Obama campaign: fighting women with women
I wonder why they didn’t see it coming.
It’s not as though Palin’s name hadn’t been mentioned as a possible VP candidate. Even a lowly blogger like me had done research on her many weeks ago, and had noticed that she was photogenic and compelling. It occurred to me that, if Obama rejected Hillary for VP (as most people expected him to do), McCain might be tempted to go with the relatively unknown and untested Palin in order to shore up his base while appealing to Hillary’s demographic.
Duh. It’s not exactly rocket science. Nor am I saying I was so extraordinarily brilliant to have had this amazing idea. It probably should have occurred to almost anyone who sat down and thought about it for just a moment.
So why was it that the Obama campaign seems to have been caught so flat-footed by the news? Why are they still searching for a strategy to counter Palin’s appeal?
The news now is that they are fighting fire with fire—or estrogen with estrogen. They’re sending out their female forces, including the much-maligned Hillary herself (is there no end to this woman’s suffering?), to campaign against Palin.
The idea that some sort of verbal catfight (is that an oxymoron?) is the way to go against Palin strikes me as odd. I can’t imagine why the sight of Hillary campaigning for one of the Men Who Done Her Wrong would be likely to draw her supporters to his side. But then again I’m not a campaign strategist.
What’s more, if the Obama campaign has decided that he needs women to fight his battles against women, why announce that fact? Doesn’t that make him look sort of—well—weak?
Although, speaking of weak, if the following is a good example of Obama’s personal efforts to counter Palin, he could use all the help can get:
The NY Times reports that Obama and his aides have decided that, in addition to sending out the female troops, the best strategy against Palin would be the one they’ve adopted for McCain: that she’s really Bush in disguise.
Trying this with McCain is iffy enough, since he is one of the Senate Republicans with the strongest history of bucking Bush, disagreeing with him prominently on immigration and torture, to name a couple of issues. But the strategy seems to have gained some traction: witness all those cries of “McSame” from Obama supporters. But the attempt to paint Palin with the same brush seems unimaginative, although I suppose it has the advantage of being parsimonious.
Obama is smart, however, in finally deciding that further attacks on Palin’s supposed lack of experience will only backfire and only highlight his own greater deficits. But the amount of logical torque in which the Obama campaign must engage in order to fit Palin into the Bush Procrustean Bed is revealed here:
Mr. Axelrod said the campaign would work instead to impress upon voters the seriousness of the race and continue to try to link the McCain-Palin team to President Bush.
While Mr. Obama did not aggressively challenge Ms. Palin, his advisers opened a new line of criticism to brand her as part of the Republican establishment.
“For someone who makes the point that she’s not from Washington, she looked very much like she’d fit in very well there when you see how she brings the attacks,” Mr. Axelrod said. “They all felt very familiar to Americans who are used to this kind of thing from Washington.”
Let’s see if I’ve gotten this straight: “Palin=Bush=Washington insider” because she criticized Obama. He’s the only true Washington outsider; everyone else is an imposter.
Palin may be many things—and no doubt she has a number of flaws that Obama could highlight in his campaign—but one thing she most definitely is not is a Washington insider or a Bush clone. Her outsider, reformer status is immediately apparent to anyone who has even a glancing familiarity with her biography, or who watched more than a few seconds of her speech on Wednesday night.
I have no idea who will ultimately win the Presidential race, but right now it seems to be a tossup. What I’ve seen from the Obama campaign ever since he clinched the nomination is a shocking lack of preparedness and a strange inability to adjust to changing circumstances.
I don’t know whether it will lose him the election. But if it doesn’t, I sincerely hope it isn’t a taste of what we’ll get from an Obama administration.
Also McSame works best with partisan democrats… Echo chamber thought does not win elections..
Ha! So if the liberal talking point says McCain is sexist for selecting a female running mate, what does that make Obama for adopting a strategy of fighting “estrogen with estrogen”? And does this mean Hillary is now a misogynist colluder? I’d better stock up on the popcorn for this unfolding spectacle.
I like to think many voters are able to think beyond the jingos and actually look at public records and statements. People that buy into jingos usually don’t do much voting anyway.
That last line was the one that jumped out to me the most. If Obama does win, will his administration be as pathetic and rag-tag as his campaign? The lack of preparedness, of good comebacks, of anything remotely resembling competence–it’s pretty sad. It does not bode well at all for an Obama administration.
You keep saying, “Obama is smart”. I don’t think that means what you think it means.
We have seen Obama do some incredibly dumb things, not the least of which was to compare his experience to running a campaign to her experience as mayor. This was tactically stupid on three levels.
One – He is now comparing his experience to the VICE presidential candidate. Let’s look at the possible outcomes— His is greater – to be expected he is the presidential candidate; His is equal – Obama loss; His is less – Obama big loss.
Two – He went after her mayoral experience. She has held two jobs since them and has had an impact in both. Did Obama really think no one would notice that? Doing this, only re-enforced the sexist charges.
Three – He used his best credentials first. Did he think no one would respond? He has better experience to cite when the push back comes.
Ask you self this. Many people saw this almost as soon as he opened his mouth. He had four days to work this out. Is he so incapable of analyzing a simple situation, that he went with this attack without realizing the possible responses? Is that the type of intelligence we want making decisions in the White House?
He has better experience to cite when the push back comes.
Make that
He has no better experience to cite when the push back comes.
Hahahaha! Obama’s female flying monkeys chanting:
O-bam-a oooooOOOOOoooo. O-bam-a ooooOOOOOooooo…..
