A negative tone going forward
After having the chance to see Gen. Wesley Clark speak tonight about the many troubles facing our nation at home and abroad, I came back to my dorm, disappointed to read news of the increasingly negative, caustic tenor of the presidential race.
Apparently Obama, after hearing rumors this weekend of a more aggressive (and negative) McCain advertising strategy, decided to preempt any such attack by, well, attacking. Launching a totally new series of websites, complete with a full documentary, “fact list,” and issue-specific attacks, the Obama campaign is effectively aiming to undermine McCain’s moral credibility, before he goes on the offensive.
This is incredibly stupid. First of all, Obama just lowered himself into the same gutter of “old politics” that he has continually renounced. He also just conceded the “you started this negative campaign” line to the McCain camp (although anyone who thinks that this campaign hasn’t been negative so far needs to open their eyes). And besides, the judgment and associations battle is not one that an Illinois politician should plan on winning.
I read a post on this blog from yesterday, and thought I’d correct the record on the “associations argument” from the Right. First, let’s get straight what McCain’s campaign is doing: they are painting Obama as out of touch with Americans (vis-à-vis his radical friendships) and lacking in judgment. That’s it. It has nothing to do with race, as some have claimed. (If you want to know what it is about, read this. Thomas Sowell is incredibly intelligent, as always.)
However, Obama has been known to associate with radical figures: Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Rev. Wright, to name a few. True, being friends with a man like Ayers doesn’t make you a terrorist. Nobody’s saying that. But it means that you have poor judgment, at least. True, attending the Trinity United Church of Christ and listening to Rev. Wright doesn’t necessarily make you a racist. But at least the McCain campaign can claim: “You should have known better.” This argument, combined with the inexperience argument that Hillary tried to use against Obama earlier this year, seems to be the McCain campaign’s chosen path, at least for now. I’m not sure it’ll be enough to stem the swelling Obama surge, but at this point, it may be all McCain has left. Here goes nothing.
Read Jonathan’s previous post | Read his liberal counterpart.
| Print
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/palins_attack_on_obamas_patrio.php
*cough*
Scott
October 6, 2008 at 11:19 pm
As far as poor jugment is concerned, McCain is even worse than his allegations. McCain was found to have shown a poor judgment in the Keating Five scandal. Since then he’s never shown the opposite. McCain is the one who started the ongoing distraction. Obama is preempting it in order to keep the debate on the issues that we all care about. This morning, a “top McCain strategist” was even more explicit in an interview with the New York Daily News. “It’s a dangerous road, but we have no choice,” he said. “If we keep talking about the economic crisis, we’re going to lose.” In other words, McCain believes that the only way he can win the White House is by painting Obama as a chancy, radical choice who will endanger all that America holds dear–and hoping that the electorate reverts to the Republican ticket (the “safer,” more familiar option) by default.
poor judgment
Gorede
October 7, 2008 at 12:20 am
What about Sarah & Todd Palin’s association with the Alaskan Independence Party? Sure, not “domestic terrorists,” but the founder was quoted as saying he had “nothing but hatred” in his heart for the American government, and he was killed in a botched plastic explosives sale (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CE3DB153CF936A25753C1A962958260).
Shouldn’t she have known better? Ah, but tsk, tsk, the McCain campaign would seek to dismiss all allegations of improper conduct with the same repeated accusations of the “liberal media” and “intellectual elites” and blah blah blah.
Disappointing, Jonathan; you could have been a Kathleen Parker instead of a Michelle Malkin, but all you seem to do is spout the same flawed campaign rhetoric McCain has trotted out to no effect time and time again. Would it kill you to take both sides into account? Given how all you’ve done in your blessedly short time as a writer is sip the Kool-Aid, maybe not.
Jeremy Gordon
October 7, 2008 at 10:32 am
Also, I believe Obama is really a radical Muslim hellbent on destroying our country, so maybe you should write about that.
Jeremy Gordon
October 7, 2008 at 10:33 am
And again, not to belabor the point, but Obama is calling attention to McCain’s record; things he’s done as a politician. McCain is trying to slander Obama personally. It’s unlikely any of us will ever truly know a president or a presidential candidate, because we do not live with them, are not friends with them, do not talk to them, etc. All we have to go by is their record. For Sarah Palin to say Obama is friends with terrorists; that’s the dirtiest pool that’s been played to date. We don’t know the extent of their friendship; what we do know is what both candidates have said and done with regards to their jobs.
Obama is attacking McCain’s competence as a politician; McCain is attacking Obama’s competence as a person. One of these impossible to make a logical argument about. Guess which one it is?
Jeremy Gordon
October 7, 2008 at 10:38 am
Actually this article is so bad it’s really not worth responding to. But since I love to argue… here we go.
I think the other comments have clearly covered some of my concerns with the article, but I just want to point out the way you omit TONS of information. Like the new strategy of McCain making personal attacks on Obama’s character. His rally in New Mexico yesterday was a perfect example. “Who is the real Barack Obama?” “What does he plan for America?” I mean, he seriously can’t be asking those questions can he? Because I’m sure that people have looked through Obama’s platform, watched him in 20+ debates in two years, watched him in hundreds of interviews, looked at his record in Senate, heard or read some excerpts from his two books, read newspaper articles (not just from NYT), and asked him questions on the campaign trail, etc.
This has been the longest presidential campaign in history, and McCain (only one month out from the election), wants to ask,”Who is the real Barack Obama?” I’m sure he knows who the real Barack Obama is, and that is why he is resorting to these attacks that call McCain’s own integrity and character into question. This may not be a race thing Jonathan, but it could be something far worse. McCain and Palin are trying to paint Obama as a foreigner, someone who is out-of-touch with the American people. McCain is basically saying, “I’m am one of you, he is not one of us.” And even more scary, they are trying to paint him as someone who “pals around with terrorists”.
First, this has been tried before and it didn’t work, so obviously we see that this is the last resort for the McCain campaign (the issue with Wright is dead as well).
I have a lot of conservative friends, and they would be embarrassed to read this article from you Jonathan. You should know better.
Runnypants Jackson
October 7, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Just to go off of Mr. Jackson’s point, here is an excerpt of McCain’s speech yesterday. Tell me something Jonathan, what do you think McCain was trying to say?
I didn’t just show up out of nowhere, after all — America knows me. You know my strengths and my faults. You know my story and my convictions.. . . And the same standards of clarity and candor must now be applied to my opponent. Even at this late hour in the campaign, there are essential things we don’t know about Senator Obama or the record that he brings to this campaign. We have all heard what he has said, but it is less clear what he has done or what he will do. What Senator Obama says today and what he has done in the past are often two different things. He has often changed his positions in this campaign, and the best way to determine where he would really take this country is to examine where he has tried to take it in the past. . . . For a guy who’s already authored two memoirs, he’s not exactly an open book. . . . Whatever the question, whatever the issue, there’s always a back story with Senator Obama.
Barack Obama wants to focus on the issues, McCain does not.
Poopie Jones
October 7, 2008 at 12:25 pm