How remarkable.

Senator Edwards likes to say that "It's time to ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war," and I agree. Today the Senator and his wife asked all of us to be patriotic about that vision of an American community where public servants and the polity trade sacrifices with confident faith in one another's honest efforts to make the nation work as one.

It's time to put our faith in something other than a President's certainty. I'll put my faith in John Edwards' humanity.

Far from the Madding Crowd

Recently, Greg and I attended an event for John Edwards at the UCLA campus. Both of us noted the complete lack of security for the event. Several hundred college students and members of the public filled and surrounded a courtyard as Edwards spoke. Sure, you may say, it's John Edwards--who'd want to harm him, besides Ann Coulter? And in fairness, I never witnessed any security at an Iowa caucus event for Edwards or his wife or for any of the other candidates in 2004. But something tells me 2008 is different. The intensity at any public gathering seems greater than ever, and the thin line of American politeness appears to have thinned.

Today's Washington Post ruminates on the potential of earlier security for presidential candidates as the selection process is underway. I suppose if we are seriously in a war against terrorism and if we value our democracy (the last element there is the catch) you would think that protecting the process itself warrants value, regardless of party. According to the editorial, the budget is there to start protecting the candidates--do we have the will?

Update:U.S. News & World Report impliedly offers evidentiary support that Homeland Security should start protecting all the candidates soon--with the potentially sped-up schedule for choosing the nominee of each party this cycle, money will be left over... why not protect all of them them now?

Back to the Future

In the "Person of the Year" Issue of Time (it's me...and you!) tiny Joe Klein hands in a short, obvious slice of journalistic homework handicapping the 2008 situation on the ground for Democrats in Iowa. Klein (with the help of the Davids Yepsen and Broder) posits that people in Iowa really like Edwards, no one really wants to actually vote for Hillary, and Obama was catching a wave of support even prior to his recent multi-media blitz (his Monday Night Football introduction was risky genius--if you missed it, here). Yepsen acknowledges that Iowans don't yet view Vilsack in a "presidential frame" (I bet it's a pretty frame...I wonder if its gilded?). Klein then insolubly suggests if Iowans deem out-of-towners too slick Vilsack could benefit (but I thought Iowans already liked Edwards?). Ah, well, who needs logic when you occupy such a small part of the magazine? Limited copy, limited deduction.

So after some "mainstream media" respect for Edwards' numbers in the first caucus state, we get this junk from Adam Nagourney in today's Times. Noting that Edwards' will most likely announce his candidacy next week in the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans, Nagourney writes:

Democrats said his campaign was gambling that the television networks and cable news programs would find New Orleans a compelling setting in a week when they were desperate for news and when many Americans would be in front of their television sets, albeit looking for football more than politics.

Unconventional announcements are conventional for Mr. Edwards. In 2004, he made his announcement on Jan. 2. That, of course, didn’t work out so well for him.

Snarkiness aside, this last line is objectively untrue. Only in America, when a one-term Senator with a working class-to-riches life story runs for President, places a surprise second in the Iowa caucuses, becomes the Vice Presidential nominee of a major political party and then finds himself well-positioned for another run at the White House in 2008, could a "reporter" label this not "work[ing] out so well."

It's going to be a long race. Happy shopping.

Baby, Don't Get Hooked on Me

With a terse David and Goliath metaphor as his guide, Senator Evan Bayh bowed out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination this weekend. Now, weeks ago when Governor Mark Warner gave a pass to the race this was easy to rationalize, but Evan Bayh had both the resume and cash to hit the ground running. What's with these guys? Suddenly the thick political oxygen of celebrity and donorship is thinning for white men, and they're fading into the wilderness faster than you can say, "Obama".

Most analysts suppose Bayh's Bye-Bye is good news for John Edwards, and I would agree. Hotline on Call suggests Edwards will become the only "crusader" in the field, although it seems pretty ridiculous to call a populist-tinged candidate a "crusader" while allowing religion-and-values-heavy candidates like W. in 2000 or Romney in 2008 the mantle of "reformer." Methinks the labels should be switched, and that Edwards' eventual mantra, should he run, will be much more in line with reform and realism than the stark moral "crusading" of men like Romney or Huckabee.

It's all in the labels.