Like in the Wizard of Oz!
only women can fight women. its old as the sun… if a man fights everyones biological gearing to protect her overwhelms them and they will defend her even if she is wrong.
the easiest place you can see this is in the movies. and yes there are rules to making scenes if you dont want people to not like your flick.
men fight men, and both can get hurt.
women can fight women, but only the bad woman gets a bit hurt
women can fight a man, but only he can get hurt
man can only fight a woman if that woman is revealed to not actually be a woman (robot, etc).
its not hard to figure out…
when a woman abandons a group of men (titanic), no one much cares about the men (today. in the past they built memorials to their sacrifice), but only the women.
when the men abandon the women (ferry riga), everyone is agast and appaled that the men treated them equally, and lived by every man for himself (as if there were no females).
even the isreali army dont have them fight together because of these biological facts.
of course the left feminist have made sure that we do not see these things before us. and so we also no longer can tell waht a fair punch is and what a sucker punch is. so now there is no way to fairly punch a woman back, even though she is equal and superior to the men.
they didnt see it coming because of their heirarchy. multiculturalism trumps feminism. african male trumps white female. etc. which is why obama with nothing made it to the ticket over hillary with something.
there is a distinct heirarchy to which comes first. (with white men on the bottom)… and anyone that violates that, or things otherwise (hillary) will be surprised as to the outcoms. this is why many feminists are writing all kinds of revisionist things for islam.
you can even see the heirarchy between parties. a liberal woman is higher than a conservative woman.
whats funny is that all those things that they endeavored to eradicate, that were said to be m eaningless and negative in arguinb between the sexes are trotted out for thos who are not left anointed.
Moralisers on a PC witch-hunt
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24295040-7583,00.html
Fervent advocates of women’s rights have no hesitation about adopting outdated chauvinist morals and rhetoric when targeting a woman they don’t like. Smiley castigates Palin for her “bitchy and arrogant point of view”, which is “characteristic of all conservative women”. Many supporters of the pro-choice lobby have adopted a radically new definition of choice. It now means “choose what we think is good”, otherwise you will be denounced as a feckless breeder or an irresponsible mother.
is it anywonder that they end up murdering thousands? they hate the ‘other’ with such a passion that they are willing to abandon everything to get them.
they have no morals, or ethics. which would cause them to accept loss in terms of merit, and letting the best person win. they cant do that, they have to win at any means, ergo, no morals. a sociopathic polity harkening back to the days when sociopathy and psychopathy were called “moral imbiciles”
dont believe me?
here is a site they have created to change the outcome of the election by ridiculing a downs syndrome child!
downspalin.blogspot.com/
sample:
How dare you, Camel Brown [i.e., CNN anchor Campbell Brown], asking those bad questions ’bout Mommy and forn polcy. You have no right caus you are media leet. But joke on you, bitch! Wite wing behind Mommy now! Wite wing glavanized!
Mommy, sorry I say word bitch. I know it bad word, but I hear it from Grampa ‘Cain. Yes, he have firey temper but it ok. Everything he do ok. He pee oh dubyou.
what happened to the compassion of the left toward the handicapped? oh yeah… when they are a reason for more largess, they are freinds, and we called them challenged.
but they only did that to get people with real morals to side with them thinking they have better morals as they cast a negative to a positive, but deep down inside, a site like this easily shows that they think the same as before, they are retards but useful retards.
and so they used them for political power… thats fine.. and so they cant see how using them for poltical power another way is bad… how can they?
they are morally imbicilic, and cant tell what is moral or not. once one abandons real morals to have an end presumption justify the means, one loses all idea of what morals are, because morals become circumstance based, no longer absolute.
so any circumstance they feel justifies something, is ok with them.
so you will see some wierd things coming this election. appaling things. because the end of a communist america is more imporant than any other moral consideration.
that means theya re going to screw up and attack palin in ways that are totally reprehensivle to the average person who does hve some morals, ethics, and an internal sense of such.
David Axelrod runs a lobbying firm here in Chicago and both he and Obama claim that Axelrod is not a lobbyist. When I look at how much money is being spent on the Obama campaign I have to wonder, how much of that money will end up in Axelrod’s pocket? These Chicago politicians are very, very slippery.
Obama has never had to run a competitive race before. There is some benefit to that kind of experience and it shows.
Hillary had the same defect, but she was at least learning as she went.
I’m guessing he never did any trial work as a Lawyer or not to any great extent. His inability to respond to counter positions is truely astounding.
Where is the Obama equivalent of this:
Fiorina, Whitman
It reminds me of the late 60s, when women would hang out with radicals. They wanted the women around for sex, cleaning house and fixing food, but somehow, the women wanted to be taken seriously. That was the start of the women’s movement, at least the part of it that inhabited Gloria Steinem’s world. Have they really gotten so stupid that they can’t see through Obama? He simply cannot deal with women.
Golly gee whiz, I wonder why Obama didn’t bring up his chairing the Annenberg Challenge as an example of his executive experience?
In the area of stark contrast, her cuddling her Down’s Syndrome child against Obama’s vote not to extend care to those who survived an abortion attempt – not been touched on yet, but in terms of walking the walk – both Cindy McCain and Plain certainly meet the test.
That’s what “Community Organizers” are supposed to be doing… fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves.
Palin (not Plain) dang typos.
OldManRick hit the nail on the head. Obama isn’t clever; he’s a fool, obviously. He rose to the bait of comparing himself to the opposing VP candidate. Good grief, what a naif! Putin and DinnerJacket must have their fingers crossed for him.
It’d be fun to titrate Obama’s naivete. For example, by asking him if he’s more qualified to be President than the busboy at Olive Garden. Maybe he’ll give us a detailed rundown of their relative merits for the job. Priceless.
obama shows how he will handle palin:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/us/politics/05dems.html?ref=politics
Senator Barack Obama will increasingly lean on prominent Democratic women to undercut Gov. Sarah Palin and Senator John McCain, dispatching Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to Florida on Monday and bolstering his plan to deploy female surrogates to battleground states, Obama advisers said Thursday.
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign event in Florida, her first for Mr. Obama since the Democratic convention, will serve as a counterpoint to the searing attacks and fresh burst of energy that Ms. Palin injected into the race with her convention speech on Wednesday, Obama aides said.
With the McCain-Palin team courting undecided female voters, including some who backed Mrs. Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Obama aides said they were counting on not only Mrs. Clinton but also Democratic female governors to rebut Ms. Palin – and, by extension, Mr. McCain. Those governors include Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.
he cant fight a woman, given how the left has set it up (just as i said). so he will send in the women to do it.
kind of like payng the neighborhood bully to beat up another kid that is giving you trouble and saying nyah you cant touch me.
on another note, a big clinton dem on her team, just defected to obama camp.
oh… and now we have a new word from victor david hanson (historian)… palinize: to slander and caricature a working-class female public figure for the noble advancement of liberalism.
