Don't it make your brown eyes blue?

January 13, 2008 by barbara

barbara writes


It has been reported that Barack Obama may have misted up just a wee bit in an allegedly unscripted moment. It happened yesterday when a Charleston house-husband approached him and said, “Hello.” It is not yet clear whether the alleged tear(s) formed in both of Obama’s eyes or just in one, and if the latter, which one. We'll be following up on that.

An Obama campaign insider who demanded anonymity, saying simply, “My ass will be grass,” waffled about the rumor that the Obama camp purchased several cartons of Bausch and Lomb’s artificial tears on the heels of Hillary Clinton’s deeply touching meltdown last week. “Are you suggesting that our man isn’t in touch with his inner lachrymosity?” the anonymous insider said with no small measure of defensiveness. Okay, that short exchange netted bupkes. There’s more!

Meanwhile, analysts are divided about the authenticity of the moment, its probable cause and its actual and potential outcome, both short and long-term, nationally and globally.

An MSNBC-FOX News poll showed Obama tanking and rising, rising and tanking, thereby averaging out to holding steady at 50-50.

A Mickey’s Diner poll generated the following responses to the question, “What impact will Obama’s tear(s) have on this election?”:

  • “Are you putting me on?” 7 responses (3 with eye rolls)
  • “Obama. Jeez, is he running for something?” 2 responses
  • “I am so, so, so sorry that man made him so sad. Gawd, what a terrible moment. Here’s what I think really happened.” 1 response (edited for length)
  • “Hey, lady, I’m only six years old.” 1 response

What’s really at stake here is whether Obama’s alleged tear(s) will be sufficient to mitigate against Hillary’s emotional response to, “How do you do it?” There is no evidence that Hillary initially responded by saying, “It depends on what, exactly, you mean by it.” In any case . . . .

BREAKING: This just in. It has just been reported that John Edwards may have misted up slightly . . . .

Posted in


Anonymous (not verified) | January 13, 2008 - 6:27pm

A post like this one will play well with the average Democratic voter, although it might be a wee bit "complicated" for most.

Keep trying though!


americangoy (not verified) | January 13, 2008 - 10:01pm

"We are a nation so accustomed to half-truths and complete lies that no one knows how to respond when someone fearlessly tells his truth a la Edwards. Framing that as random anger is Frank Luntz 101. Seems to force the labelee into fighting back. Rwemember flip-flopper?

Albatross is absolutely right. We’re all angry. And with just cause. We’ve been abused by BushCo. All of us. With the possible exception of Bush intimates and cronies. Crooks and liars, the whole lot of them. Wow! That’d be a great name for a blog!!"

I intensely dislike Hillary (ultimate pro politician, bought and paid for with hidden lobbyist money) and Obama (my platform is change! As president, I will change! change! change!)


Of course Gravel is a fringe, and now so is Edwards...


barbara says (not verified) | January 14, 2008 - 3:11pm

Well, what say we weave the fringe into something substantial? Because I, for one, am tired of seeing big money buy the presidency of this country. Let's not breathe life into the "Edwards is toast" meme. He's not. Patience. Patience. (This from she who unravels sometimes, too.)


Jean T (not verified) | January 14, 2008 - 9:35pm

The woman has a sense of humor!! And yes, please, Edwards is NOT toast at this time though undoubtedly some would like that to be true. I say, "Send him money!!"


barbara says (not verified) | January 15, 2008 - 1:44pm

Hey, Jean T., welcome back! FYI, there's a major fundraising initiative for Edwards, set for this Friday, January 18. Check out this link at Kos. I'm fed up and rising with rock stars and issue position du jour stuff. The only thing wrong with the Kerry/Edwards ticket was Kerry. We have another chance! When Susan surfaces, she will surely chastise me for this, but I am of sturdy peasant stock and I can take it. Sometimes. Kind of. More or less.


MLS (not verified) | January 15, 2008 - 2:41pm

"The only thing wrong with the Kerry/Edwards ticket was Kerry." Amen.
I am convinced that John Edwards is the only Dem. candidate
that stands a chance of becoming our next President. He has
the experience that Obama lacks and the decisiveness where
Hillary sometimes teeters.
I'm crossing my fingers, my toes, my heart on an Edwards

Hope all is going well for David. You remain in my thoughts often.


barbara says (not verified) | January 15, 2008 - 10:54pm

Hey, MLS! Welcome back to you as well! Been missing you here. And thanks for the wonderful cards! David has rallied once again and he's having a much better week than last.

I wish I felt omniscient with respect to this election. I don't. Not at all. So if I'm sounding like a know-it-all, that's not how I'm feeling. But my personal bias is that Edwards is our best hope. Would I support another Dem if that's how things shake out? Yes, I would. Another Republican is a totally unacceptable prospect.

So let's support our favorites with some measure of civility, because if push comes to shove, some of us may have to shift favorites before next November. Easier to do sans some of the mega-nastiness that's flying around out there.

Enjoy the sunshine and warmth!


susan | January 16, 2008 - 5:58pm

Susan is back and not gonna chastise Barb for nuthin'. I was never a big Kerry fan, though I do recall him doing a swell job in one of the debates, and making a speech or two that surprised and moved me. And can we please not forget that the man is basically decent, asking the famous "Who'll be the last to die for a mistake" question of Vietnam? And that he got slimed and gored by the liars of the Swift boat brigade? He has a hang-dog goofy demeanor and a tortured way of splitting hairs, and his campaign was lacklustre, but for this he deserves our snide derision? C'mon.

I like Edwards and would be delighted to have the "Party" settle on him, as I wrote here once before. My first choice is still Obama, but I'm not going to get into bashing Hillary or any of the Dems because we've got an election to win folks, and yeah, I'll take Hillary -- or Edwards or Obama or Richardson or Chumpy the Clown over any of the Repubs currently poking their heads out of their god-created caves.

I loved it when Huckabee called Bush arrogant and Romney pounced on him for it and Huckabee stumbled around explaining himself. So when we get into bashing our for-better-or-worse own, (and yeah, they are better) we just play to the other side's script. Unless you think Tinkerbell is going to appear and sprinkle pixie dust on the American electoral system, we've got to go with what we have and work like hell to change it. Grousing about Hillary, or Obama, seems counterproductive to me. Grousing about Republicans, or how we elect our leaders, is not. Okay, maybe grousing about anything is pointless, but it's a lot more justified when it's someone like Romney or the Huck.