This Crazy Sex Ad is Obama's Dukakis Moment

In the last few days, it seems about a dozen communications experts have written pieces on HuffPo calling on the Obama campaign to get tougher with their messages (including my piece just yesterday).

Not a moment too soon.

This "sex ed" ad the McCain campaign just launched is waaaay over the line. After a parade of out-of-context quotes, it shows Obama smirking naughtily as the voiceover talks about him wanting to provide "comprehensive" sex education to Kindergarteners. The voiceover by itself is hard-hitting, but together with the visuals, the ad basically paints Obama as a pedophile. (In reality, the legislation provides for educating younger children about the difference between good touches and bad touches to help protect them against pedophiles.)

So this is it. This is Obama's Dukakis-and-the-death-penalty moment.**

Everyone who sees this ad can see how dirty it is. And if Obama wants Americans to respect him, they must be allowed to see him object as strongly - a controlled, but still palpable anger - as they would if somebody did that to them.

That means Obama should address the issue, personally and promptly, and do it just right. He should talk about how he has young daughters, and how just like any parent, he wants to do everything he can to protect them from pedophiles.

We should see his disapproval in his face: he must furrow his brow and narrow his eyes. He is so cool, he very rarely does this, but it is critical in this situation, as people will look for his feelings in his facial expression. He can speak in a voice of controlled anger - softly even, that's fine - but we need to be able to tell how he feels with the sound turned off. Not raging-hot angry, but piercing, calm, dignified angry.

This is not a moment for Obama to be relaxed and detached and thoughtful. This is a moment for him to show America how he behaves when something despicable is done to him, so we can all see how he would behave as our leader if something despicable were done to us - as it was on 9/11, and could be again. He should be dignified, but he should be tough as well.

Frankly, I doubt the McCain campaign created this ad for the mileage they can get out of the smear itself. No, they have seen how detached Obama can seem, and they are trying to showcase this for voters. They want to get Obama to under-react, to be inappropriately cool, to make him look emotionally out of touch the way Dukakis did. They're kicking sand in his face so voters can see him stand there and take it.

Obama needs to call their bluff. He should say he is proud of that legislation, because it helps protect little children from being preyed on by pedophiles, and as the parent of two young daughters, he wants to do everything he can to keep them safe... And it is despicable that someone would try to twist that into something sexually perverted to score political points. It is not just outrageous, it is shameful. John McCain has served his country with great honor. This kind of campaigning is not worthy of the man or his legacy.

If that sounds like a little much, read it again and get used to it. That is probably not quite the right phrasing, but that kind of language is exactly what this situation calls for.

Yes, it is important not to leave the impression that Obama is an angry man, especially in light of his ethnicity and this country's race relations, and for the next few days the campaign should be sure to feed the press lots of smiling, light-hearted images of Obama.

But this moment is a Dukakis moment: it calls for anger. If Obama wants to be our leader, he needs to show us what he's got. The McCain campaign doesn't think he has it in him to rise to the occasion. His challenge is to prove them wrong.

** From Wikipedia: The issue of capital punishment came up in the October 13, 1988 debate between the two presidential nominees... [W]hen Bernard Shaw, the moderator of the debate, asked Dukakis, "Governor, if Kitty Dukakis [his wife] were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?" Dukakis replied coolly, "No, I don't, and I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life," and explained his stance... Many observers felt Dukakis' answer lacked the passion one would expect of a person discussing a loved one's rape and death. Many -- including the candidate himself -- believe that this, in part, cost Dukakis the election, as his poll numbers dropped from 49% to 42% nationally that night. Other commentators thought the question itself was unfair, in that it injected an irrelevant emotional element into the discussion of a policy issue and forced the candidate to make a difficult choice.

Comments

[dannyS]

angry = out of control

[johjoh5]

What Democrats don't get is that it's not enough to simply exhibit outrage at these types of sleazy smears. All we end up doing is magnifying the smear. Unfortunately, we need to stoop to their level -- that may sound craven, but it's the only way we'll ever win. If someone punches you once in the stomach, hit them back twice in the face. For example, with regard to the sex ed ad, Obama's camp should double whatever McCain's ad buy was and air an ad that essentially says:

John McCain Opposes Defending Our Kids Against Sexual Predators

Eerie music, scary McCain photos, dark cars with tinted windows pulling up next to little kids and the door opening -- you get the idea.

