A Line of Attack the Obama Campaign Must Answer Forcefully
Tonight during the evening news the Republican National Committee ran an attack ad (multiple times) that featured menacing black-and-white images of Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, Patrick Leahy and other leading Democrats with the captions: "Ready to Tax" and "Ready to Spend." I was hoping the DNC or the Obama Campaign would answer this propaganda with an ad of its own, but I have yet to see one. Right-wing talk radio and Glen Beck (the "King of the Cretins") have been hammering the idea that if Barack Obama were to be elected president the Democrats would control the government and it would lead to higher taxes. Steve Moore, formerly of the Club for Growth, whose vision for America Charles Dickens described long ago, was mercilessly flogging this idea on the Glen Beck show just yesterday. Moore said that if Obama were elected the stock market would tank and there'd be capital flight.
This argument, unfortunately, might have legs because many "independent," "centrist," and "low information" voters believe: 1). Government can't do anything to help you with your health care, housing, or energy bills and anyone who thinks it can is naive; and 2). The only thing Government can do is raise your taxes. These false notions have been beaten into the brains of voters for the last 28 years. The McCain-Palin campaign is lying and misrepresenting Obama's economic plan, but their target audience pays little attention to things like truth, reason, or rationality; they vote their feelings or their "guts." By running with this Big Lie the McCain-Palin camp is hitting below the belt. But what would you expect from Karl Rove acolytes?
I was astounded to learn that more television viewers watched John McCain's acceptance speech than Barack Obama's. I hope this doesn't mean that Sarah Palin is going to succeed in energizing the right-wing Christian evangelicals and other flat-Earthers to get out and vote in 2008. She might be able to do for the election of 2008 what gay marriage did for the election of 2004.
The Sarah Palin phenomenon tends to neutralize the inroads (if any) Obama might have made with white evangelicals. The religious Right has already denounced Obama's Saddleback colloquy with Rick Warren as being not "pro-life" enough. The only thing these people seem to need to know is that Palin knowingly chose to give birth to a "special needs" baby. They will ignore the fact that as Governor of Alaska, Palin cut the budget for assistance to families with "special needs" children from about $8 million to $3 million. The DNC or a sympathetic 527 should immediately begin running television and radio ads pointing out Palin's hypocrisy on this issue. Palin needs to be hit hard and hit now. Hesitating to slam her with some well-produced attack ads would be like John Kerry failing to respond to the Swift Boaters.
Sarah Palin is this election's Grand Swift Boater -- the sooner the Obama camp recognizes this the better.
Joe Biden cannot allow the corporate media to kowtow him into going soft on Palin just because she has a pair of overactive ovaries. She is a liar and a fraud and a religious extremist, and the sooner the bark is stripped off her the better. Hillary Clinton, if she is forceful and diligent on the campaign trail, can be very effective in countering the Palin pander. Hillary might have to be just as bitterly sarcastic and caustic as Palin to counter her. I don't think she should hold back.
But I cannot help but think about how Phyllis Schlafly (an ally of Palin's) and women like her -- to almost everyone's surprise -- killed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in the late 1970s. It would be foolish to underestimate the political power of anti-feminist women in this country. They're angry, vocal, motivated, armed with a Carrie Nation fanaticism, and they have a hell of a lot of money.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
first off, she has no right insulting pit bulls.
secondly, i do agree that there needs to be very heavy dialogue on the airwaves about the LIES stated that night. over and over. obama needs to blanket with all of his issues so people know the TRUTH OF THE MATTER. like a commercial, over and over, until people can say, "wait a minute, whats really going on here? who's the liar?"
hopefully they will figure out it's the two hideous monsters that i could call by their real names but my comment would be disapproved.
This comment is off topic, but I love how the GOPs pushers are portraying McCain's speech having more viewers as a "lack of interest in Obama".
I, in only a very small sampling of people I've asked, are Democrats, plant to vote for Obama, but watched McCain's speech nonetheless. The reason is simple. The old philosophy of "know thy enemy". I'm willing to bet a steak dinner that the minor number by which McCains speech's viewership beat Obamas was due to this in large part, but also in large part the RNC being broadcast on many more channels nationwide than the DNC.
