The Daily Detour

Is Bill the attack dog being muzzled?

I've had this post in the hopper for a few days, what with all the other issues going on out in the blogosphere. We've touched on it before, but what was originally a mildly distracting concern has blossomed into a very significant problem for Camp Clinton. Former president Bill Clinton's role as attack dog has now found its way into Newsweek's coverage of the campaign. But as Dick Morris, a former Clinton advisor and one who knows him best, points out, this side of Bill is nothing new. Even Christopher Hitchens, with whom I rarely agree, weighs in on this issue.

It seems everyone is trying to muzzle him. And the latest reports coming out of the Camp Clinton are that the strategists there are beginning to recognize the evolution of Bill's role from an asset to a liability. They are now trying to find a different role for him in the campaign. That's quite an evolution when you think of it--that Bill Clinton, who even many of us on the conservative side of the aisle recognize as a phenomenal politician, is now being relegated from his position of strength because of how it may hurt Hillary's chances at election. Wow!

Just this week in an interview with ABC News' Cynthia McFadden, Hillary assured McFadden that she can keep Bill under control. As you might imagine, the blogosphere is buzzing over that claim, recalling the track record in that department with someone who has a confirmed lack of impulse control.

And as we watch this newest strategy for Bill play out, I expect it will be a preview of things to come should Hillary find her way into the presidency. Friends, it is not difficult to imagine what a Hillary presidency would be like with Bill trying his best to stay in the shadows. Just like the first Clinton presidency, we'll be getting 2 for the price of 1.

UPDATE: Here's Dick Morris' compelling take on the co-president in waiting.

John Edwards bowing out

Early yesterday morning, Sen. John Edwards announced his decision to withdraw from the race for the presidency. On the local news tonight, there was a poll if John Edward's decision to drop out of the race was too soon, or not soon enough. Two-thirds of the respondents suggested it was long overdue. I would have to agree with that assessment.

Either way you view this development in the Democratic presidential race, some political watchers may still engage in a seemingly-theoretical debate about which of Edward's options would have had the biggest impact on the Democratic nomination. His decision to drop out effectively narrows the field to Obama and Hillary, a foregone conclusion in many people's minds.

However, the FOX News coverage presented the converse possibility:

He said he would be “suspending” his campaign, leaving open the possibility that he could leverage some of his pledged delegates to influence the outcome of the national convention. However, no one, including Edwards, expects the suspension to be lifted for him to re-emerge as a candidate.

Maybe he will, maybe he won't. To leverage his delegates could certainly make him a "Kingmaker" at the convention. Senator Edwards doesn't strike me as being someone who would engage in that kind of political manipulation if the opportunity presented itself. (But if that candidate were someone like Hillary....?)

Either way, it's safe to say that one of the four remaining top-tier candidates (McCain, Romney, Obama and Hillary) will become the next president of the United States. That reality brings the pragmatism of my (idealistic pragmatist) political philosophy to the fore. (More on that later, when I give an official TDD endorsement, for whatever it's worth.) If I can pull it off, we'll be presenting some further indepth analysis here on all four of these candidates over the weekend. A small attempt to help you get ready for Super Tuesday.

UPDATE: One other thought...I've never been able to fully understand Edward's "Two America's" idea about the haves and have-nots. Not that I don't get what he's trying to say, nor do I disagree with the need to equip the have-nots with the means to overcome their circumstances. I've just always wondered in which of those Two America's Sen. Edwards would put himself? I guess we'll never know...

UPDATE: Yet another Gary Varvel rendering of the surprising situation in which Edwards and Giuliani find themselves. Who would have predicted seeing them leave the presidential carnival together?

A BIG "Happy Birthday" is in order

Amidst all of the political hullabaloo we almost overlooked a very important birthday. We have a new 1-year-old on our hands, and you're all invited to the party. And no, I'm not talking about our little man Mark. Today The Daily Detour turns 1. (Cue the streamers, balloons, and whoopie cushions!)

One year ago today I ventured into this previously-unknown arena of the blogosphere on an experimental quest to see if we could create a community built on critical thinking, cultural analysis and mutual civility. From my vantage point today, my initial desires have been surpassed by all of you, who, thankfully, represent a broad cross-section of political and theological persuasions. Because of that, our community here is all the better for it. (If you are interested in taking a trip down memory lane, feel free to go back and read The Daily Detour's first post.)

It's hard to believe that this blog has actually been maintained for so long. I certainly have been lacking in the sleep department with my many late nights of blogging. But it's for a good cause, right? My wife is especially surprised, since I found out earlier this year that she was secretly waiting to see if I would actually follow through on this undertaking. (Honey, I told you we'd get 'er done.)