It seems Hillary is making the TV talk-show rounds this week for the re-release of her book "It Takes a Village," now sporting a full-color photo of the Senator surronded by happy children. Does anyone else notice the irony in Hillary repackaging an old work rather than writing something fresh for public consumption? It takes a cynic.

Update: Political bravery delayed is good policy denied. She makes me sick.

In case you missed it like I did, here's a week-old Washington Post column from David Broder regarding Tom Vilsack, titled, "An Iowan You Should Know."

Over the Hillary

Great, early news on the ground in Iowa for John Edwards, who continues to consolidate his support among caucus-goers. Most of the media has chosen to focus on Edwards' front-runner status, but the more interesting aspects of this poll are Obama's hard number (13%) and Hillary's decline since the last poll (from 26% to 16%). To focus on the Hillary issue, it seems that this new poll displays not only how weak her support is when it comes to actual voters, but also that after all this time in front of the nation, Iowans at least aren't buying what she will most likely be selling. As for Vilsack, the single digit showings don't help much.

This Alfonse D'Amato quote from a Friday New York Times article seems misdirected and more applicable to Senator Barack Obama and not D'Amato's object of affection, Ms. Clinton: "“My Republican colleagues would do well to take notice of a very focused, energetic, organized, articulate, bright senator who, if she does run for president, should be taken as a very, very serious candidate.” Change the "she" to a "he" and you've got a truism (again, someone all about that Clinton "energy"...please, stop, please). Also note that D'Amato actually believes Giuliani would run as McCain's VP on the GOP ticket. Evidence of delusions? Perhaps D'Amato has seen a submissive side to Rudy no one else has...

An obvious link from the Huffington Post, but a significant glimpse into the fact that the Obama's actually live in the real world (unlike, that "energetic" Hillary!). A quote from Obama:“Being shot, obviously, that is the least-attractive option... Now I will tell you, this is something, this is one of the least-attractive — not the part about being shot, obviously, that is the least-attractive option. But even just having a security apparatus around you; one of the things that I have been very proud over the last several years, is, for all the hoopla, I am not an entourage guy. . . I have been accessible, and Michelle and I have gone out of our way not to change our habits. Even if I am not to run for president, the crush of attention has created a different set of problems.”

Hopefully polls like this from the Wall Street Journal are reflecting America's true collective wisdom. The poll notes that "eight in 10 Americans would be 'comfortable' or 'enthusiastic' about an African-American or woman running for president," and also notes that if you want to be elected President in 2008, it's worse to be connected to the Bush Administration than to be gay.

An excellent quote from Chris Matthews this week, an aside the host made to his live Hardball audience during a break from taping a show with Senator John Edwards: "This is not hardball, this is batting practice. This guy is killing me. He couldn't do this four years ago."

Sounds like 2004 taught at least one Democratic nominee how to better communicate his message. I'm looking forward to seeing more of Edwards on the scene.

Choices

A tasty morsel of hope in today's New York Times: Barack Obama is acting more and more like a candidate, giving well-attended speeches and meeting with possible donors. Some key graphs:

One of the donors who met with Mr. Obama, and who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to offend Mrs. Clinton, said that he and several others had supported Mrs. Clinton’s Senate campaigns but were not committed to her as a presidential candidate.

“I like Hillary a lot, but I’m also impressed with Obama — his message, the way he connects to people,” said the donor, a prominent New York business person. “It’s a little too early for Democrats to be certain that Hillary is the strongest bet for 2008. There are a lot of good people interested in running.”

Agreed. But this passage takes the cake:

John Catsimatidis, a loyal Clinton donor, said he had recently received a phone call from Mrs. Clinton asking to have dinner before the holidays. He believes she wants to run for president and is moving to ramp up her Senate fund-raising operation for a White House campaign.

“I think they have a phenomenal political machine set up that’s far superior to any of the other candidates, or theoretical candidates,” Mr. Catsimatidis said. “Now they’re getting ready to put that machine to use.”

Oh yeah, nice machine! Too bad it's a machine with no voters involved! I don't know anyone who supports Clinton. When I ask folks out here in California about her, all I get is variations of a grimace.