By spining lies to win past elections, the Republicans have mastered the art of not only winning over, but also fostering as many "low information voters" as possible. They do not want people in general to be able to make informed decisions based upon clear facts and truth. Because, if Republicans told us what they were really up to, they would not win elections. Common sense would tell us that it's not logical to vote against our own future interests. Therefore ,why would McCain and Palin want to honestly talk to us about their real plans or debate the subjects of education, health care, employment, housing, social security, energy, the ecology ,and an unjust war? Instead, their approach is to present their own "self-righ
I was thinking that the Dems could feature some of their well known, wealthier members (ie, the Caroline Kennedy types) and having a "reporter type" ask whether they're in the top 5% and when they say yes, the reporter is all shocked. Well then, why are you a Democrat. Barack says that he's going to raise rich people's taxes, then they'll say "I'm proud to be a Democrat; because my family has always believed in SHARING THE WEALTH."
But, but, aren't Democrats "ELITIST"
Elitist people are STINGY and SELFISH. They think that they are better than poor people so they don't care about their problems and they don't like to share. Who does THAT definition fit? Think about it...
"I was thinking that the Dems could feature some of their well known, wealthier members (ie, the Caroline Kennedy types) and having a "reporter type" ask whether they're in the top 5% and when they say yes, the reporter is all shocked. Well then, why are you a Democrat. Barack says that he's going to raise rich people's taxes, then they'll say "I'm proud to be a Democrat; because my family has always believed in SHARING THE WEALTH."
But, but, aren't Democrats "ELITIST"
Elitist people are STINGY and SELFISH. They think that they are better than poor people so they don't care about their problems and they don't like to share. Who does THAT definition fit? Think about it...
Why don't you show the legions of Democrats that are not elitist. You know, most Democrats. The ones that are sick and tired of the same old lies and bullshit from the right. We are not elitist. We are the party of the working class. Obama has promised to cut taxes for those making under $75k, you know the WORKING CLASS. How is that elitist? What does McCain offer the "non-elite" of America? No tax breaks, more war and a psychotic right wing agenda. Democrats are the ones that push for the end of the Bush tax cuts even if they are in the higher income bracket. This is worse than Tucker Bounds calling Obama an elitist. Rich party telling poor Americans they are elites....
Great idea, but rather than have the person say I believe in sharing the wealth, why not have him/her say :
"I believe in supporting my country and community. If it weren't for the institutions such as the independent judiciary that the country and communities provides, I wouldn't have this wealth. Instead, I would be putting a lot of my money into acquiring and maintaining private enforcers, there would be very little capital for the basic research and development from which marketable ideas come, and there would be a very small middle-class with discretionary income. I depend on the institutions my taxes pay for. So do my kids and grandkids.
Really? You mean the Dems now need Hillary to do just what she got criticized for doing on the campaign trail? How interesting. And, just why would she put herself in the position of being vilified and denigrated again?
For those who believe foolishly, I might add, that McCain isn't going to raise your taxes listen up. My family is on the lower end of the middle class bracket. The Bush tax cuts did nothing for my family. So when McCain says he will make the Bush tax cuts permanent this will not benefit my family. But what will devastate my family and many more is McCain's health care program. If you get your health care through your employer you will soon find yourself without. McCain plans to eliminate the break the government gives to businesses to control price increases if you get very ill. When you get ill the ins. companies raise the cost to the employer to cover you. The government comes in and provides tax breaks to cover the higher prices so it protects you and your employer. When McCain takes this away this will be the open door for businesses to stop providing medical for anyone with a illness already from being covered. He will then go one step further. Anyone who is lucky enough to survive the first test here comes the next . McCain will assess how much your employer based insurance is worth and this will become part of your income and you will be paying taxes on it. All I can say is wake up people. As Obama said ENOUGH!!!
I was one of the 38 million watching the RNC on TV. I wanted to hear what they were saying about the DNC and the issues / solutions offered for the next four years. What I saw were many signs on Tuesday promoting SERVICE. Then I heard Guioilane (sp) and Palin putting Senator Obama down for giving service by being a community organizer. The hypocrites. The bulldog with lipstick hockey mom (her oown self description) attacked Obama with non-truths (thanks to Bush / Rove speech writers).
Senator McCain did offer his solutions to help the economy, and they sounded just like the existing policies, I mean, nothing new. For example, McCain promotes charter school choice. We have charter school choice today. In contrast, Obama has a new plan, from pre-school thru college, with help in covering the high cost of tuition in exchange for community service. This also promotes his 'I am my brothers keeper & sisters keeper philosophy, breaking from the me-ism only way of thinking.
McCain did offer privitizing social security, an item on Bush-Cheney wish list. Just think about Enron.
Just because I was one of the 38 million viewers, does not mean I was a pro-republican viewer. If there were many more viewers like me, then that number is overstated and not a true representation of McCain voters. No way, no how, No John Bush-McCain-Palin. I say NO to four more years of the last eight years. ENUF!
Pitbull.