I still haven't hosted a TDD blog party yet so we can all put names to faces, though I have had a few opportunities to introduce people from this community. It usually goes something like this, "Hey Andy, this is D.J., ya' know, from the blog." (And then the light goes on, and we are strangers no more.) Aaah, The Daily Detour, bringing humanity together. Hopefully, we can pull off a blog party sometime later this year. In the meantime, I would be curious to know where you all are logging in from. If you're so inclined, post a comment that includes your screen name, state/country, and anything else that suits your fancy. Many of you I know, many of you I don't. So, whether you're an old timer or you just stumbled upon this growing community today, stop by the comment board and drop us a line.

It's been a great year, and I have to thank all of you as I always do during our regular TDD check-ups for your faithfulness in continuing to stop by the blog, as well as, your willingness to add your 2-cents to the various discussions. I really do consider it an honor and a privilege that you think there is something I've spouted in this posts worthy of coming back to read so regularly. I hope it has been as profitable for you as it has for me. I trust that in the coming year we can take this little excursion to the next level and invite even more people to make this detour a part of their daily routine. Imagine how big the birthday party will be next year!

A change on the horizon

I meant to update you all sooner, but with all the political action, I let it slip down the priority list. It appears that there will be a change coming for the Crane family. It was announced publicly at our church on Sunday night that they are reducing the number of pastoral staff. As a part of that decision, the church leadership has decided to eliminate my position, primarily because of the financial constraints of this year's fiscal budget.

For many people, to be put in such a position would be considered a detrimental development. But if God is still in control, which we believe He is, then He'll guide us from this season of ministry into whatever is coming next. In the meantime, I would appreciate the prayers of those of you who are the praying type as I look for a new job. I have the option of staying at the church until the end of June, so I'll be knocking on whatever doors present themselves between now and then. (If any of you have any leads, let me know. :) I'll keep you all posted as this situation develops.

An early report from the Sunshine State

Sen. John McCain has been going toe-to-toe with Gov. Mitt Romney. And with 73% of the precincts reporting, McCain is beating Romney 36% to 31%. This victory certainly bodes well for McCain's increasing position as the GOP frontrunner. However, Super Duper Tuesday is less than a week away. And that will be the primary indicator of where both parties stand.

In a related surprise, be looking for Rudy Giuliani to drop out of the race in the next day or so. His distant third place finish in Florida is proving that his "late-surge-from-behind" strategy was not as strategic as originally predicted. His looks to endorse McCain, which is going to created an interesting situation for the Romney Camp.

Another TDD prediction: Don't be surprised to see Huckabee drop out not too long after Super Duper Tuesday. On the GOP side, this is shaping up into a 2-horse race between McCain and Romney. One of those two candidates is much more conservative than the other. See if you can figure out which one it is?

UPDATE: Giuliani makes it official by putting his support behind McCain. Meanwhile, Gov. Arnold Scwarzenegger is also set to endorse McCain early Thursday morning. These key endorsements do not bode well for Romney's candidacy. Super Duper Tuesday is a presumably a make-or-break win for Romney.

UPDATE: I had intended to include this Gary Varvel cartoon depicting John "Rambo", but forgot until I went over to Varvel's blog to find another gem. Pardon the oversight.

Hunker'd down in the bunker

Well, I'm sitting here in the recently renovated "fort" (a.k.a. Mommy and Daddy's walk-in closet) watching the weather reports. As I write from inside the bunker, a tornado has apparently been reported in the small town of Clermont, which is only about 3 or 4 miles from our house. And there have been reports of winds up to 80 mph. For those of you in Indiana, keep your heads down. It may be headed your way, if it hasn't arrived already. (This picture I borrowed from the "Free Republic" folks captures the situation faced by me and my little junior grunts.)

Whenever these kinds of weather systems come through, I nonchalantly suggest to the boys, "Hey, why don't we build a fort in Mommy and Daddy's closet?" To which they are always enthusiastically amenable. So, as I write, they are spread out on the pillows and blankets, with their flashlights and snacks close at hand. We've got the Cars movie playing on the portable DVD player (until the electricity goes out). In the meantime, we're ready for anything. (Hopefully, when we come out, we'll find out who's ahead in Florida.) Signing off from inside the bunker... :)

UPDATE: And just as quickly, the adventure's over. The storms have moved on toward those of you in Ohio. We've been given the all-clear. We're coming out. What year is it? Is the presidential campaign still going on? (Oh, of course it is. It never stops.) Now, I just have to convince the boys that they can't sleep in the closet all night. That, and I'll be picking up Wheat Thins for weeks to come. It was fun while it lasted.

Bush's State of the Union

Tonight at 9 p.m. (EST) President Bush will be giving his final State of the Union address as president. So, for all you political junkies out there, settle and see what he has to say about the state of affairs. I'll be weighing in tomorrow soliciting your reaction on the speech.

UPDATE: If you were expecting any major surprises in President Bush's last State of the Union address, you were probably disappointed. It included many of the same themes that have defined his presidency, which for some is a sign of his steady conviction, for others, a sign of his stubborn hubris. (For those of you who may have missed the speech, you can read the text here.) If you did see the speech, what did you think?