Speaking of variations of a grimace, it looks like the response to Senator Kerry's "botched joke" (which I sincerely believe was a simple mistake) has knocked Kerry off course when it comes to an '08 run. His previous plan to decide early in 2007 has been pushed to Spring. Even Nixon had to wait two cycles before his White House comeback. But I suspect Kerry's chance at a comeback will never come back.

Even more hope on the 2008 front: Senator John Edwards appeared on CBS Sunday Morning over the weekend, showing off his new home in North Carolina, discussing his new book, and generally reminding me why he should not be counted out this time around. His genuine focus and confidence were evident; Elizabeth looked great and back to full form as well. Here's a link from the CBS website detailing the appearance that includes some clips from the show. Within the last few days, Edwards also snatched up former Michigan Congressman David Bonior as a senior advisor--a solid move in step with Edward's consistently populist behavior since his 2004 loss.

2008: Hawkeye State

Looks like Senator Edwards will be in Des Moines tonight at the Barnes & Noble signing copies of his new book, Home. If you're in the area, it might be worth stopping by (even just to see the size of the turnout...).

Also this evening in Mount Pleasant, Governor Vilsack holds a potluck to pull the trigger on his announcement tour for the White House. I don't think Christie Vilsack's dish sounds appealing, but I guess what Tom is serving up is more important... grab a fork.

I haven't been reading much about McCain's Iowa operation...I'm looking for any evidence he will take Iowa seriously this go-round and I'm not hearing much. Maybe he's too busy taking fancy photos for that website of his.

Update: Political Wire notes rumblings that Hillary Clinton is not setting up necessary staff elements in Iowa, suggesting that she is watching Obama's moves before deciding to run herself or is skipping the caucuses entirely. If Obama runs and Hillary doesn't, I think the word "miracle" would be an appropriate response.

I noticed that CNN is re-running clips of Vilsack's presidential announcement, but I also noticed how the announcer cited both Vilsack's support for gay unions and his single digit showing in the Democratic preference polls. On one hand, it's good they're even giving Vilsack coverage, but on the other hand, must the press highlight this kind of stuff even before a candidate leaves the gate? It's going to be a long election cycle....

No Place Like the White House

Former Democratic Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards appeared on The Daily Show last evening to promote his new book, Home: The Blueprints of Our Lives. The book is a compliation of narratives from over 60 Americans, sharing stories about their homes either as children or adults. Jon Stewart asked Edwards if he was running for President and Edwards said stay tuned to his website JohnEdwards.com.

While I don't own a home of my own (yet), my second childhood home probably held the most impact for my life's blueprint...so far. The house watched me get ready for my first job at the local public library, for my second job at the local movie theatre, provided a parking spot for my first car-- Brownie the Sentra-- helped to observe countless family dinners, and even watched me head off to two different colleges (Go Hoyas). Remembering a house can assist in the recall of so many other great memories. It is an interesting book concept for a politician. I'll have to check it out.

Quick Hits

For wonks, anticipated Senate committee assignments in the 110th Congress. Foreign Relations looks stocked with the most 2008 hopefuls.

For jokesters, John Edwards appears on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart this evening. Edwards announced his candidacy for President on the show in 2003. Can we expect a do over?

For optimists, do you really think competence and service get rewarded by this President?

Finally, I tried to do a FoxNews.com Cracker Watch this morning, but when I checked the site's main photo was of the freshman class for the upcoming House of Representatives.

Unfortunately, my calculator can't count that high...

Whine and Cheese

Salon's Walter Shapiro fitfully and briefly examines the impact of today's announcement by Senator Russ Feingold that he will not seek the 2008 Democratic nomination for President, noting that the field now excludes former hopefuls Feingold, Gov. Mark Warner and Senator John Kerry (if we're honest). Who is left in the race? It seems Hillary, Gore, and Obama top the charts with John Edwards and others (including Tom Vilsack) jogging behind. After six long years of dealing with a leader who says junk like this with utter seriousness, it is insane that the Democratic roster is stocked with such lukewarm possibilities. John Edwards is an intelligent, decent American, but the 2004 primaries proved the Democratic Party can't handle such direct simplicity in both message and policy. The atmosphere of fear engendered by the cynical Bush Team sidelines the effectiveness of appeals to hope or opportunity. Is there a mystery Governor who will come to the rescue?