The Obama Rules

[ProfJohn]

Here is a nicely put together example of typical political hypocrisy.

Any issue that Obama doesn't like is now a 'distraction' from the important things.
link

If Barack Obama gets his way, the Oxford English Dictionary will have updated its definition of "distraction" by the end of the campaign: "Diversion of the mind, attention, etc., from any object or course that tends to advance the political interests of Barack Obama."

After his blowout win in North Carolina last week, Obama turned to framing the rules of the general election ahead, warning in his victory speech of "efforts to distract us." The chief distracter happens to be the man standing between Obama and the White House, John McCain, who will "use the very same playbook that his side has used time after time in election after election."

Ah, yes, the famous distractions with which Republicans fool unwitting Americans. Ronald Reagan distracted them with the Iranian hostage crisis, high inflation and unemployment, gas lines and the loss of American prestige abroad. Then, the first George Bush distracted them with the notion of a third Reagan term, as well as the issues of taxes, crime and volunteerism. After a brief interlude of national focus during two Clinton terms, another Bush arrived wielding the dark art of distraction.

Forget "bitter"; Obama must believe that most Americans suffer from an attention-deficit disorder so crippling that they can't concentrate on their own interests or values.

Obama has an acute self-interest in so diagnosing the American electorate. His campaign knows he's vulnerable to the charge of being an elitist liberal. Unable to argue the facts, it wants to argue the law -- defining his weaknesses as off-limits.

The campaign can succeed in imposing these rules on the race only if the news media cooperate. Newsweek signed up for the effort in a cover story that reads like a 3,400-word elaboration of the "distraction" passage of Obama's victory speech. "The Republican Party has been successfully scaring voters since 1968," it says, through "innuendo and code." McCain "may not be able to resist casting doubt on Obama's patriotism," and there's a question whether he can or wants to "rein in the merchants of slime and sellers of hate."

Here are the Obama rules in detail: He can't be called a "liberal" ("the same names and labels they pin on everyone," as Obama puts it); his toughness on the war on terror can't be questioned ("attempts to play on our fears"); his extreme positions on social issues can't be exposed ("the same efforts to distract us from the issues that affect our lives" and "turn us against each other"); and his Chicago background too is off-limits ("pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy"). Besides that, it should be a freewheeling and spirited campaign.

Democrats always want cultural issues not to matter because they are on the least-popular side of many of them, and want patriotic symbols like the Pledge of Allegiance and flag pins to be irrelevant when they can't manage to nominate presidential candidates who wholeheartedly embrace them (which shouldn't be that difficult). As for "fear" and "division," they are vaporous pejoratives that can be applied to any warning of negative consequences of a given policy or any political position that doesn't command 100 percent assent. In his North Carolina speech, Obama said the Iraq War "has not made us safer," and that McCain's ideas are "out of touch" with "American values." How fearfully divisive.

We could take Obama's rules in good faith if he never calls John McCain a "conservative" or labels him in any other way. If he never criticizes him for his association with George Bush. If he doesn't jump on his gaffes (like McCain's 100-years-in-Iraq comment that Obama distorted and harped on for weeks). And if he never says anything that would tend to make Americans fearful about the future or divide them (i.e., say things that some people agree with and others don't).

This is, of course, an impossible standard. Obama doesn't expect anyone to live up to it except John McCain.

 

[StageLeft]

That article is quite underwhelming at all, although it does a good job by starting things off with some strawmen :thumbsup:

 

[OrByte]

I think this one is DOA.

but thanks anyway PJ.

 

[Genx87]

One of these days the coddled Obama will have to grow up. Should be interesting to see how his campaign reacts in the Fall. I wouldnt say it has been particularily impressive with the Clinton campaign.

 

[ProfJohn]

The fall campaign should be very different than the Democrat nomination.

Obama hasn't been challenged on the issues because him and Hillary agree on virtually everything. But in the fall he will have to do more than give nice speeches about change and instead speak about the issues and how he will deal with them.

Will be very different than what we have seen for the past few months.

