[T]he ad itself wasn't as effective a pitch for Clinton as was the indignant response of Barack Obama's surrogates. An Obama spokesman condemned the spot as "the politics of fear."Obama also needs to diffuse the distracting controversies that have lately beset his campaign involving verbal gaffes and impolitic personal associations so they don't continue to dog him going forward. Conservative talk show radio host Jerry Agar (WPTF-680 AM, Raleigh, NC) makes the case that Obama – who has been countering Clinton's charge that he lacks experience by claiming he has better judgment – has repeatedly betrayed a lack of judgment. If he cannot dispel a deepening unease amongst the traditional Dem base over the course of the next – and final – nine contests, the superdelegates will have to take this into consideration in their deliberations.
If Obama's supporters want to argue that their candidate can better handle these challenges than Clinton, then fine, they should do so. But for some unfathomable reason, they insist on drumming Osama bin Laden out of polite Democratic conversation, such as there is any these days.
The Wall Street Journal's Gerald Seib quite sensibly asks: "If there are uncomfortable subjects to be aired about Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton, isn't it better for Democrats to have them raised, aired and answered now rather than in October, with just weeks to go before a national vote?" It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but in their hearts Dems know he's right. Certainly party chairman Howard Dean knows it: He tells the WaPo he is "less concerned than a lot of Democrats" about the consequences of allowing the candidates to duke it out until there's only one left standing. "I wouldn't think anybody would drop out at this point, nor have I ever suggested anyone should."
Closure may prove costly to Dem party pooh-bahs in the end, so they should be careful what they wish for – or push for.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