[UltraClassic]

Everytime you Obamabots get all tied in knots over McCain slamming your guy, think of the liberals and leftist democrats at the DailyKos spreading the lies about Palin's youngest child.

Nope, the gloves are off, and after the stunt the DailyKos pulled, all bets are off. Remember, Obama paid homage to these guys like they were some kind of religious leaders (which if you consider liberalism a religion, I suppose that's what they are)

[Thad]

So the only thing you can do to defend McCain's ads -- ads CREATED BY HIS CAMPAIGN AND WITH HIS APPROVAL -- is to say they're equivalent to anonymous blog posts on Daily Kos that Obama did not approve and had nothing to do with?

I think you've kinda proven our point for us there, UltraClassic.

[ItHasToGetBetter]

True. I admire Obama's tactic of not getting into the mud with the Repubs, but I think the worst mistake he could make is underestimating the effectiveness of these things. They appeal to emotion and not reason. Anyone who listens or reads what his campaign has put out on this will get the full picture. Most people don't want to take the time-even for something as important as who will run their country. Obama has to be ready to hit back.

[ofbbg]

Of course he should address the issue - unless the ad is TRUE!! Re: post abortion live birth protection legislation,or his REAL dealings with Reszco and Ayers. And just where the 1 Billion + in requested earmarks were going. Or what his REAL agenda is.

[soulfulnotes]

Republicans are either super rich or stupid. Which one are you, ofbbg?

[ob4meor]

This is tricky for the Obama campaign. The thing that is so insidious about this ad is that they never come out and call Obama any names. They act as if they are just stating the "facts." Facts which McCain defended as "absolutely true" in Friday - SHAME on him. Anyhow, Obama needs to tread carefully here. If he comes out guns a blazing, the opposition will have a field day talking about his temper while they claim that they never did anything wrong or said anything harmful. That will then open them up to saying something like, "if the truth hurts. . . " Makes me sick.

Lets all remember why we support Obama in the first place: This election is about Intelligence, Character and Judgement. I know that the right wing implies that possessing these personality traits makes someone elitist, but the heck with them. We will fight the good fight and keep reminding our friends and neighbors why we are voting FOR Obama rather than AGAINST McCain.

[rh654]

Obama should hit back with a commercial that insinuates that John McCain for some reason does not want little children to be taught about how to protect themselves from Pedophiles.

[soulfulnotes]

And Sarah Palin.

[posercom]

So Barak Obama wanted to educate small children about sexual abuse. Well that is all very nice but lets look into bill that he voted yes to while in the Illinois state senate:
SB 485 1999 : Allow convicted sex offenders to be released from prison before their time was served because of good behavior, or "Good Time."
I'm not sure just how Barak Obama expects convicted sex offenders to behave in prison. These kinds of offenders had best keep a low profile while in prison because the crimes they commit repulse even the most callous of fellow prisoners. Michael Jacques who had once been convicted of Aggrevated Sexual Assault 7-12-1993 surely would have supported this bill. Released sex offenders result in dead children.
R.I.P. Brooke Bennette Micheal Jacques, now facing death penalty. Who wins?

[research]

What else did that Bill have in it?

Most Americans do not think some old guy who fondles a 17 year old hottie should get Life.

But many of us Do want the truly dangerous perverts locked up forever.

As usual, republican solution is wrong by being simplistic.

[soulfulnotes]

Yes, Republicans operatives, like Karl Rove, are masterful at reducing complex issues to aphorisms and soundbites that the Rush-listening dolts can easily memorize. Republicans voters are all either rich or stupid.

[rh654]

I wonder why you appear to be against a bill that takes away early release for pedophiles?

Hmmm - yes - I wonder???

[EvoMan]

McCain's sleazy campaign is trying to knock Senator Obama off his game and they haven't. They want an angry response and they're not getting it. It's driving them crazy. Expect McSame's cork to pop really soon.

