Bill's Disappearing Act

Wild Bill tries to take the spotlight on primary night, until someone gives him the hook:

The McLaughlin Group

Please join us for The McLaughlin Group, this weekend and every weekend. Check your local listings for time and channel, or visit www.mclaughlin.com for more information.

Every Family Has One

Black sheeps.

What would families be without them?

This week, one of President Bush's twin daughters, Jenna, was asked by Larry King if she were going to support John McCain to succeed her father. "I don't know," she replied, then added that she's "open to learning about the candidates."

Also this week, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, daughter of President Nixon and granddaughter-in-law of President Eisenhower, came out in support of Barack Obama.

You'll recall that two of President Reagan's children, Patti Davis and my former MSNBC co-host Ron Reagan, often proclaimed themselves liberals diametrically opposed to their father's policies.

My own sister is a Democrat who married Alan Colmes.

Presidents Nixon and Reagan are rolling in their graves, and President Bush is probably just rolling his eyes at the idealistic rebellion of their offspring. I suppose it's inevitable that powerful, famously partisan fathers would give rise to children who have an intellectual and individual need to think differently.

Memo to Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton: it's cool for you to be for McCain.

Yo, O! Maybe YOU Should Go!

An Open Letter to Senator Barack Obama:

What's all this ludicrous talk that Hillary Clinton should drop out of the Democratic race? We all know she's not going anywhere. She just won the Pennsylvania primary (clobbering you, I might add). She's got some momentum now, has won the big, industrial states, and has new life to her fundraising.

Of the two candidates in this race, it is YOU, Senator Obama, who should voluntarily drop out.

You say you are a man of "unity." And yet, your continued struggle with Mrs. Clinton has rent deep and profound and possibly irreparable divisions within the Democratic party. Nothing would show "unity" better right now than your stepping aside. A true gentleman, which you also claim to be, would toss his coat on the ground and allow the lady to pass. (Or "lady," as it were.)

You also claim to hold dear your Christian faith. As you therefore know, Christians are supposed to model their lives after Christ's example of selflessness and sacrifice, to supercede your own ego, and to show you live your life according to you word.

Senator Obama: put on hold your political ambitions for the sake of your party. That would be a pure "class move"---but then again, "class warfare" seems to be your stock-in-trade. You can "change" all that with one deft exit.

Think of all you'll do for Hillary, too. She'll be less "bitter," so she can stop "clinging" to those Crown Royal shots and made-up fantasies of sniper fire. Your withdrawal will get Bill off her back too, for which she will owe you a huge debt of gratitude (the Secretary of State job? Or perhaps you'd prefer a lifetime Supreme Court appointment?).

You talk incessantly about "bringing people together," but your record shows a complete inability and/or unwillingness to bridge gaps or work across party lines. What would signal your capacity to do that better than bowing out so your party can "come together? What would be a greater example of "change" than you pulling a complete 180 and withdrawing from the race?

If you really want to show "unity," then go, O. This is your moment.

Yes, you can.

Politics of Reality

President Bush is constantly criticized for playing "the politics of fear" whenever he refers to the Islamic terror threat.  When Rudy Giuliani was running for president, his campaign produced an ad that featured footage of the burning, smoking mass that used to be the World Trade Center.  He too was accused of "playing the fear card." 

Now Hillary Clinton is being attacked for "playing to our fears" by airing an ad in Pennsylvania that shows Osama bin Laden.  Barack Obama jumped all over her for it, saying we need to move on from "fear tactics" and that her ad was all about "scoring political points."

What does he think he's doing out there?  Running for dogcatcher?  Of course she's trying to score political points, as is he, by pointing out that she's trying to score political points.

Here's the bigger political point:  Hillary made the decision 15 months ago to run on her so-called "experience."  She hopes that flashing the image of bin Laden will reinforce the idea that she's better prepared than her opponent, Senator Deer-in-the-Headlights, to deal with the real threats coming at us.

We SHOULD be afraid.  Despite significant progress in killing and capturing top and mid-level al Qaeda and other terrorists, Islamic radicalism is still the most dangerous enemy we face.  Jimmy Carter, Obama's "mentor" of sorts, thinks we can just hug it out with Hamas and other terrorists.  Obama believes in "talking" to them.  (By the way, Carter talked and hugged and hugged and talked and Hamas still blew off his request that they renounce terror.)

A few years ago, Hillary criticized Giuliani and other Republicans who aired ads featuring footage from September 11, but now she's doing the same thing, because she knows they were right to do it.

We don't live in a fantasy world, filled with rainbows and puppies.  We live in a country that remains the number one target of Islamic terrorists.  We should feel fear.  We should be wary.  We should be dealing in reality about the threat, rather than anesthetizing ourselves with wishful thinking that if only we had Obama, all of our enemies would go away. (In fact, Obama is so weak and sympathetic to some of their causes that the enemy is rooting for him.)

There ARE threats facing us.  They are real, and they are powerful, and they are deadly.  If Obama wants to pretend the threats aren't there, or that he'll be able to work his charismatic magic on our enemies and make them disappear, he is certainly free to indulge that fantasy.

Hillary, for all her faults, knows better.  And so do we.

Begetting and Begatting

Democratic spinners say that once the primaries end in early June, the superdelegates need to make a choice between Hillary and Obama in order to "avoid an intra-party civil war."

Here's news: the civil war is already going on. And it's hardly "civil."

The Democratic primary contest begat Hillary vs. Obama. Hillary vs. Obama begat women vs. blacks. It also begat Hillary vs. MoveOn.org vs. Michael Moore vs. blue-collar white voters vs. Hispanics vs. Jewish voters vs. young voters vs. older voters vs. poorer voters vs. more highly educated voters vs. liberals vs. moderates.

The Democratic race has more begetting going on than Genesis.

The divisions are deep and real and serious. The core constituencies of the Democratic party are at each other's throats, with no sign of retreat or surrender anywhere.

Despite the candidates' campaign themes of "unity," they're not doing a lot of it in practice.

Hillary vs. Obama may, in fact, beget President McCain. Who will, in turn, beget real unity.