[he notes that soon there will be a backlash to all this “creepiness”]
I agree.. as many people are not political animals to the extend that they actually follow things in detail. and the left has gone over the top in a way that they will start to notice what they dont pay attention to. while trying to cook the frog, they heated the pan to fast, and the frog is moving out.
But Obama is smart. He’s figured out a solution to the oil crisis. Everybody maintain proper tire pressure! LOL!
As I see it. Obama and the left shouldnt have belittled the Air Force man… he should have taken his oponent seriously. And what did mccain do?
Use the kind of training that airmen get, and keep up with througout their lives. he got in and screwed up obama, crashed his ooda loop, with a faster better one.
OODA LOOP
Boyd developed the theory based on his earlier experience as a fighter pilot and work on energy maneuverability. He initially used it to explain victory in air-to-air combat, but in the last years of his career he expanded his OODA Loop theory into a grand strategy that would defeat an enemy strategically by – psychological – paralysis.
strategy should always revolve around changing the enemy’s behavior, not annihilating his forces. The parallel between Boyd’s ideas and the masterpiece of Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”, are obvious. Both Boyd and Sun Tzu advocate the ideas of harmony, deception, swiftness and fluidity of action, surprise, shock, and attacking the enemy’s strategy.
Colonel Boyd viewed the enemy (and ourselves) as a system that is acting through a decision making process. This decision making process is based on observations of the world around it. The enemy will observe unfolding circumstances and gather outside information in order to orient the system to perceived threats. Boyd states that the orientation phase of the loop is the most important step, because if the enemy perceives the wrong threats, or misunderstands what is happening in the environment around him, then he will orient his thinking (and forces) in wrong directions and ultimately make incorrect decisions. Boyd said that this cycle of decision-making could operate at different speeds for the enemy and your own organization. The goal should be to complete your OODA Loop process at a faster tempo than the enemy’s, and to take action to lengthen the enemy’s loop. One tries to conduct many more loops “inside” the enemy’s loop, causing the enemy to be unable to react to anything that is happening to him.
Colonel Boyd stated that the enemy’s loop can be lengthened through a variety of means. Boyd’s aim is to generate “non-cooperate” centers of gravity for the enemy through ambiguity, deception, novel circumstances, fast transient maneuvers, and the use of Sun-Tzu’s idea of Cheng and Ch’i. By isolating the enemy’s centers of gravity and developing mistrust and cohesion within the system (making them “non-cooperative”), friction will be greatly increased, paralysis in the system will set in, and the enemy will ultimately collapse. By attacking the thought process of the enemy / competitor, his morale and decision process can be shattered.
if you think of ooda, mccain took control of the situation, and now its obama who is attempting to reverse that. however, obama thought that getting to the top of the hill was enough, and mccain knows that getting to the top is the easy part, holding on to what you have is the hard part.
even if mccain didnt follow ooda, he is doing just that. obama was hit with novel circumstances and fast transient maneuvers (palin). he thought mccain would not ever do that (deception), and mccains being a bit quiet before the nominations (ambiguity).
now the situation is that obama is technically down and trying to reverse the situation. letting him take the hill first, left him as a clear target. now obama has to be the one to respond, and mccain then gets to define the battle.
if mccain and palin keep pressing, the rest of obamas campaign will be catch up and desperate attempted to get ahead of mccains ooda loop.
there is a reason why so many presidents had military experience and have won. it might not do with americans saying he is military, lets vote for him. it may more have to do with being more tactically and strategically savvy for the end game result.
those that are not so savvy try to win every battle, thinking that will automatically win the war.
but those who are more savvy as to tactics and outcomes, only care to win the fights that count, and so they dont care if they lose every battle, as long as they win the war.
which is why you hear the left now screeching that obama had all these ‘points’ and should win… but in truth… a big point early on isnt worth as much as a small point late on.
its going to be interesting… wish i had more time to watch in more detail…
Don’t laugh, Brett. Moving air got Obama where he is today.
Rose Says:
“That’s what “Community Organizers” are supposed to be doing… fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves.”
I think “Community Organizer” is going the way of “Activist”. That being associated as code for lefty kook.
I think only the lefties will be offended too (vs. everyday Community Organizers)… technically I could be called an activist (or ex) for some of the stuff I did but if someone made fun of activists I wouldn’t be offended. I know they meant ‘lefty kooks’ and not me. 😉
Pingback:Amused Cynic » Blog Archive » Sarah Palin–The “Alpha-female grizzly”* who scares the living crap out of Oprah Winfrey…
I agree, Thomass. “Community Organizer” is the fancy way of saying Leftist, activist shit stirrer.
So why was it that the Obama campaign seems to have been caught so flat-footed by the news? Why are they still searching for a strategy to counter Palin’s appeal?
Because Obama expected McCain to choose a white boy, like Obama would have done.
The Left projects. Also, even if they had predicted Palin, it is hard to attack her with any unified message. So Obama must rely upon the unofficial insurgents and forces of Kos and what not. They are called Cossacks, Neo, and the reason why is because RUssia also uses them as guerilla auxiliaries to plunder and burn when the Russian main army doesn’t want to be bothered doing such things.
What’s more, if the Obama campaign has decided that he needs women to fight his battles against women, why announce that fact?
So they don’t get criticized for being mean to the underdog.
Doesn’t that make him look sort of–well–weak?
No different than what he would have looked like.
Obama is unethical. No amount of intelligence can overcome that flaw.
When I hear “community organizer” I think “communist agitator,” but that’s me.
On hearing lefties smugly assert that Jesus Christ was a community organizer, I have pointed out that so was Jim Jones, and so is Al Sharpton. Not to mention Vladimir Lenin, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, and Benito Mussolini, among others.
Link
Cindy McCain is quite an admirable character.
I notice many things different between classical liberals and the Left, Neo. But this one is probably one of the keystone differences.
From Cindy’s comments to Katie Couric, it seems Cindy was very influential in getting McCain to choose Sarah Palin of Alaska.
My doubts with McCain always had to do with his susceptibility to be used as a tool, like Bush was, by seemingly well meaning “bi-partisan” folks, who were in reality just jackals.
Given McCain’s Senate record, it was high likely, but not certain, that he would act the same way in the Presidency and listen to people and things he really shouldn’t listen to. To compromise on issues he really shouldn’t comprise on.
