Intellect and experience, then and now

By 'raindrop'

If we are really going to discuss Sarah Palin's intellect or experience, we need to go back and look at Teddy Kennedy's intellect and experience when he first started running for office. He was generally considered, if not outright dumb, at least not very smart and certainly totally lacking in any accomplishment.

A while back, I was watching an older documentary about the Kennedy men (the Kennedy women never seem to rate much coverage) and it reminded me how Teddy Kennedy was viewed when his father first decided Teddy should be a U.S. Senator - in and out of the family he was considered not very smart.

To get Teddy started politically, Papa Kennedy arranged to have a loyal Kennedy family friend fill the U.S. Senate seat that had been vacated by John Kennedy's ascension to the presidency; the friend was to hold the seat for Teddy until Teddy reached the legal age to be a senator. Teddy was widely thought (even in the Kennedy family) to be not very smart and not at all accomplished (his only accomplishment to that date was having been born a son of Joe Kennedy Sr.).

The Kennedy family was worried that Teddy wasn't ready for the big leagues, and they were right to worry. It took all of the old man's money and political muscle to put Teddy into that senate seat. Soon, the word got around that Teddy had been kicked out of Harvard for sending a friend to take an exam for him. Of course, Teddy (being the old man's son) was soon readmitted but the news of that cheating and subsequent expulsion could have ended Teddy's political career right then, and would have if he had not been born a Kennedy. However, the press guys and women were in love with the Kennedys, so it would take more than cheating to dim Teddy's star. Soon, rumors of Teddy's high-living looked like that might end Teddy's political career but, no, drinking, womanizing and even letting a young woman drown when he might have saved her life was not sufficient to end Teddy's political life. He was a Kennedy and all things Kennedy were forgiven.

When Teddy decided to run against incumbent President Jimmy Carter for the Democratic nomination in 1980, Teddy couldn't even come up with a rational reason for wanting to be president. People were aghast at his incoherence. Yet, this hard-drinking, womanizing, callous, and intellectually dim man is now recalled as the greatest senator in American history. Go figure.

Teddy had the benefit of the powerful Kennedy political machine, the great Kennedy wealth and a father who would stop at nothing to advance his sons. What would Teddy have been without the help of the brilliant men that had swarmed around John Kennedy and were eager to help another Kennedy rise politically? Hard to say, but I doubt any of us would have heard much about Teddy. The Kennedy brain trust (as they were known) wrote his speeches, guided him through the political maze, and wrote articles and books advancing his star. Few men in American history have had the benefit of such an army of political and intellectual heavyweights to carry him along as Teddy had.

Forgotten, now, is how skeptically people viewed Teddy Kennedy's intelligence when he first started out.

We can only wonder how Sarah would fare if she were a Kennedy and had access to that cadre of talent, political muscle and Kennedy money to assist her.

Rest in Peace, Ted.

R.I.P.

50%

Obama is now down to 50% approval in the Gallup poll, putting him at 51.8% in RCP's average of the major polling outfits. Even that number is buoyed by the outlier ABC/Wapo poll.

Strictly for the sake of my ego I don't want him to sink below 50% until September as that is when I predicted it would happen. He'll be doing a eulogy for Senator Kennedy on Saturday. At the risk of being a bit gross let me say: I think he'll get a little bounce.

The first day after Kennedy's death was about the man. Today it is about the end of an era. (Which for many of us, including me, it is.) A sad finality does accompany the last Kennedy brother's passing. And the media is playing up this angle. Obama does well in moments like this. He'll try like the dickens to pick up the vigor baton. I assume he'll be successful enough to get a few points back in opinion polls. His skill set it perfect for moments like this.

But it shall not last. Obama is now set to have the third biggest drop off in support of any post war President. Only Ford, who pardoned Nixon causing nationwide disgust, and Clinton who won with only 43%, fell further quicker.

We Love Ted.

As you go about your business today say a prayer for Ted.

Lenin Would Be Proud

The more I think about this the angrier I get.

We have commenters come here and tell us we're not Democrats because we don't support Senator Obama. How bigoted is that? Who are Jim Bob or Norb, et al to decide what a Democrat is or isn't? I thought Liberal meant "in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties or favoring or permitting freedom of action with respect to matters of personal belief or expression." Yet when they come here (and other Clinton friendly blogs) they don't want freedom of action of personal belief. The Obama supporter who made the 1984 ad about Senator Clinton should look in the mirror.

As to our Liberal street cred, perhaps read back to some of our early work when we were delightfully bashing Bush (ah the halcyon days when we were all united) . Or when we had great hopes that a Democratic congress would do something. Nancy Pelosi told us that impeachment was off the table and we began to lose hope. We were promised "change" in 2006 and you can see how well that has gone.

Here's a comment by Jason from a previous post that sums it up:

Where does it say, anywhere, you can't be a true Democrat (or for that matter a Republican, a Libertarian, a Green, or a member of any other party) if you express a desire to vote for someone outside your party. Automatically voting straight party ticket is not the sign of a healthy democracy but more akin to those "free and fair" elections that were occurred in the former Soviet Union and now occur in those Utopian paradises where voters are "gently persuaded" whom to vote for.

