Some political guidance comes from the mouths of babes

A minuscule slice of the U.S. population -- the children of big-shot politicians -- suddenly seems to have emerged as a major influence in the spirited Democratic presidential contest.

Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, in shifting from a neutral position to an endorsement of Barack Obama, said support for the Illinois senator among his four daughters influenced his decision.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, who followed Casey's lead and signed up with the Obama team, had this to say in a conference call with reporters Monday: “To continue to stay silent would be, as my 12-year-old daughter, Abigail, likes to say, ‘Awkward, Mom, awkward.’ ”

Obama obviously appreciates these shows of support (every superdelegate counts at this point in the race). But his campaign may want to consider suggesting to backers that they put a lid on calling such attention to their kiddies. Astute strategists that they are, his advisers assuredly recall that perhaps the most famed reference to a child in contemporary politics didn't work out so well.

It was during the second half of President Carter's one and only debate ...

with his Republican challenger in the 1980 campaign, Ronald Reagan, that the incumbent offered this comment:

"I had a discussion with my daughter, Amy, the other day, before I came here, to ask her what the most important issue was. She said she thought nuclear weaponry -- and the control of nuclear arms."

Carter's intent was to humanize an issue that, as he said a few seconds later, he viewed as the "single major responsibility" of a president. He went on to question Reagan's commitment to arms control.

But his invocation of Amy, who had just turned 13 at the time, as a policy counselor was poorly received (even though this was before Comedy Central was around to widely ridicule the comment, or even cable news networks to endlessly replay it).

In part because of this moment -- and in part because Reagan succinctly asked voters to ponder his now-famed question: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" -- the former California governor emerged as the clear winner of the Oct. 28 rhetorical face-off. And a few days later, what most analysts had assumed would be a close election broke decisively his way.

Don't expect Obama to emulate Carter with forced campaign mentions of his two daughters, Malia, 9, and Sasha, 6.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[dave]

the biblical reference of obscure and corrupted meaning, drawn from its context in psalm 8:
'out of the mouths of babes and infants you have drawn a defense against your foes, to silence enemy and avenger.'
so, would anyone seriously argue that reagan drew his strategic defense initiative out of the mouth of carter's babe, interpreting amy's concerns his own way?
but what about that awkward saying, 'children should be seen and not heard'? and how awkward it was when mrs. mccain wished to mint political profit for her husband from her maternal instincts for her adopted daughter from bangladesh, while her husband seemingly can't wait to bomb millions of children in distant deserts.
some say that children and the elderly will tell the truth.
i guess not always, they won't.
but whether they do or don't, is often easy to tell.
what to make of their truths or their lies, is still the responsibility of those who listen to them.
maybe it would be fine to listen to what people have to say, without regard to race, sex, age, position etc...
and then make reasonable and responsible choices, and decisions that benefit all.

[ck]

So now Democratic officials are turning to their kids to help them decide whom to support in the presidential primary??? It's a good thing the kids don't care about things like the capital gains tax, which Obama wants to raise by some huge (but of course as yet unspecified) amount, if nominated and elected. You can read about that in the Mar. 31 MoneyNews.com. Is it astounding and ludicrous to anyone else that Obama has come this far, this fast, based on his extremely slim record as an elected official and lots of words signifying nothing? All claims he makes are thin as the air surrounding his thousands of vacuous words, including the claim about being against the Iraq war "from the start." He wasn't even a U.S. Senator when the U.S. invaded Iraq and therefore couldn't even have voted on it. How can anyone know how he would've actually voted if he'd been in the hot seat then? Very likely he would've merely voted "present" just as he's done hundreds of other times, rather than take a stand one way or the other on tough issues. Is the Democratic Party still drinking this guy's kool-aid? It should be obvious to anyone capable of any form of logic that nobody in this country comes as far and with such lightning speed as this guy has without the backing of huge money and behind-the-scenes power of the kind he doesn't want anyone to know about. Does the name Rezko ring a bell? And that's just the "mobster" type backer of whom we've learned so far, the one about whom Obama only recently sort of came clean. What other secrets need to come to light about this guy? Has anyone in the media thoroughly investigated where Obama's real backing is coming from? In fact, are there any investigative journalists left out there? Oh, I forgot, just like our elected officials, they've all completely abdicated what used to be the role of intelligent, courageous, responsible adults, and they're now depending on their kids to decide the important issues for them, just so they won't appear "un-cool," "un-hip" or "awkward." Like the children of Hamelin town, the Democrats appear to be following Obama, the pied piper, in some sort of mesmerized daze, even toward their own ultimate demise. I weep for the future of this country.

[4 year old]

if i lied, i go to my room.

hilary should go to her room for a year.