However, having learned more about Cindy McCain, I am actually more confident of John McCain’s Presidential potential now, Neo. For I do worry that Cindy will allow her husband to be easily taken in by fake liberal, pro-Diem Assassinating, State Department politburos, and various other parties to the domestic insurgency of America.
If it came to a choice between rescuing a Russian family that tried to escape Russia and was held and returned to Putin or compromising with Russia and giving them what they want in order not to “invoke antipathies”, Cindy will choose to rescue the family rather than compromise with totalitarian dictators.
As you can see, Neo, I often listen to the views of women more than I do the views of men.
One more thing (and I didn’t know where to put this), the Dems are running a batch of conservatives to try and retake the South. If those folks win, they may just be the people McCain needs to form a coalition. It amazes me that the story isn’t getting more airplay. I think the Hillary supporters may find they have more in common with McCain than with some of these new Democrats.
I find the “experience” thing to be so humorous, I can’t get myself to believe they will continue that line of attack.
I think the Obamas will attack Palin as a scary extremist, and I think they will zero in on her church.
Christianity, fully practiced, is extreme. We Christians endeavor to pull ourselves out of the normal milieu, i.e. out of the milieu we ourselves walked in before we began pulling ourselves out of it. Thus Christianity is very easy to attack. You don’t really even need to mischaracterize it – or at least not very much – yet it’s also incredibly easy to mischaracterize it and spin it practices into something scary and base and ugly. I think this is how they will go after her, and I think their spinning and lies cannot help but have some measure of negative impact upon her.
Once they have established some measure of credible extremist meme, they are certain – CERTAIN – to spin that extremist meme into some type of charge of racism. This will not happen for some weeks. Yet, I predict their dream scenario is to have this racist meme heated up all through mid and late October. I’ve been watching the left a long time, and I’ve been watching Axelrod and Barack for a while, and I’ve read “Dreams of My Father”, and I will be shocked if they don’t try this strategy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Last – I’m with Occam: a community organizer is pretty much a communist agitator. This is especially so with Obama, who was trained in the Saul Alinski “Rules for Radicals” method of organizing. Alinski’s method amounts to: wake people up and organize them to fight against capitalism.
Barack wrote, in “Dreams of My Father”, that he left organizing b/c it simply wasn’t working, i.e. organizing simply wasn’t making a difference in the community. The irony is that Barack, challenged about executive experience, unwilling to speak of his massive executive failure with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, fell back into touting his community organizing experience, and thus opened himself up to Giuliani’s and Palin’s great lines on Wed. night.
Barack simply has zero accomplishments to point to. He has nothing. He has NOTHING. Nada. It’s not that he’s handling his resume problem in an ineffective fashion. It is, rather, he’s dealt himself a resume problem for which there is no solution. ALL HE CAN DO is cover up, cover up, cover up, and hope the election gets here before the voters wise up. He has no other choice. There is nothing else.
“Last – I’m with Occam: a community organizer is pretty much a communist agitator.”
Well, as I see it, this is ALMOST correct.
A community organizer is a communist agitator who shakes down others to fund his own political ambitions. Read about Obama’s early “successes” as a community organizer: that’s pretty much what it amounts to.
Ah, OriginalFrank, you’re speaking to the precise species to which “community organizers” belong; I was just referring to the genus. /g
I’m glad others share my view of this rather noxious species.
To Teri’s point above, isn’t it fascinating that the Dems are running centrist candidates in the South, apparently in recognition of the distaste that more left-wing candidate engender, but refuse to do so on the national level?
For some reason, at the national level they seem to feel that they lose because their candidates are not left-wing enough, or haven’t enunciated their left-wing bona fides distinctly enough, never suspecting that maybe they have the opposite problem.
Then of course the MSM have mobilized themselves to counter Palin. Ive seen a news blurb about the number of Colleges Palin has allegedly gone thru. I was thinking when I saw that about the lack of similar scrutiny regarding Obama’s past. Seems Linda Chavez had just been thinking the same thing:
The Unexamined Life
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_unexamined_life.html
You endlessly hear from the left complaints about the “Republican attack machine” and numerous references to the mysterious machinations of the evil Dr. Karl Rove. I’m sorry, but there just is no comparison when it comes to viciousness. None whatsoever.
Palin/Rove in 2016 – it’d be worth it just to watch lefties heads’ explode!
I have a hunch (that’s all it could be, of course) that Obama picked Biden because he (and/or his campaign staff) thought McCain was going to pick Romney.
Obama has never had to run a competitive race before. I have noticed that myself, and I wonder if it signifies anything: “Obama hasn’t gotten into his offices by squarely winning a fair election. Do you think he might like to continue that pattern?” (Big October Surprise a Done Deal Already?)
“So why was it that the Obama campaign seems to have been caught so flat-footed by the news? ”
Haven’t we seen a couple of hints previously that he’s a bit condescending towards them? Like that reporter he called “sweetie”?
them = women
I don’t think it was condescension toward women, but toward the opposition in general. I suspect he subconsciously figured the election was in the bag, the whole exercise a mere formality, hence the Presidential seal and such nonsense.
Ironically, it’s probably the same attitude Hillary had toward the nomination, if not the general election.
If you listen carefully, you can hear God chuckling…
Occam’s Beard:
I suspect he subconsciously figured the election was in the bag, the whole exercise a mere formality, hence the Presidential seal and such nonsense.
I have read in the blogosphere at least one reference to the belief that the reason Obama figures the election is in the bag is that the Obama campaign is planning to spring an “October surprise” on the McCain campaign. But nothing stated as to what it might be.
..And why is God chuckling…? As a republican I am very uncomfortable with Palin. If some further scandal comes out –and there seems to be a lot swirling–all those who are so fawning now will drop her like a hot potato. It is very dangerous to assume that just because a lot of people are turning up and tuning in to find out about her that that means they will vote for her. She is right up there in “popularity” with some pop singers and media darlings right now but would we want them a heartbeat away from running the country? I am very uneasy…
Gringo, I think the “October surprise” is probably wishful thinking.
Fred, the “God is chuckling” comment had nothing to do with Palin, but rather with Obama and Clinton, and their attitudes toward the election(s). Even if Obama wins, he probably received a nasty scare last week.
