"Obama is an Arab"

mammasan

digster wrote:

I agree with this post entirely. I'm pretty sure I would've voted for McCain in 2000 if he had been the candidate against Gore, and I can't help but think how much better the past eight years would've been had he been in office. But I think he had a bit of a crisis after that 2000 debacle; he realized that if he remained the maverick, and if he didn't engage in the type of politics that had been used against him by Rove, he would never win. And like everyone that runs, he REALLY wants to be president. For all the talk of the momentous event that Obama's presidency is, it has also been the least dramatic presidential campaigns I can remember. McCain's the story here; he seems very uncomfortable with these personal attacks, but he's committed to them anyway, since as a smart politicians he knows he may not win otherwise. I think he's been starting to realize (with his rebuttal of this jackass, and the toning down of his rhetoric on the stump, no more 'palling around with terrorists' junk). He's seen the reports of what those rallies are bringing out of people, and is very uncomfortable. Maybe he's had enough of having his strings being pulled by the Roves and Schmidts of his party...or maybe not. Maybe he wants to win too much.

It'd make a hell of a film or something, later on down the line.

Here is a good editorial by Ed Rollins. I think he sums up the McCain campaign best.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/11/rollins.endgame/index.htm

digster

mammasan wrote:

Here is a good editorial by Ed Rollins. I think he sums up the McCain campaign best.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/11/rollins.endgame/index.htm

I'd agree with most of that. Alot of conservatives I've seen are already positioning the story as this; "McCain's campaign completely screwed the candidate. He wasn't able to beat an opponent who offered nothing in return." I don't think I'd agree with an argument like that, because it turns Obama into a mere footnote, rather than a central reason behind the electoral map right now. I see it in some of my Republican friends; they are adopting this argument because they want to avoid giving Obama's campaign and message any legitimacy. As in, Obama's victory happened completely in spite of him, rather than due in large part to him. I think that's a pretty ridiculous notion, and it tries to bury the power of Obama's positions and the attractiveness of his message. I don't think McCain would be winning this election in a walk if he hadn't abandoned his principles, but it'd be alot closer and alot more inspiring (this is not to say, of course, that this election is by any means over).

I usually despise Bill Kristol, but he's got a similar message in his column today in the New York Times. However, all of these points operate on the notion that McCain now is completely suppressing his instinct, i.e. to be the candidate he was in 2000. I don't know if he can go back to that, because the credibility he's lost has cost him some. To co-opt a term used far too often in music, he "sold out" to get the nomination. Sometimes, selling out your principles won't matter in the general election, but it is this time around. I must say, though, that if either Rollins or Ayers seem to think that the road of Wright and Ayers will lead them to the White House, I just simply don't believe that anymore. Americans perceive their country to be in too fragile a state, and I don't think those distractions would work the way they might have in the past.

jimed14

You wonder where all the hate speech and misinformation is coming from? Here's an example ...

poll on Sean Hannity's message board ... "What is Barack HUSSEIN Obama's religion?" .... not surpisingly, Muslim is winning ...

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=976951


note, there's a lot of right wing propagnada on there, including such thread titles as ...

"Barack Hussein Obama's Family Were African Slave Traders; his Mama's family owned! "

"Who is Vera Baker? Why did Obama send his MISTRESS to the Caribbean??"

"If you like Fidel Castro you willl love Obama. "

and a thread that asks ... "What's racist about this anti-Obama billboard?" ... and here is the billboard ... http://current.com/items/89393772_racist_obama_billboard_causes_outrage

g under p

I can't open that first link but that second one just goes to show with a little stirring up of the masses these racist ads and people WILL come forth.

I notice MCain in his speech in nearby VA he dropped the Ayers stuff and terriost connection.

Peace

jimed14

g under p wrote:

I can't open that first link but that second one just goes to show with a little stirring up of the masses these racist ads and people WILL come forth.

I notice MCain in his speech in nearby VA he dropped the Ayers stuff and terriost connection.

Peace

try it again, the hannity forum was down for a bit

mammasan

digster wrote:

I'd agree with most of that. Alot of conservatives I've seen are already positioning the story as this; "McCain's campaign completely screwed the candidate. He wasn't able to beat an opponent who offered nothing in return." I don't think I'd agree with an argument like that, because it turns Obama into a mere footnote, rather than a central reason behind the electoral map right now. I see it in some of my Republican friends; they are adopting this argument because they want to avoid giving Obama's campaign and message any legitimacy. As in, Obama's victory happened completely in spite of him, rather than due in large part to him. I think that's a pretty ridiculous notion, and it tries to bury the power of Obama's positions and the attractiveness of his message. I don't think McCain would be winning this election in a walk if he hadn't abandoned his principles, but it'd be alot closer and alot more inspiring (this is not to say, of course, that this election is by any means over).

I usually despise Bill Kristol, but he's got a similar message in his column today in the New York Times. However, all of these points operate on the notion that McCain now is completely suppressing his instinct, i.e. to be the candidate he was in 2000. I don't know if he can go back to that, because the credibility he's lost has cost him some. To co-opt a term used far too often in music, he "sold out" to get the nomination. Sometimes, selling out your principles won't matter in the general election, but it is this time around. I must say, though, that if either Rollins or Ayers seem to think that the road of Wright and Ayers will lead them to the White House, I just simply don't believe that anymore. Americans perceive their country to be in too fragile a state, and I don't think those distractions would work the way they might have in the past.

I was using the editorial to merely point out the internal struggle in the McCain camp. Of course people like Kristol and Rollins are going to down play Obama's significance, that is their job, but I do believe that McCain's, to borrow your term, "selling out" has been a bigger contributer to his lagging behind than Obama's performance to date. That is not to say that Obama has been a non-factor because that is untrue.

NeilJam

fugawzi wrote:

How about the people outside and inside his rallies screaming that he's a terrorist? These people are fucking psychos. Psychos who are clinging to smears because their candidate is getting his ass kicked on the real issues. Nothing new for Republicans to smear though, that's their style. They're behind and they know it, and they're desperate.

When I was out campaigning for Obama on Saturday (going to visit people registered as Democrats mind you), as soon as I told one guy who I was supporting he just yelled out "He's a terrorist!!! That's what they said down at the VFW!" I knew there was no point in trying to argue with ignorance like that so I just said "Sir, you have been misinformed," and walked away.

fugawzi

NeilJam wrote:

When I was out campaigning for Obama on Saturday (going to visit people registered as Democrats mind you), as soon as I told one guy who I was supporting he just yelled out "He's a terrorist!!! That's what they said down at the VFW!" I knew there was no point in trying to argue with ignorance like that so I just said "Sir, you have been misinformed," and walked away.

Yea what else can you do? They're not gonna listen.