 

[Lemon law]

We all know how republirats campaign and thats via swiftboats. And the record McCain must run on is the true embarrassment the desperately needs public distraction.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The fall campaign should be very different than the Democrat nomination.

Obama hasn't been challenged on the issues because him and Hillary agree on virtually everything. But in the fall he will have to do more than give nice speeches about change and instead speak about the issues and how he will deal with them.

Will be very different than what we have seen for the past few months.

yep. a very different tone will come from the obama camp, they will need to bump up their rhetoric several notches, and that is what will be their downfall

 

[Vic]

Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The fall campaign should be very different than the Democrat nomination.

Obama hasn't been challenged on the issues because him and Hillary agree on virtually everything. But in the fall he will have to do more than give nice speeches about change and instead speak about the issues and how he will deal with them.

Will be very different than what we have seen for the past few months.

yep. a very different tone will come from the obama camp, they will need to bump up their rhetoric several notches, and that is what will be their downfall

You guys are hilarious. Somehow... you're still in complete denial that your party has f'ed up so bad that you're facing a Democratic sweep of historical proportions this fall.

Think 1932. That November, one of Hoover's supporters wrote him a letter right before the election that said, "Vote for FDR and make it unanimous."

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Genx87
One of these days the coddled Obama will have to grow up. Should be interesting to see how his campaign reacts in the Fall. I wouldnt say it has been particularily impressive with the Clinton campaign.

WTF are you talking about with the coddled Obama. :roll: Do you mean the attention Wright got and is still getting? Do you mean the 'bitter' comment that was taken out of context and twisted? Do you mean the 'elitist' label on him despite the fact that those attempting to pin that label on him are worth far more?

You're right though. Obama has been totally unimpressive. It's not as if he started out a long shot up against one of the biggest names in the (D) party. It's not as if he overcame that *huge* deficit. It's not as if he didn't completely out fund raise both Clinton and McCain. Totally unimpressive. :roll:

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Vic
Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

I think you are making the mistake of believing that Obama will automatically win on all those issues.

What is Obama's plan for the economy and is it a better plan than McCain's?

What is Obama's plan for our deficit? More spending? The National Taxpayers Union estimates Obama's spending proposals will result in an additional $300 billion per year. Meanwhile McCain's spending amounts to all of $6.9 billion... hmmmm

McCain has a history of supporting fiscal responsibility, Obama does not.

Obama will have to over come that problem in the fall and he won't be able to do it by standing up and talking about 'change.'

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Vic
Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

Obama has no serious economic plan. The one on his website is a complete platitude filled joke. Also, McCain actually voted against a lot of the Bush bills that created these deficits, which took a lot of political courage in his party, something Obama has yet to demonstrate.
I doubt the media will care about the real issues though. It's on a hope dope high.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Vic
You guys are hilarious. Somehow... you're still in complete denial that your party has f'ed up so bad that you're facing a Democratic sweep of historical proportions this fall.

Think 1932. That November, one of Hoover's supporters wrote him a letter right before the election that said, "Vote for FDR and make it unanimous."

pssst this isn't 1932 because Bush isn't running again.

This is McCain v. Obama not Bush v. Obama.

They are two very different politicians with different political views.

 

[Moonbeam]

Richard A. Lowry (born 22 August 1968) is editor of the National Review.

Lowry was born in Arlington, Virginia. He regularly appears on the Fox News Channel. He has guest-hosted on Hannity and Colmes on Fox & Friends, and is a guest panelist on Fox News Watch.

Lowry, who graduated in 1990 from of the University of Virginia, joined William F. Buckley's National Review, in 1992 and has been the magazine's editor since 1997.

You Bush supporters have destroyed the Nation. Why post more shit that will continue us on that path.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Vic
You guys are hilarious. Somehow... you're still in complete denial that your party has f'ed up so bad that you're facing a Democratic sweep of historical proportions this fall.

Think 1932. That November, one of Hoover's supporters wrote him a letter right before the election that said, "Vote for FDR and make it unanimous."

pssst this isn't 1932 because Bush isn't running again.