As for being a heartbeat from the Presidency, if we have to have a question mark in office, I’d rather that it be a heartbeat away than no heartbeats away.
OB–I think you are wrong about the Dems being sure about the election–every one of them I know ( and argue with) is working very hard door to door and not taking anything for granted. They are sure not sitting back and thinking that some “October surprise” is going to do it for their ticket. They have a strong passion and respect for their ticket that we Republicans could have if we had a more tried and trusted VP candidate. Unfortunately, it seems to be my Republican friends who are sitting back and thinking we have this election won just because of a temporary popularity contest. The choice of a woman was brilliant but I wish it had been a vetted and respected woman.
“”The choice of a woman was brilliant but I wish it had been a vetted and respected woman.””
Translation:
Hey you can’t appeal to voters we’ve already decided are no longer a political force.
Until now Obama’s adult life has been a confident march from victory to victory. Given the structural advantages any Democrat has this year, I think Obama assumed that getting by Hillary was the main difficulty. He ran straight up the middle past year using the race card for blockers.
Now he’s dealing with a surprisingly crafty Republican who doesn’t have to play by Chicago rules. Obama is not stupid, but he’s not prepared for this fight.
One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to. This need isn’t limited to women; it brought us after all, two terms of George W. Bush. And it isn’t new; Americans have always needed to feel that their leaders were, on some level, people like them.
But in the past, it was possible to fill that need through empathetic connection. Few Depression-era voters could “relate” to Franklin Roosevelt’s patrician background, notes historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. “It was his ability to connect to them that made them feel they could connect to him,” she told me in a phone interview.
The age of television, Goodwin believes, has made the demand for connection more immediate and intense. But never before George W. Bush did it quite reach the beer-drinking level of familiarity. “Now it’s all about being able to see your life story in the candidate, rather than the candidate, with empathy, being able to relate to you.”
Food for thought.
Excerpted from:
The Mirrored Ceiling
New York Times
September 4, 2008, 8:41 pm
Tags: Politics, sarah palin, women
At first I thought somebody was cooking barbeque… and missing the mark.
Now I think I know what I smell, and it’s a big heaping pile of dreams left smoldering over in Denver, and the wind is JUST right to send the sour smell this way.
I don’t doubt for a moment that there will be surprises before November. I just don’t think that Team O! is going to benefit from them.
And I agree – I think the big story to come out of this campaign may end up being how many spoons were in Obama’s soup on his way to picnic. Hillary’s, too; she ended up ten million in the red.
George Soros has got to be tired of buying Leftist operators vacation homes and funding their early retirements.
I wouldn’t discount an October Surprise (one can never truly do that), however at this point I doubt it if the main thing people are looking at is his confidence. That would mean it was only about McCain and he has been WAY to controversial a political candidate for way to long for it to be there. Palin? I’ll buy that – like Obama she hasn’t been vetted that strongly (no one with that short a political career *could* be – I would compare Biden to McCain in that regard, probably not really any big skeletons in that closet).
I will, however, say that if for nothing else than how deep the corruption ran that Palin (and her staff) pretty much dismantled that she likely doesn’t have any really big ones either. The worst they seem to have come up with is that she fired them and that is somehow an “ethics charge” simply because the corrupt machine brought them up against her (and I hope that ones keeps getting nice good air time – that she faced that down is nothing but an endorsement for her given all the real actual ethics charges in congress today).
I will also say that no one rises to political power within the established confines of the Chicago political machine without some major “issues” (and make no mistake, if he had an R after his name Rezko, Ayers, and Wright would have already sunk him and they may still very well given some time).
Were I to bet I would put my money on an “October Surprise” against Obama, however I doubt that will be needed. There are too many non-teleprompter based debates and Obama has rarely done well in them and they are McCains bread and butter. And those *do* make a difference. The only issue is going be Palin, and I will say again that given her rise to the governor in Alaska I wouldn’t bet against her in the debates (Biden surely hasn’t – he hasn’t been in there that long from stupidity and can just as easily see that the statement “Alaska is littered with the bodies of those that underestimated her” has a ring of truth to it).
No, as I read somewhere else within the last few days, if you truly think that the opponent is the most likely candidate for you to loose too you don’t call for them to remove themselves from the race. There are many leftist trying their best to convince themselves that they are not worried at all, but their own rhetoric shows they are.
According to your NYT link:
“Advisers to Mrs. Clinton said that she stood ready to help the Obama-Biden ticket, but they urged the campaign not to overestimate the impact Mrs. Clinton could have, noting that she had other commitments this fall, like campaigning and raising money for Senate candidates.”
I haven’t the time this morning to read the whole thread and if my point has already been raised I apologise, but surely one of the most amusing ‘leitmotifs’ of the next two months will be watching ‘Hillbilly’ doing as little as she possibly can for Obama’s campaign without being accused of shirking. After all, what’s in it for her? If Obama chose Biden to go up against this ‘pit bull with lipstick’ then why should she risk a mauling by stepping between them? She will be saving her ammo for 2012!
However, I am the bearer of bad tidings. I have just gone public over at my place by calling it a McCain victory in November. Alas, with my record, that’s the kiss of death!
I think Obama was counting on a news media that would effectively be his PR and Attack Department for his campaign.
What Leftists never appreciate is that the general public has been through this so many times now that they are generally suspicious of the sincerity of the news they watch.
The press usually does at least one thing every election that reveals their lack of scruples .. in 04 it was CBS making up those documents about Bush.
Well this year we just experienced what I think was the largest most concentrated effort of the news media and new media to destroy a candidate. Last weeks’ massive disinformation campaign.
I’ve never seen anything like it.
How many of you are aware of US Magazine’s smear cover story on Palin?
Well there’s a GIANT backlash from their readers.
These are readers who may not be Blog saavy and perhaps not aware of the nastiness from the Left are now confronted wiht the disgusting lack of princples of lefties staring at them in the face
This is from newsbusters:
And now the vast following that Oprah Winfrey has is about to face the intolerance of Obama supporters:
I think the people in this country are DONE believing the news people. I think we can pretty much guarentee that the news is going to keep bringing one outrageousoly false thing after another and eventually after having so many of these charges be found false.. no one is going to want to hear about any more , even if true.