Barack versus Jesse

I suggested yesterday that we could do a lot worse than Barack Obama by making a reference to Jesse Jackson. To be fair, I may have revise my comment. In a recent editorial, Father Jonathan Morris compares Barack and Jesse on the selective application of their religious faith. His analysis is worth considering, particularly for those of you who may be smitten by Obama's positive message. His position on abortion gets overshadowed by his sunny disposition.

While were on the subject, I must say, I find it extremely difficult to understand how professing Christians can justify a pro-choice position on the issue of abortion. The Bible is replete with multiple passages which make a strong case for the reality of human life in the womb (Exodus 21:22-23; Psalm 51:5, 139:13-16). The Christian has a responsibility to act on their behalf (Proverbs 24:11-12) and to "speak up for those who cannot speak up for themselves" (Proverbs 31:8). For we are all made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6).

If this is what the Bible says about the value of humanity and the gravity of unjustifiably taking human life, where does a Christian justify abortion? In fact, in his book, Family Driven Faith, Dr. Voddie Baucham addresses this inconsistency. He writes about Dr. Peter Singer's view on abortion. Dr. Singer, a leading bioethicist, advocates abortion. But he goes radically further. Dr. Singer actually advocates that parents should have the option to exterminate their children after birth if they determine that the child is not viable. You see, his view on such life-and-death issues is built around his definition of personhood. A person is truly a person only when they have self-awareness and the capacity to communicate and sustain their own life without help. Therefore, until a human being reaches that state, he/she is expendable.

Dr. Baucham's point is this:

What is the difference between my thirteen-month-old son and a six-month old fetus? The answer is, location. If it is acceptable to kill a child in the womb, it is also acceptable to do so outside the womb. Peter Singer is not being morbid; he is being consistent. The only difference between him and many Christians who take a pro-choice stance in the abortion debate is the coherence of his view of man. (p. 79)

Friends, you may recall my rationale for how I come to vote for a particular political candidate, that my starting point is an evaluation of their position on the sanctity of human life. And there are many who would challenge that philosophy, suggesting that we can't just be a one-issue voter. I agree. We shouldn't just be one issue voters. But rarely does our evaluation of the options come down to one issue. Thus, the starting point for me is the the issue of life. As I asked back in June,

When considering a candidate's political convictions, I wonder, what is the price tag on a human life? I mean, how much of a tax credit would I need to receive to sufficiently justify eroding basic human rights?

I said it back in June and I still believe it today as the election draws ever closer. And no matter whether the candidate of our choice is a Democrat or a Republican, it would be irresponsible to diminish the significance of this issue when we get to the ballot box.

The Clintons and civil rights

Yesterday's post was centered on Obama's big win in South Carolina. In thinking more about that development, there was one other thought that came to mind about Hillary's push for the White House. (I think I may have picked this up from someone, though I can't remember who with all the political commentary flying around lately):

If "America's first black president" and his wife were really serious about championing the key democratic issue of civil rights, why not step aside and put your support and considerable influence behind a black presidential candidate who actually has a legitimate shot of making unprecedented history for minorities? Of course, that's too much to ask.

The truth is that despite what Hillbillary might say on the campaign trail, their actions don't seem to back up the claims. In fact, Hillary is much less concerned about promoting the cause of disenfranchised minorities and more concerned about her own self-promotion.

Naturally, I'm leaning well toward the right and hoping that one of the conservative candidates takes the final prize, but if we have to settle for a black Democratic president, we could do a lot worse than Barack Obama. (Anyone remember Jesse Jackson's 1984 and 1988 bids for the White House?.)

As this contest continues to unfold and the stakes get higher, it will be fascinating to watch the real Bill and Hillary rise to the surface. As hard as they may try to hide it, the pressures of the campaign and the looming possibilities of failure will continue to shed light and what we can expect from Team Clinton should they make it all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

UPDATE: Oh, and did you hear? Both Caroline Kennedy, daughter of the late JFK, and her uncle, Sen. Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama. That can't be good for Hillary to have members of the original Democratic dynasty step out against her. Things are heatin' up, folks.

UPDATE: Make that three Kennedys. And here's Gary Varvel's creative take on the endorsements.

Obama picks up the Big Mo coming out S.C.

We rolled back into Indy tonight after a good conference in West Virginia earlier today. Meanwhile, the Democratic primary was underway in South Carolina. Barack Obama swept to a decisive victory in the South Carolina by taking 55% of the vote to Hillary's 27%. While she is still ahead in the delegate count, Obama has regained some momentum after his initial victory in Iowa.

As much as Team Clinton has tried to downplay what was considered an inevitable outcome in South Carolina, this doesn't help their cause. There has been considerable punditry over the ongoing strategy of the Clintons. As I've mentioned, even Democratics are getting weary and wary of it all. Yesterday's op-ed page in The Indianapolis Star included a column from local editorialist (and established liberal) Ken Bode. Bode's assessment was less than flattery to say the least.

The Clinton strategy which has inherited so much negative reaction is evidence of desperation. Obama's victory today will only underscore that. There's more to come, I'm afraid. We can only hope. :)