I have to agree. I am a liberal Democrat. I watched every minute of the DNC, but only the keynote speeches of the RNC. I do not know a single Republican who watched any of the DNC.
I am happy to have been one of the million that tuned in, because I was able to hear for myself what was being offered and see the visuals of what is being passed off as America today.
Sad and glad to say I was able to stand and say "NOT THIS TIME....no
I was not surprised that more people watched McCain's speech than Obama's. As an avid supporter of Sen. Obama, I watched both Palin and McCain speak as well. I imagine that was the case with many Obama supporters. I believe it was my duty to know what they said... if only to know how to fight it going forward. In contrast, however, I have come across many McCain supporters in the blogosphere who say they would NEVER give Obama the time of day to listen to him. And some people are downright hostile to seeing his image on their TV screens. What I would venture to guess from that is that a larger percentage of peopel who watched Obama were inclined to vote for him or at least consider voting for him than the corresponding percentage who watched McCain.
Good point. I am proud to support O, but I was tuned in tot he Repub convention.
yah we had to tune in to see what lies they are spouting! i was on the phone with mulitple people who tuned in... equally afraid of the Rep party...
i don't remember them telling many lies, except that they were mean and promising the same old sh*t. if you SOMEHOW are undecided at this moment in the campaign, and not politically astute to what Obama is offering - it was definitely misleading, and they are a very dangerous team.
Dems are informed so we watched the RNC too.
http://www
What a sense of humor McCain has. Here he is joking about women being rapped.
Joe, I agree with you completely. Every time the Republicans issue an attack-lie, Obama and Biden should counter directly and forcefully, using facts, not vituperation. They are both more than capable of doing this.
In fact, I've long thought that the most effective Obama ads, which so far we have not seen, would be FDR-style: Barack sitting quietly in front of a camera, talking directly to the American people. I'm convinced that this kind of direct, forthright, no BS communication would win the American people, and win the election.
And please, people, stop making this a conversation about Hillary. Either you want another four years of disasterous Republican rule, or you don't. If you don't, then please focus on helping Obama win.
Dems do need to answer the lies about their tax policies, which they have been doing at least somewhat already. They don't need to let Sarah drive them to distraction - McCain is running for president, he needs to be the main target. Biden can confront Sarah with her lies and false promises at the VP debate. Hopefully, he will do so.
MEDIA MATTERS:
Media report Palin's opposition of "bridge
to nowhere" but not her previous support for it .
Media report Palin opposes earmarks, but not
her previous requests for them
Media promote Palin as "reformer," ignoring
state ethics investigation
Ignoring numerous ties, media promote idea
that Palin "took on" Sen. Stevens
Media fail to challenge McCain camp talking
point that Palin is "commander in chief' of the
Alaska National Guard
Media falsely assert Palin supports benefits for
same-sex partners of state employees
Media ignore McCain's previously stated
"threshold" for his VP: "ready to step in on
a moment's notice"
Media do not challenge McCain camp assertion
that liberal blogs dictated timing of Palin pregnancy
disclosure
I fail to understand why Obama's campaign has not responded vigorously to the blatant lies and mis-statements from the Republican party. The attack ad you refer to is particularly grating with the record of the current administration. When Clinton left office, the budget was balanced and government was smaller. In the past 8 years, the American people have been lied to time and time again but they choose to ignore it. Why don't the Democratic strategists take advantage of the facts to bolster Obama's standing. If they follow the course that Kerry and Gore followed in the last two elections we can be assured of at least four more years of the same old thing in Washingon.
Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.
Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.
Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.
His record is in fact quite impressive for a junior Senator from Illinois.
Most of his legislative effort has been in the areas of:
� Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills)
� Health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills)
� Consumer protection/labor (14 bills)
� The needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills)
� Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills)
� Foreign Policy (10 bills)
� Voting and Elections (9 bills)
� Education (7 bills)
� Hurricane Katrina Relief (6)
� The Environment (5 bills)
� Homeland Security (4 bills)
� Discrimination (4 bills)
If you make less than $250,000 your taxes are maintained at current rate
If you make 150,000 or less your taxes will be further reduced.
I'm just getting started, but hows that for "different?"
What we are up against is that the truth simply does not matter to the Hard Right Republicans that own the party. They want to have complete control over the American people so they can re-write the constitution to support their un-american and frankly un-christian agenda. Those who are members of this group need to know that God has left their building. They are not doing his will and I doubt very much that he is darkening their door. The Bible tells us, That which you do for the least of these, you do for me. John McCain, Guiliani, Palin, Romney, Thompson, Graham and Huckebee redicule and laugh at Obama and every other American who adheres to that Biblical message.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