This is McCain v. Obama not Bush v. Obama.

They are two very different politicians with different political views.

But given the answers Hoover offered in 1932, and the Mclame offer of another 100 years in Iraq, the similarities
are unmistakable. Sadly, other than a few minor differences, GWB=McCain and there is no hiding of that basic fact.

But PJ point taken, Obama will not just automatically win.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Vic
You guys are hilarious. Somehow... you're still in complete denial that your party has f'ed up so bad that you're facing a Democratic sweep of historical proportions this fall.

Think 1932. That November, one of Hoover's supporters wrote him a letter right before the election that said, "Vote for FDR and make it unanimous."

pssst this isn't 1932 because Bush isn't running again.

This is McCain v. Obama not Bush v. Obama.

They are two very different politicians with different political views.

psst... that doesn't matter, and no, they're not two very different politicians with different political views. And even if they were, the party machine is directing McCain just like it directed Bush. This notion, that I constantly hear over and over again, that we are electing a single man to be President, and not a team and political machine, is IMO very childish.

I know you're in denial about the political climate in America, but rest assured, Bush's legacy, in particular the war and the economy, are going to sink McCain. The party even knows it, otherwise they wouldn't be running this obvious fall guy.

As to you other post, IIRC we've already had this discussion. Don't expect me to keep posting the facts and figures over and over again just because you don't want to accept them. And the NTU is deluded. I support the idea of lower taxes, but I'm not so stupid to as fall for the shell game that my taxes have gone down when the debt and deficit go up. Plus, they certainly didn't include McCain's "Surge Part II" war budget in their projections.


edit: BTW, has anyone been kind enough to tell you yet that your sig is the Irish making fun of Americans and thinking us stupid and superficial?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Richard A. Lowry (born 22 August 1968) is editor of the National Review.

Lowry was born in Arlington, Virginia. He regularly appears on the Fox News Channel. He has guest-hosted on Hannity and Colmes on Fox & Friends, and is a guest panelist on Fox News Watch.

Lowry, who graduated in 1990 from of the University of Virginia, joined William F. Buckley's National Review, in 1992 and has been the magazine's editor since 1997.

You Bush supporters have destroyed the Nation. Why post more shit that will continue us on that path.

As the hoped-for successor to Buckley's legacy, and who shined early on, Lowry has done nothing but disappoint in recent years.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Vic
Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

Obama has no serious economic plan. The one on his website is a complete platitude filled joke. Also, McCain actually voted against a lot of the Bush bills that created these deficits, which took a lot of political courage in his party, something Obama has yet to demonstrate.
I doubt the media will care about the real issues though. It's on a hope dope high.

What? No "empty suit" or "demagogue" comments? Wow, you must be slipping.

Has anyone told you yet that you have devolved into the worst kind of troll? Obama's, Clinton's, and McCain's plan (for anything) could match word-for-word, and you'd still criticize Obama for being empty, not serious, or whatever. The sad thing is that everyone here knows that this, and likewise doesn't take you seriously, and yet you seem completely unaware of that.

 

[jonks]

*raspberry*

Wright was mostly a distraction. Whether or not Obama is a muslim is a distraction. Whether his not wearing a flag pin reflects somehow on his love of country is a distraction. I think these are pretty clearly political toys that are fun for 24 hour cable news and 30 second ads, but have little value in assessing merit.

Is his healthcare plan feasable? Is his Iraqi withdrawl plan feasable? Does he have any ideas on fixing the economy besides giving people $600 to spend on gas? What does his voting record reflect? These are questions the answer to which might actually matter in some way.

People love the distractions because talking issues is pretty boring.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Vic
Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

Obama has no serious economic plan. The one on his website is a complete platitude filled joke. Also, McCain actually voted against a lot of the Bush bills that created these deficits, which took a lot of political courage in his party, something Obama has yet to demonstrate.
I doubt the media will care about the real issues though. It's on a hope dope high.

What? No "empty suit" or "demagogue" comments? Wow, you must be slipping.

