Taking the high road (to milk) or distinguish himself from the Sen. Barack Obama-Sen. Hillary Clinton Democratic public squabble that broke out last week, Presidential hopeful, John Edwards told ABC News, "It makes me kind of sad, actually.It's entertaining, but I don't think it's what we should be focused on right now. I think the country's faced with a war and huge challenges at home. These sort of back-and-forth personal interactions I don't think are helpful for America."
He is right, but for now, he is irrelevant.
If the exchange was between Obama and Edwards or Clinton and Edwards, it would have been no story.Instead, it was about two major television stars—Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Barack Obama is Abe Lincoln, John Kennedy, and Sen. Biden’s “Mr. Clean” wrapped into one.He is surging in name recognition as the U.S. Army surges into Iraq.More than anything else, he is black with an Arab-sounding name—which means controversy.He is also brilliant, charismatic, but a political neophyte.His campaign is oozing with attention.
In the other corner, Hillary Clinton is a politician in her own right.She is a woman running for President with a real chance of winning.She is the bane of the conservatives, the husband of the hated (or the loved), and she her own person.She is also willing to “deck” her opponent as she forewarned earlier this month although some say she was talking about Republicans.
Her campaign is also oozing with attention.
The tussle could be Biden vs. Edwards, Richardson vs. Biden or anyone else.But, it wasn’t.
Nor, was it really about Hollywood, or movie mogul, David Geffen, a former Clinton political playmate.
In reality, it was the first round of the Clinton versus Obama bout which for now has race, gender, sex (as in Bill Clinton), hate and theatrics that has kept Presidential politics “hot” while indeed a war debate divides our nation’s future and Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith eat into our psyche.
Edwards, who impressed many during his debate against Veep Dick Cheney and scored points on the campaign trial in 2004 lacks the rod that will attract the charge.He lacks “ooze”.While it might be a long way to Iowa, New Hampshire, Super Tuesday or even Super Super Tuesday, for now, the best he and others can do is be a commentator of the real match between the King and Queen of Ooze—Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
That might not be fair, then, it is the positive and only difference he can make until the real knockout punch or squeal occurs in the Democratic primary race that causes Clinton or Obama to ooze from a sore a real political blow.
Obama and Clinton are celebrities, but that doesn't make them Presidential material. Why doesn't the serious media focus on their political attributes and stop wasting everyone's time with the stuff ET delights in?
Written by SL King
on 4/24/2007
We need Hilary as President & John McCain as Vice President.
John should switch parties to be with Hilary, that would give him a chance for 16 years in White House.
Written by Bill Dixon
on 3/4/2007
There are a lot of people questioning BO experience. I would like to know what king of experience they have themselves. When MLK became a leader and took his dream to change the world he was 1/2 the age of BO. Lot of folks are hiding behing the experience factor as a way to say they are against a colored person running for the US pres
Written by Remy McCoy
on 2/27/2007
Barack would make a great Vice President for Hillary, which would lead him to the WH down the road
Written by Libby
on 2/27/2007
You are right about John Edwards being the very qualified but so is Hiliary Clinton but obviuosly John Edwards isn't that smart or he would be appealing to the rules of politics and the media meaning controversy and disagreement brings you the people's knowledge of you and their vote.Clinton will win because Obama is "inexperienced".Look for John Edwards to sit on the sideline and MAYBE be the VP.
Written by Johnnie
on 2/27/2007
It is good to know Obama is NOT smearing Hillary at all!
He is the only Fresh thinking Candidate that I am voting for and busting my ass to get everyone i meat to do the same
WOW a black man and a women running.. Who cares
what it comes down to is what they plan on doing with the US after Bush gets dune fucking it up!!!
And i am sorry to burst all your bubbles but Obama is the only one that has a solid plan to fix the mess we are in..
Now i would put more reasons behind this but DO your own research.. you will see
OBAMA 2008!!
Written by Brian
on 2/27/2007
Yes, that's right. And besides, the Present Occupant ran TWICE for PRESIDENT, for goodness sake, even though he actually only got elected one of those times... and Edwards has much more on the ball than he does.
Written by Lynne
on 2/26/2007
Tina - Last time, the ticket was KERRY - Edwards. It was the clueless, slow-to-react John Kerry who lost the election. John Edwards provided the only electricity on the ticket. And if you recall, the vote was extremely close - down to one state, Ohio. And some say that the Dems may have actually won due to voting irregularities and uncounted absentee ballots that were later officially reported by the state. Edwards was responsible not only for the high turnout and close vote but he also gained invaluable experience campaigning as a VP candidate. Unlike Hilary or Obama, Edwards not only has the senate experience but he has run as a vice-presidential candidate before. Even sports teams "lose" once in a while but that still does not preclude them from becoming champions at some point. Ditto John Edwards.