A sign of a mature democracy is that you make an informed decision and cast your vote for the person you believe is the most qualified for the position, even if it is a vote against your own party. It is a maturity that allows you to realize your party couldn't find the best there is for the position or even has made a mistake in the choice of its candidate.

Party membership in our society does not mean we have to ascribe 100% to all positions and all of the party. After all, the members of a party have to debate and fight among themselves as to what the party platform will be. We identify with the party that on balance tends to support more of with what we agree than disagree.

This is what I now find lacking in the Democratic Party. The party elites have decided to cram Obama down our throats and tell us their little fringe group is now the whole of the Democratic Party and we are all traitors to the Party if we dare express our opinions to the contrary.

This new vision of the Democratic party is not the party of its former giants, FDR, John and Bobby Kennedy (sorry Ted), who fought for the betterment of American society, but one of powerful elites (that's you Ted, and Pelosi and Reid) who will do anything to perpetuate their grip on power to the expense of the greater good of American society.

The New Democratic party shouldn't even be called Democratic anymore, not with it's calls to stop the electoral process and anoint Obama; calls that started with his first few hundred delegates and "polls" taken by the elites to advance their own end. No, the New Democratic Party is not the party with the ideals of FDR, JFK and Bobby, but of Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov.

Weapons of Mass Resentment

John's post on Ted Kennedy got me thinking about the SUPER delegates who support Obama.

I wonder how much of their support is because they believe in his policies and how much is resentment towards the Clinton's.

Donna Brazile - possible the worst campaign manager ever. Is she angry at the Clinton's because she believes it's President Clinton's fault Al Gore didn't become President? (I won't say he lost the election because he didn't.) Is she jealous of the fact that President Clinton had two terms?

Howard Dean-a loser. Unfair to be booted out of the race because of the scream? True enough, but losing Iowa was really the reason he gave up his bid. Does he resent that Senator Clinton lost Iowa and came back? Or is he like Ms. Brazile and is jealous of the only Democrat who won two terms since FDR?

Ted Kennedy - one thing I'll give him is he is not hypocritical enough to suggest that Senator Clinton should abandon her campaign. And as much respect as I have for President Carter he was beatable. Obviously. But Ted Kennedy couldn't do it.

John "Windsurfing Madness" Kerry - TWENTY KNOTS - HOLD MY CALLS! Let the Swiftboaters go unanswered for way to long and then once it had started to fade brought it right back into the spot light. Could not have run a worse campaign from a phone booth in Yankton, South Dakota with no change. Of course he comes out for Obama, they're cut from the same cloth. He must wonder, how did I lose to that schmuck and how did Clinton get to win?

Gary Hart. Nursing old resentments because the super delegates "gave" the nomination to Mondale. In actuality, he had less pledged delegates than Mondale but he had won the last contests so he argued that he had momentum on his side and should be the nominee. Odd, that he would support Obama.

Tom Dashle - blames President Clinton for making him Minority Leader.

Nancy Pelosi. Please vote this woman out. Right now she is the highest ranking woman in Washington. She doesn't want to give that up.

Huffington and Dowd - also don't want another woman to do better than them

Olbermann - who knows? He's lost his mind and his viewers and neither are coming back.

You can blame President Clinton for a lot. I was angry about the blow job because it was wrong and it diminished the good that he did. But the way all of the people above talk about him now you would think he lost, like them.

I'm supporting Senator Clinton, whether she is on the ballot or not. I am not afraid of a strong woman.

Here's my quote of the day:

Ms. Michaux and Ms. Prigg may be among the "bitter" people Mr. Obama was talking about -- a teacher, Ms. Prigg has no health insurance and says she may lose her house because her salary won't cover the monthly mortgage payments.

But both women said they're sticking with Mrs. Clinton.

"I felt back in the 1990s when the Clintons were in, I lived pretty good, and now my life is going down the tubes, like everyone else's," said Ms. Prigg. "When I met her in Pittsburgh eight years ago, I told her, Hillary, no matter what you run for, anyone who stays with Bill deserves my vote, and she loved it."

"I feel like I AM Hillary Clinton," she said. "Strong women are all Hillary Clinton."

Thank you very much Ms. Prigg, I couldn't say it any better.

Ted Kennedy, 1980, and the B.S. about Clinton needing to get out if....(fill in the blank)

Let me say this here because the MSM won't. If Clinton wins Pennsylvania by 1 vote she should stay in. There is no "margin" she needs to win by to justify her on going campaign. The idiotic Howard Dean, who is apparently an ego with a body attached, should shut his pie-hole. He's run the DNC into a ditch. Ditto for the very unwise and biased Donna Brazille - whose claim to fame is she ran Gore's campaign in 2000. A campaign in which Gore lost his home state. You go, Donna!
Ted Kennedy's campaign in 1980 is instructive.
From wikipedia:
In 1980 Carter was still able to maintain a substantial lead even after Kennedy swept the last batch of primaries in June. Despite this, Kennedy refused to drop out. On the platform on the final day Kennedy, for the most part ignored, Carter.
The delegate tally at the convention was:
Jimmy Carter - 2,129
Ted Kennedy - 1,150
14 others - 66
Teddy K. refused to drop out with a deficit of 979 delegates. This was against a Democratic incumbent President. Clinton now has a 140 delegate deficit against BHO. 4 more super delegates threw their support to Clinton this week. Bet you didn't hear about them on MSNBC.