Today: Struggles to Find Dem Guest; W Governed "from Far Right;" Teresa Blasted!

If there's one place where Democrats know they'll receive a warm reception, it's The Today Show. So take it as a sign of the depths of Dem depression that Katie Couric had to admit this morning that "with Dems licking their wounds" it was difficult for the show to find a Dem willing to come on!

You'd think that it would have been a cinch to find a leading Republican insider to talk about W's plans for the second term. So who did Today choose? Gillepsie, Frist, Hastert, maybe even Cheney? Nope, they went to a guy firmly on the outside, Today's favorite Republican, John McCain.

1. In one of the most unvarnished bits of liberal editorializing I've ever witnessed at Today, Matt Lauer expressed skepticism about W's ability to bring people together in his second term. Said Lauer: "He actually divided the country by governing from 'the far right.' Why should people trust him this time?"

2. McCain took a huge swipe at Kerry's notoriouly lackluster record as a Senator. "Speaking personally, If you work at it you can really enhance your effectiveness in the Senate," advised McCain!

3. McCain denied a Newsweek report that Kerry offered him, in return for accepting the VP nomination, control over the DOD and a say on all foreign policy

Then it was on to Katie's interview of PA Gov. Ed Rendell, who was still looking depressed. It was then that Katie mentioned Today's difficulty in booking a Dem this morning - a nice little insult to Rendell, letting everyone know he was far from the first choice!

A clearly unhappy Katie, still dressed in black, asked "the Dem Party was organized, the base energized, and W had low approval ratings. Why couldn't this be translated into victory? There must have been some problems in strategy."

Rendell cited the failure to respond quickly to the Swift Boat Vets, contrasting this with Bill Clinton's rapid response approach.

Rendell's response showed that the Dems still don't get it. He tried to define family values in terms of government programs. For him, it's all about "valuing families," meaning more government child care, health care, etc.

He added it was hard to make the case with terrorism and Iraq in the background.

With rising frustration in her voice, Katie said Dems are known for getting out the vote, and asked why young people didn't show up at the polls. Rendell claimed they did, but that overall turnout was up so the effect of young people was diminished. He bragged about Kerry's win in PA.

Katie: "It was a big loss to have Daschle lose. How will the Dem party retool and go forward?"

Rendell cited 1964 and LBJ's huge victory, whereas by 1968 the Republicans had won back the WH. Rendell: "This is not a time for hand wringing and soul searching. If not for 9/11 and Iraq we'd be talking about Pres. Kerry."

Russert: "The party has to come to grips with itself. There is a disconnect in large parts of the country with the Dem party. Dems have to find words, language to speak to people of faith."

Note that once again, the Dems are addressing the issue in superficial terms. They discuss the need to find ways to "speak" about values, about the need to find "the right language," rather than looking into their souls and realizing that their values are simply out of synch with those of most Americans.

Russert gave his list of people he expected to leave the administration. Some were predictable: Powell, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft. But I was surprised when he also mentioned Condi Rice, saying "she has to figure out what she wants to do with her career."

At the beginning of the second half-hour, Evan Thomas of Newsweek appeared to tout a special Newsweek edition telling the inside story from the campaign. By far the most interesting comments were his absolute massacring of Teresa Heinz Kerry. I couldn't type fast enough to keep up, but among his blasts at her:

"A negative for the campaign, a bad campaigner, all about her, very demanding, a drag on her husband."

I think it's true, Teresa Heinz-Kerry was a liability in her husband's campaign. Laura Bush was an asset to her husband's. While neither woman is being elected for public office, their actions and their speech reflect on the way in which each Presidential candidate is viewed. Laura Bush is an elegant, articulate, impeccably-dressed woman, while Teresa Heinz appears over-touseled and off balance (sometimes when she walks, she truly does appear to have balance issues, which might be caused, as someone here suggested through a medical or medication issue). Given her resources, I think she should have met with an image consultant. I'm sure that First Lady Bush does; however, I also have the feeling that she simply has natural good taste and style. However, let me get away from the Women's Wear Daily review, and back up to what matter's most: the minds. None of the women on the campaign trail could be called stupid; however, I think prudence and skill are required when making the commitment to the Presidential walk. Teresa should have checked her facts before she made mention of Laura's employment record. (And, regarding that incident, Laura Bush was extraordinarily kind and gracious despite Teresa's gaffe.) While the wives of candidates and Presidents have always had opinions and projects and have, for the most part, been well spoken, in our modern world these qualities are even more important. It is not enough to have a First Lady who is attractive and appropriate in social situations; it is increasingly important to have a partner who is clearly able to hold her own in debates and match the intelligence of her partner, all the while promoting a dignified and thoughtful presence----which Laura Bush so obviously does. And another lady on the trail, Lynne Cheney, proved herself to be another gracious and very smart addition. In fact, maybe we should be making posters right now that say "Lynne Cheney, 2004." Why not? If we're ready for a female President (and she would be a smart one), why shouldn't that person be a Republican? Many Democratic votes would likely be captured.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.