Has anyone told you yet that you have devolved into the worst kind of troll? Obama's, Clinton's, and McCain's plan (for anything) could match word-for-word, and you'd still criticize Obama for being empty, not serious, or whatever. The sad thing is that everyone here knows that this, and likewise doesn't take you seriously, and yet you seem completely unaware of that.

The beauty of self0rationalization is that it is self-convincing.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Vic
Wow, it sure sucks for the Pubs that Obama won't play the issues game of abortion and gays this time around. OMG you might have to face up to the economy and the debt and deficit!! :Q

That's the political hypocrisy.

I think you are making the mistake of believing that Obama will automatically win on all those issues.

What is Obama's plan for the economy and is it a better plan than McCain's?

What is Obama's plan for our deficit? More spending? The National Taxpayers Union estimates Obama's spending proposals will result in an additional $300 billion per year. Meanwhile McCain's spending amounts to all of $6.9 billion... hmmmm

McCain has a history of supporting fiscal responsibility, Obama does not.

Obama will have to over come that problem in the fall and he won't be able to do it by standing up and talking about 'change.'

Hmmm, how much will a 100 years in Iraq cost us? Or will Iraqis pay us for guarding their country for the next 100 years with their oil revenue?

 

[RightIsWrong]

Ok. I read the article and I am still unable to determine what issues are off limits that actually effect anyone.

Let's see....

1. The economy? Nope. Obama has been trying to get that to be a major theme of this campaign
2. Iraq? Nope. Obama has repeatedly spoken about it and has relished the "debate" over this issue with McCain
3. The housing crisis? Nope. After McCain's statements that we should do nothing...this is something to focus on
4. Terrorism? Nope. Obama was the first to come out and state that he would send Specops into Pakistan and then Hillary and McCain realized that it was a positive and jumped on board
5. The federal budget? Nope. Obama has outlined a plan that will keep costs stable or even cut them by re-instituting PAYGO
6. Health care (or lack thereof)? Nope. Obama has a plan for that as well that will cover ALL kids under 18
7. Taxes? Nope. Obama has outlined a plan to repeal the Bush tax "cuts" and outlined a new middle class cut that will benefit more than just the uber rich
8. Foreign policy? Nope.

Ah...fuck it. Just read up for yourself for a change instead of spouting off talking points based in a reality that even Freud wouldn't recognize or be able to label.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

 

[fskimospy]

Pro-Jo, the articles you are linking are becoming steadily more pathetic. This one is awful even under the standard of a political hack job editorial.

He's really attacking Obama for the flag pin thing again? 'Extreme positions on social issues'? Like what, the universal health care thing that more then 70% of Americans support? I like how he mentions without irony how he thinks a lot of Obama's positions are 'vaporous' and then uses 'toughness in the war on terror' as something solid to rate a candidate on.

When you link articles like this you only embarrass yourself and the guy that wrote them. I'm sure he doesn't care, but you should.

 

[Rio Rebel]

What is Obama's plan for our deficit? More spending? The National Taxpayers Union estimates Obama's spending proposals will result in an additional $300 billion per year. Meanwhile McCain's spending amounts to all of $6.9 billion... hmmmm

Apparently the funding of the Iraq war isn't included in your calculations.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Rio Rebel

What is Obama's plan for our deficit? More spending? The National Taxpayers Union estimates Obama's spending proposals will result in an additional $300 billion per year. Meanwhile McCain's spending amounts to all of $6.9 billion... hmmmm

Apparently the funding of the Iraq war isn't included in your calculations.

It never is. This has become the ultimate shell game in Washington the past few years. Bush proposed a record $3.1 trillion budget for FY09, with a projected record deficit of over half a trillion, and that doesn't include a single dollar to Iraq or Afghanistan.

So when you put it in that light, the reality is that, by getting us out of this unnecessary war, Obama will be taking $300+ billion of our money that is being spent overseas, and bringing it back home. While Benedict Arnolds like PJ keep waving the flag and preaching up fiscal responsibility while handing our money over to their Saudi masters. It makes me sad for PC, because if this was 100 years ago, there'd be hangings.