Written by Sam Iam
on 2/26/2007
I like the idea that a woman or a black man could conceivably become president of our country. But that doesn't make me pick either (or any) of these candidates. I am leaning heavily toward Obama based on his philosophies & intelligence. So, his health-care plan, as outlined in Audacity of Hope, doesn't have a lot of substance. For the most part I agree with his stance. I'm not worried that he is not a 'seasoned' politician. I honestly think politicians are much of what's wrong with politics. I say we give him a chance. If Bush hasn't blown up the world, Obama's not going to. I'm voting Obama.
Written by Adry 5
on 2/26/2007
I'm sorry. Didn't Edwards lose already? If he's such an adult, perfect candidate, what happened last time? I'm not saying he's not smart or worthy, but he didn't get the nomination before. What's different now?
Written by Tina Gates
on 2/26/2007
Written by
on 2/25/2007
Obama is my man. Edwards or Gore would be great also. I would love a woman president, but Hilary is no Bill. Of course she would be much better than Condy.
Written by Peter R Bromer
on 2/25/2007
Hillary expected all Dems to step aside while she gets coronated the nominee. Thats what happened in NY when she ran for Senator. Everyone rolled over for her Royal Thighness. It is great that Obama can give her some competition. I dont think she will be the nominee.
Written by Daryl Washington Brooklyn NY
on 2/25/2007
how insightful... obama and clinton stand heads and shoulders above the other contenders for the 2008 democratic president nomination. there, i just rewrote your article in a sentence, without resorting to a stupid, stupid word like "ooze."
Written by gerald
on 2/25/2007
Written by Phred
on 2/25/2007
Does anybody really want Lady Macbeth for President
Does anybody want a president justout of short pants.
Richardson should be the nominee. It is time for the Democrats to get serious.
Written by TOC
on 2/25/2007
Ooze is the "Gravitas" of this campaign. Just be sure to watch where you step.
Written by Phred
on 2/25/2007
Yep, Obama is black and Hilary is female: two "types" that to date, have never been elected president of this country. Regrettably in a sense, the time for either one of them to hold the top leadership position is not now (2008). Perhaps later, but definitely not now.
A spat between the two though is as entertaining as publicly shaving one's head or having numerous men claim paternity of your infant or dibs on your dead body.
Hil has been around awhile and did the stand-by-your-man thing, not out of love of course, but for her political ladder climbing/clawing future. Barack is the new kid on the block. As such, he attracts attention more out of curiosity than as a sure thing.
Hilary is a shrill shrew whose position at any given time depends on the polls and Barack is way too insecure about himself and his experience or lack thereof. Neither one of these drama queens is fit to lead this country - especially considering the critical mess we are all in at the moment.
John Edwards is not only "electable" but he is seasoned (unlike Obama) and non-divisive and decisive (unlike Hilary). He is intelligent, level-headed, relates well to most people, has a normal family and seems fairly genuine. He is also a pretty smart dude to sit on the sidelines as the two entertainers both sling, "ooze" and wrestle in the mud.
Americans need a truly elected president whose smarts and experience can help restore the extremely unbalanced and enfeebled country we have become. This president must not be elected on the sole history-making basis of gender or race but on proven ability, bold visionary ideas and a real track record.
John Edwards is the only viable candidate who meets this criteria.
Written by Sam Iam
on 2/25/2007
Actually, so far the discord between these two candidates shows how dysfunctional the Democratic Party really is. No wonder they weren't able to field a candidate to beat Bush. Please take note everyone, Iran launched a rocket today that penetrated 94 miles into "space"---uhhhh....I think we have a problem here Houston! Whoever our next President is better be more than a tough talking big mouth--must have foreign relations experience and have the stones to throw a few fastballs to wake the rest of the world out of their coma! I'm starting to think Isreal is our only hope for victory and stablization in the Middle East, so we better take care of our allies a little better--we're going to need them! We are the USA and I want to see something for my 6 figure tax bill other than the bs rhetoric and dead service personel!
Written by Brian
on 2/25/2007
Actually this article was written well. It brought out many things that will make the run for office interesting at least for the Democrats.
Written by Judy T. Lloyd
on 2/25/2007
Brian, you are right--John Edwards is the only "adult" candidate in this race, and he is the one we should be watching and concentrating on. But as long as it's all about gender and race or other "groundbreaking" characteristics that might capture media interest, he'll lose out. I hope the Democrats wake up before it's too late!
Written by Lynne
on 2/25/2007
maybe your right or maybe your wrong, we will see. so far edwards makes more sense then the top two. i am leaning to edwards, he can face the best of the top leaders in the world, and that is what i have to look at, besides our country,s problems to which he shows a return to pres, roosevelt,s economic new deals days for which i was brought up in. tony sacco
E-mail
Print
It's Obama vs. Clinton for the Ooze. 
To
Buzz Right Back on this article