“… a shocking lack of preparedness and a strange inability to adjust to changing circumstances.”; “hope it isn’t a taste of what we’ll get from an Obama administration.”
All those votes “present” as a short-term legislator, as well as his consistantly vague comments during unrehearsed interviews, and poor speaking ability without a teleprompter; The man is a sham, with no substantial legal experience or accomplishments beyond an academic role; Involvement in murky real estate/management issues with Rezko, including probable conflict of interests in the purchase of his own home, and simultaneously detrimental results for his constituency in the Chicago neighborhood developments; Essentially ineffective “community organizing” efforts, particularly with his stint managing the 100 million dollar plus Ayers inspired Annenberg Challenge education reform group’s efforts; A long history of intimate relationships with race baiters, radical left-wing activists and Islamist apologists and promoters. The dim’s are just scamming us with a race pandering ploy. Biden is just a more experienced Obama, selected to balance B.O.’s youth, inexperience, and being half-black; Biden’s assumed credibility as 100% white, aged, and establishment experienced history, but with a similar undercurrent of political duplicity, repeated incidents of plagiarism, and misrepresentation of his academic accomplishments and geo-political positions. What you see is what you (are going to) get…
How many folks knew that the following is one of Obama’s first bills he tried to do when taking local Illinois office:
SESSION 90 SR0110 OMAMA 1/1/97 DECLARE ISLAMIC COMMUNITY DAY – NOT PASSED
Hi Vince, thanks!
My concern about Obama isnt’ about high taxes but that he and the Dems in Congress plan on totally subverting the Constitution and go full-steam socialist.
Obama is a Marxist.. there can be no doubt about that. His entire Presidential campaign is a fraud, in the strongest meaning of the word.
For William Ayers to choose Obama to co-lead a multi-million dollar organization devoted to shaping education policy in Chicago so that their values (William Ayers) are taught to kids has to require that Obama and Ayers are in agreement on what those values are.
If one hasn’t done a good job at finding out about Ayers life then they may not think this association is so dangerous. But I watched a self-titled documentary on “The Weather Underground” that was filmed in the early 2000s (or late 1990s .. cant remmeber) You can find this film for free at Google Video. If you haven’t watched it.. you really have to.
The Ayers of today is just as commited now as he was back then to revolutionary transformation of American society and goernment to a “humane system”
No Lib can tell me that Ayers is going to pick Obama to distrubute millions of dollars of Ayers insitution if Ayers thought it wasn’t working toward his goals.
Glenn beck / CNN did an awesome show on the dangers if Obama wins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd-JeeNcTig
I urge everyone to watch the Weather Underground documentary… you must understand what Ayers tried to do in the 70s.. and then watch the Glenn Beck / CNN video to see how that matters today
In this fight Obama is having with Palin about experience and who has managed what sums of money and sat on what commissions
WHY IS OBAMA OMMITTING HIS WORK IN THAT INSITUTTION FROM HIS CASE?
Clearly, that type of work would bolster his credentials as an adminsitrator and handler of money.
Yet no one mentions it.
There are too many lies and ommissions.
And there are too many people , like Alan Colmes, who are willing to lie for him.
In the video clip, Obama says that running his presidential campaign gives him executive experience.
Except that he’s not running his campaign. His Campaign Manager is running it. Anyone who knows anything about campaigns knows that the candidate does not run any but the smallest of campaigns.
Unfortunately Obama’s argument will fool a lot of people.
Further, his use of campaigning as “experience” shows that for him it’s all about self-glorification. He’s spent just about his entire career in the U.S. Senate campaigning for president.
Stanley Kurtz, a very bright, fair, and credentialed researcher, is burrowing away at the Annenberg Challenge files, which contain the notes of the work Obama and Bill Ayers did frittering away over $50 million and achieving no result.
At the very least Kurtz’s work will demonstrate beyond all doubt and spin that Obama misled the nation when he dismissed Ayers as just a professor who lives in Obama’s neighborhood, and that Obama’s sole executive experience was pure pork barrel for leftist causes.
However, there may well be nastier material in those files. I don’t think it would be fair to characterize Kurtz’s findings as an October Surprise, but we will hear back from him and it iwll be a solid body blow to the Obama campaign.
VinceP, did you see this? Went up in record time:
http://www.boycottusweekly.com/
Palin: More and less than she seems
I’m sorry, but there just is no comparison when it comes to viciousness. None whatsoever.
People actually believed the Left’s lies on that score? People should know better by now, after 9/11, not to believe in their enemy’s deception operations.
I’m glad the media has finally shown its true face.
No one will believe it again.
There have been so many false rumors about Sarah that I think she’ll be immune to any new ones… there comes a point where people just dont care to hear about it anymore and know that people out ther are trying to ruin her.
Leftists are scum of the world
Given what the MSM would do to throw an election–see Rathergate–I imagine a number of likely voters would discount any October surprise.
What would Rather and CBS have done if they’d not been busted until after the election and Kerry had won? Laugh in our face every evening?
I really hope we can avoid that again.
Aren’t you tired of bombastic culture war shtick? Most of western civilization is left of the archetypal American Republican. Most of the world is scum? Give it a rest.
If Palin were as experienced as Obama she could sit down with the press.
Sarah Palin will be missing from action Sunday a.m.
” Most of western civilization is left of the archetypal American Republican”
And most of western civilization outside the US has decided to abort their future… all the european countries have non-replacement birthrates of their native ethinc populations. In 50 years you wont recongize those countries.
So it seems like we’re doing something right.
And yes, most of the rest of the world is scum.
Toes, they are falling for it again, I just cant believe it, just read all the comments on there, “See See, she is afraid of answering questions” “They have to hide her etc” This is exactly the same as what we heard last week, she wont be able to give a speech, let this keep up and then when she does appear on the Sunday shows and blows it away you guys are hoodwinked again, I would encourage you to Google all of the press appearances she has already done to she how bad she is at it. This really is turning out to be a rope a dope, fascinating to watch really.