Oh, and if you're buying into the polls, don't. They're wrong. Remember back when Clinton pulled even for a bit? Remember the kitchen sink? Didn't work, did it?

[buddhish]

It appears to me that Obama has been in a way standing still and just trying to stay afloat in order to play it safe and not fuel the Repubs going on the offensive, which it's clear they'll do about anything. But he needs to stop worrying about that and start calling McCain and Palin liars 'cause that's what they are. He needs to stop blabbering about policy and complaining about how McCain doesn't talk about policy. Instead, he needs to focus on character, as that's the Republican tactic and they seem to always win.

[gisellestwocents]

Someone should do a response ad asking why any person would want to criticize legislation aimed at protecting innocent young children against pedophiles.

Clips of a few notorious pedophiles. He might. He might. But why would he? Final clip -- JM's infamous smile..

What goes around...

[WildcatRob]

The debates cannot come soon enough.

We really need that Kennedy/ Nixon atmosphere post haste,

[Lurker50]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-R5Vh5tOWk

A scary McCain movie

[research]

Why do you Republicans want kindergarten kids ignorant of how defend themselves from Pedophiles?

[alexis d]

ROFL, A+

[NTO08]

Everyone who sees this ad can see how dirty it is. And if Obama wants Americans to respect him, they must be allowed to see him react with the kind of anger - controlled, but still palpable - that they would feel if somebody did that to them.

Obama needs to do nothing of the kind...he will look defensive, whiny, annoying and peevish if he acts like a petulant spoiled child when things do not go his way.

[research]

Actually, I thought Obama responded brilliantly.

[Pancake]

Google Republican pedophiles and see what comes up....

It is a surprisingly long list....

[CuffyMeigs]

The sex education ad is completely honest. The libs want to control you from birth (if you are lucky enough to be born to lib parents) to death. This is the responsibility of parents, not schools, government, etc. Tell your candidate to bring it on. McCain/Palin have pushed it back in his face and made him eat his words. But Obama is so smart. Educated at Harvard. He knows everything, He knows more than you. He can run your life better than you can.

ARE YOU KIDDING?

I am going to love to see him back in the Senate with Palin in the big chair.

McCain/Palin 2008

[demninja]

This is something I have been wondering about; what exactly is it that the "common" Republican thinks about the Democrats? From your post I gather that you believe democrats want the government to have a beyond-soc­ialistic-O­rwellian-t­ype control over citizens. I also gather that you believe democrats to be educated, elitist, and that they "look down" on everyone else.

I ask this because I am curious. What exactly do you think we're about?

[nonibright]

You sound scarier than McCain/Palin!! Did you read the proposed bill??? Get your info, then make your decision.

[kcnativnla]

"But Obama is so smart. Educated at Harvard. He knows everything, He knows more than you. He can run your life better than you can..."

And there is the crux of your animosity. If you feel intellectually inferior, maybe you should get some additional education or read a book. Those of us who don't feel our egos bruised by the sight of a Harvard educated black man will move forward and try to get this country out of the ditch YOUR president put us in.

You just told on yourself. I wish more CONservatives were as brave as you are to say how you really feel.

[the Lensman]

there are two kinds of Republicans, Millionaires and suckers, which are you?

[Hera424]

Are you kidding?

First of all, the children who most need education about how to protect themselves from sexual predators are the children whose parents will not be teaching them. The sad truth of this is that sometimes children need protection from their parents--do you think we should remove all laws against child abuse, sexual or otherwise? Or should we just take responsibility for punishing it after it happens?

Second of all, do you advocate the end of public schooling in general? Isn't a great deal of what you're saying that the parents should take responsibility for educating their children? What do you think should be in the schools? If you're only for the basic facts, I sincerely hope you're not including creationism in them.

The problem with McCain/Palin's worldview is that it protects most the people most like them. Girls like Bristol with families that can support them are fine; girls whose parents know well enough to tell them. There are girls out there who do not have that, and they are the ones who suffer. Do children without parents, or children without parents without certain benefits, really need to be the ones who suffer?

In my case, my parents never thought to tell me. After all, I was only five. I never thought to tell them. It seemed like something that was my fault, and I was too ashamed. Thank god for school assemblies.