“see Rathergate”
Rathergate was one media “October surprise” (and of course, actually debuted in September) in the 2004 election, but there was another. Remember the “Al QaaQaa” weapons depot story that burst on the media scene shortly before Election Day. It was meant to show how incompetent the Bush administration was in securing weapons in Iraq and had just about the same frenzy level as the Sarah Palin media hyperventilation (and just about the same level of truthfulness). The story was so vitally important, of course, that they had to publish it right before the election, even though it barely left time for any sober discussion or rebuttal of the charges. In fact, I’m sure that was the plan.
How do I know? Because the day after Election Day and after Bush had won, the story mysteriously disappeared without trace from every major newspaper. I kept my eyes open and didn’t see another article on it for six weeks. One day it was a vitally important national story with hundreds of examples in the press and the next day the press couldn’t be bothered to write a single article about it (and couldn’t be bothered for six more weeks thereafter). At that point it became patently obvious that the story was an excuse to bash Bush and an attempt to throw the election, not a serious examination of a serious issue. The importance of the story on its own merits could not have disappeared that quickly.
So beware of late-breaking fake (but potentially plausible) stories from the press this election cycle. They have the potential to do real damage. And maybe the press will get the timing down even better this time around, after the practice they had last time.
Fred, I don’t think the Dems are confident now; I think they in general and Obama in particular used to be, and that made them complacent.
Talk of an October surprise is in itself telling, because it bespeaks desperation, a perception that one needs an October surprise.
kcom, I think you’re exactly right. Lucy Ramirez is probably firing up Word right now to draft another memo from years ago.
And most Republicans are authoritarian. USA! zzzzzz ….
Darrel, re. Palin, it’s likely the strategists are holding her back this weekend to get her up to speed on issues x, y, z, and/or get her media trained. Probably both.
Mark Foley was the october surprise in 2006. The Republicans could have called them on it, but they were weak.
The Dems knew of the communications for over a year. they had the papers that long.. they were waitig to make it a issue. It was disgusting what they did.
Toe: I’m independent. You shouldn’t view people in stereotypes, hater.
strcpy; That’s a pretty good takedown of a potential October Surprise. As you pointed out, since McCain has been in the public eye since before Obama graduated from elementary school, he is anything but an unknown quantity. We’ve seen it, we know what we’re getting.
Maybe George Soros is going to pay his ex-wife $20 Million to say something juicy. But even that is doubtful, as she has had over a quarter century to spill the beans, and hasn’t.
Alaska is a small town writ large. There are no secrets in a small town. The most digs at Sarah Barracuda would most likely come from those caught dipping at the trough. Commenter Peter claimed that as an Alaskan he had the dirt on Sarah Barracuda, whereas his links were nothing that anyone living in New York or Iowa couldn’t have come up with at the time.
Given the media storm directed at Sarah Barracuda the last week, which she survived quite nicely, thank you, it is hard to imagine what more could be “revealed” in October. What else could there be?
The biggest challenge for her will be to be ready for the storm of media questions, so that she can be true to herself but not be painted as a “religious wacko.” That can be difficult, because many lefties are of the opinion that the mere mention of a Supreme Being means that you wish to bring back the Inquisition.
kcom Says:
“How do I know? Because the day after Election Day and after Bush had won, the story mysteriously disappeared without trace from every major newspaper.”
It is ritual to switch back to stories about the homeless problem any time a republican has just won. Sorry, only so much space.
all the european countries have non-replacement birthrates of their native ethinc populations. In 50 years you wont recongize those countries.
I wounder befor throw these words, did he looks what in his native country what Balck Africans? after 50 yers whaht will be seen there?
It’s funny to watch neo’s fake it till their their next WWIII/IV warrior will make it.
Why not return to the institution of kingdom. No clones needed.
OB–I didn’t say the Dem’s I know were talking about an Oct. surprise–that came from your comment–none of them even think that way. They aren’t counting on anything other than their hard work and a candidate they truly believe in (whether you like it or not.) They aren’t just playing a game–they really want change. At least we can have discussions on the issues. Name calling is not constructive–“leftist”, “communist”, “neo” all shut down the conversation. I have to agree with “Toes” on that.
“let this keep up and then when she does appear on the Sunday shows and blows it away you guys are hoodwinked again,”
And it will be some really convoluted Rovian plot and they were duped into doing that. There are already many saying that over their complaints over the Republican Convention (attack Palin as lightweight unable to give a speech, she can, knock them for being afraid to talk issues, McCain does so in quite a bit of detail – WAY more than Obama has given *anywhere*). They looked like they were played Rope-a-dope (Bill Whittle has a nice article over this too).
Of course there was no trick, no grand master plan, nothing more than the dems being stupid and hanging themselves. They are doing it again. I do note that the Obama campaign is saying something quite different, but they have been content to let the media speak for them for ages and it’s probably too late for it to be otherwise.
I’ll note one of the more amusing things here too is that when you set expectations so low if she does just a mediocre job than she had a major success. She gave a good speech, while as good as anything I have seen from Obama it didn’t really deserve *that* much praise from the right and the much fear from the left – why did it? Because many many people tuned in to see a trainwreck from the huge beating her and her family had received. Not only did she *not* wreck but her family didn’t either – in fact they did as well (or better) as any long term highly experienced politician would. If people had been expecting Churchill to show up that day it would have been disappointment, as is that was total homerun speech (same thing with how bad “everyone” had said the McCains speech would be too).
The left is nearly 100% responsible for what is going on now almost purely from the rampant dishonesty and need to use “rumor” to damage people. That works sometimes but when the real thing shows up you are screwed. McCain and Palin aren’t really politically outmaneuvering them – they are simply being honest. Due to their tactics the harder the left tries to the win the further they sink because of that.
I was thinking about Wed night speach.. By the time Wed came around, there was 4 days of horrible slander and lies.
I went from being excited , to being angry, and then to being protective her and her family from the scum in this country. And then I was looking for payback.
So when Rudy came on stage and started making Obama look like a little girl.. oh it felt good. And he kept making jab after jab.. and it was bulding me up a bit. Because up to this point ,, no one has said contemptious things of Obama, overtly.
And then when it was her turn, and she walked up to the podium.. and she gave a smirk/smile… OOOOH it was like YES! SHE’S GOING TO FIGHT BACK.
And my God… fight back she did. It was so satisfying knowing that she held nothing back. And I knew the Press would sent into hysterics.
I also know that there have been so many lies told, that I think people are just going to ignore it when some idiot comes out of nowhere with a new one.
Now the idiots are complaining the campaign isn’t subjecting her to what a reporter called ‘the firing squad’. I hope they never let a reporter talk to her.
The press in this country needs to learn a lesson from this.
Vince P:
I had heard Sarah Palin’s name before the announcement last Friday, but that was literally all I knew about her.
By Wednesday I was expecting her to hit a home run. All day long I looked forward to her speech. I felt downright serene about it. It was the strangest thing.
And I wasn’t disappointed: She hit a grand slam into the upper deck.
“Here’s a little news flash for you reporters and commentators…” LOL.
Sen. Obama. In his memoir, he gives the most telling explanation of how he has gotten away with avoiding discussions of his drug use. It was the same technique he used on his mother when she confronted him in his senior year of high school: “I had given her a reassuring smile and patted her hand and told her not to worry, I wouldn’t do anything stupid. It was usually an effective tactic, another of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves.”
He uses this same slicko tactic when he tries to appear “bipartisan.” A strategy of contempt.
Why not return to the institution of kingdom. No clones needed.
That’s what Obama is for.
So beware of late-breaking fake (but potentially plausible) stories from the press this election cycle. They have the potential to do real damage. And maybe the press will get the timing down even better this time around, after the practice they had last time.
That’s what usually happens when you let enemies stay alive, gain from the experience of their mistakes, and freedom to plot anew.
Whether it is Israeli releasing Palestinian terrorists from prisons, in lots of 500 each, or in America releasing terrorists and child murderers from GitMo, or reporters bent on destroying the US Constitution, it is all the same in the end. Only the methods and the degree of the methods differ.
No one will believe it again.
22% of America will always believe the media. The other 30% will believe the media, because they believe the media is biased and corporate owned. So that 30% will get their news from… Yahoo, AP, Reuters, Google. Which happens to be the source of what the MSM media gets their news from…
I really hope we can avoid that again.
Enemies don’t go away by avoiding them. They go away by destroying their base of operations, their logistics, their armies, their cities, and their faith in their gods and leaders.
And if people don’t believe the Left has a God, just look at Obama again.
Most of the world is scum?
This must be one of those peeps that clapped when UN Peacekeepers were ripping open boys and girls courtesy of UN funded operations, official operations carefully vetted by those worthies in New York.
Most of the world is scum not because everybody is evil. Most of the world is scum because of people who look at such events and abuses of power by the powerful, and they clap. They feel overjoyed. They defend such institutions, such actions, as if they were the natural state of things. The natural state of the world is suffering and misery, however.
strcpy Says:
Nice comments.
Let me get this straight: being the candidate in a presidential campaign gives one the executive experience to claim that you have the executive experience to be president. Got it.
Enemies don’t go away by avoiding them. They go away by destroying their base of operations, their logistics, their armies, their cities, and their faith in their gods and leaders.
This so foolish thinking, What difference between your head and Saddam head dude?
Sadam’s head last known activity was used to break his neck
Hmmm….Britian and the US armed the Talibams and trained them in “insurgency/terroris
t” methods. Britian and the US backed Saddam against Iran. Britain also backed, Amin, Mugabwe, Pinochet, etc, etc, etc, when it suited them. all these necks need to broken, what about someone doing and calling as same as those above?
Why the “Lipstick on a pig” quote is important
By now everyone has heard Obama’s “lipstick on a pig” quote. Those who are for McCain and Palin have chimed in that it is obviously a sexist remark made about Palin. Those in the Obama camp point out that he has used the phrase before and that even McCain has used the phrase. So who is right and who is wrong? Let’s look a bit deeper.
It is absolutely correct that both Obama and McCain have used this relatively common phrase before. McCain admits he has used the term numerous times. Obama used it to describe Bush having given General Patraeus an impossible mission. I don’t think anyone is in disagreement that it is an often used phrase in Washington.
So what is all the hubbub about? In law you can help prove a crime or criminal mindset by showing a propensity to do that crime over and over. If I go out and get drunk on the town, I may or may not be an alcoholic. If I go out and get drunk on the town repeatedly, I probably am an alcoholic. The underlying question then is whether or not Obama is sexist. While some people have said that his “lipstick on a pig” comment is not worthy of much attention, it certainly could not be said that his being sexist is not worthy of attention. So is Obama sexist or not?
Having researched the topic, there is no doubt in my mind that he is. Not wishing to make such a broad statement without proof, I submit to you that Obama has a history of making sexist statements which can only lead me to believe, he is a sexist.
Indeed Geraldine Ferraro, a Democrat that has the honor of being the first female Vice President nominee called Obama sexist. She has since thrown her support behind him, picking party over gender now that Hillary is not an option. But let us look to Hillary herself who continually alleged that Obama and his starstruck media was sexist.
Then you have the numerous little jabs that Obama has taken at women. If you come to the conclusion that Obama is not sexist, then surely you cannot say he is not chauvinistic. While in Allentown Mr. Obama said to a woman at the Tama Manufacturing plant that “you look like you might be a dancer. “You’re big time. You are gorgeous.” Then while in Scranton Obama tried to convince a Hillary supporter to change allegiance by suggesting “I’ll give you a kiss.” At an address at Tulane University Obama stated, “You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out” when referring to attacks aimed at him by Clinton. Finally, when asked a question by a female autoworker, Obama said “hold on sweetie” avoiding the question so he could go pose for a photo shoot.
While none of these jabs in and of themselves constitute blatant sexism, when viewed in light of the totality of the evidence, they show a pattern. This coupled with the fact that Sarah Palin had already taken personal possession of the lipstick comments with her “lipstick on a pitbull” comment makes Obama’s use of the phrase very questionable. In fact, right after making the comment, Obama began to talk about Sarah Palin. This leads to the conclusion that either Barack Obama is a reckless unintelligent person who does not have a good mastery of the English language, which is not the case. Or, he is sexist. You have the information, you decide. One way or the other, the “lipstick on a pig” comment is more important than some are letting on.
I was just checking out useful blog posts for the project research and my spouse and i happened to stumble for yours. Thanks for any helpful material!