Monday, October 6, 2008

Shock & Awe

From a letter sent out to the Republicans to whip them up.  The McCain campaign has not denied they need to change the conversation in this election.  They don't want to talk about the issues anymore.  This should be disturbing to anyone, Republican, Democrat or Independent.  How low have we sunk?

Hillary Clinton was late in recognizing the threat Obama posed to her campaign, but once she did, her strategy worked.

When Hillary exposed Obama publicly, her campaign saw a major turnaround.

Hillary won every major state primary in the nation with the sole exception of Obama's home state of Illinois.

And even though Obama was 'anointed' by the media and Democratic elites, Hillary went on to win eight of the last 10 Democratic primaries.

How did Obama beat Hillary for the nomination?

Well, using a loophole in Democratic rules, he was able to rack up large majorities in caucus states where he outspent and out organized her.

But in large, contested states she won almost every time. Why? Because when Democrats heard what Obama really stood for, they turned on him.

Make no mistake about it: If we let Americans know the truth about Obama, John McCain can win this election!

But we must employ Hillary Clinton's strategy.

We must expose Obama for the dangerous radical he is.

You Can Make a Difference

This is why the National Republican Trust Political Action Committee is moving to implement a 'shock and awe' strategy against Obama in key states.

We plan to take out powerful television ads, Internet ads and other communications to inform Americans about the dangers posed by Barack Obama.

We plan to target key states that can make a difference - But we need your help to do it
I'm in the process of watching the Obama video released today on the Keating 5.  I will not bother you with a link to it.  I am sorry Obama's campaign felt they needed to go there.  But,  in light of what the Republicans have announced is coming, I understand their response.  G-d help us all.



Don said...

Don't think I have been so disappointed in a presidential campaign as I am this time. I just plain don't know what I'm going to do.

Brian said...


Is it worse than it used to be? Honestly, this is the most involved I've ever been involved in a political campaign (especially during the primaries). I can recall being sickened by the general tone of negative ads before. But, this time I'm really in the trenches and seeing how gory it is on both sides.

I had such high hopes when McCain won the nomination on the Republican side. I thought this campaign would be different.

kc bob said...

I think everything changed when McCain brought Rove's minion in to run his campaign.

Someday said...

How much lower and personal can one go than to accuse opponents of being racists? Obama’s already trotted that out four times this summer.

How long did it take to make that 13 minute video? Longer than a few days. Never mind the fact that McCain took responsibility for his mistake here, and owned up to it. I remember what happened, and Senator McCain was found not guilty of any wrong doing in the affair. Yet he still claimed responsibility. Do you really believe that this video wasn't produced with the very intention of bringing it out sometime in October? You think he had this made "just in case"?

Here is my take on all of this. Senator Obama has repeatedly associated Senator McCain with President Bush in unfair and dishonest ways. Anyone with a memory older than this race will recall Senator McCain speaking out against George Bush's policies.
Senator Obama's whole campaign has revolved around running against George Bush accusing Senator McCain of "Guilt by association". McCain has even influenced the Neocons into changing their policies.

He voted with Bush 90% of the time. That means 10% of the time he did not. How many times did Obama vote along with Bush? 50% of the time. He differed on things like, supporting the troops, extending tax cuts, the economic stimulus plan, against limiting credit to 30%, the surge in Iraq, etc. Did he pick the wrong 50% of the time to agree with Bush? Evidentially.

Senator Obama has been running negative ads for months. They may not like the fact that Senator Obama's missing history is being examined, but I personally believe his history is fair game, especially since he has no record to run on. Being ex-military, I know how hard it is to get a high security clearance. Do you really, honestly believe I would have gotten one with Obama's background? The answer is no. Being associated even slightly with a known terrorist would have disqualified me. Face it. He is running for Commander in Chief.

Brian said...


I'm sure the video was made long ago. And, no it wasn't made "just in case". It was made because anyone who knows politics could see this coming. It's not shocking that McCain has turned to the Rove playbook. What is shocking (to me anyway) is Sarah Palin and his advisors actually announced it over the last couple of days. The video is to keep the news cycle from being completely focused on the accusations from the McCain camp. Call it "flak" if you will. Obama is not going to be Swift Boated and doesn't intend to spend the next four weeks playing defense.

I am disappointed that the Obama camp felt they had to release the video (as I said here earlier). I did not link to it and I have not sent it to any friends, including the one who just sent me another email trying to tie Obama to Bill Ayers.


Tones said...

Both gentlemen have and will continue to use the same tactics. Both camps are despicable - Brian, you are sounding like Obama is a victim here - both camps are doing the same thing and it's been going on for decades. Neither will get my vote this year.

kc bob said...

I see associating Obama with Ayres and McCain with Bush as two seperate things someday.

Speaking to how maverick McCain votes 90% in lockstep with Bush seems relevant to me. Dragging Ayres in and saying that Obama "pals around with terrorists" seems at best unrelevant and a bit desperate.

I am an undecided voter.. I wonder why the campaigns think that they can win me over with nasty political ads? They have had an opposite effect on me.

Brian said...

Certainly a legitimate POV, Tones. Both have made misleading statements. Both have had horribly misleading ads. And both have flat out lied about certain things. Which we call "worse" is a subjective matter. I know which way I've decided on that issue.

Not voting is not an option for me.

Brian said...

Yeah, Bob. I agree with you about the negative ads. They actually make me want to run in the opposite direction. I can only surmise people like you and I are not the target audience for them. People who don't take the time to figure out what is really going on might fall victim to them, I supposed.

Someday said...


It's only irrelevant if it leads to nothing concrete. If John McCain had this type of pattern of associations throughout his life, he would have never even made it to pilot training, let alone become a presidential candidate. Believe me, you may call it negative, but it is a valid question to ask. Who is Barrack Obama? Why is he running in the same circles as people like Rezko and Auchi, Odinga, Ayers, The New Black Panther Party, La Raza, Farrakhan, and finally Rashid and Mona Khalidi?

This may not bother you enough to take a closer look, but at least someone should alert you to the facts. What you do with them is your own business. If the facts lead you to vote for Senator Obama, then so be it. Let's just quit hiding them.

As I already mentioned, the "most liberal Senator" in congress managed to vote with Bush 50% of the time. I am willing to bet most Democrats have voted with Bush over 75%-80% of the time. Most are more moderate than Senator Obama. That's how he got his "most Liberal" label. When you start doing the math, and look at how the other Republicans voted with Bush 95-97% of the time, Senator McCain starts to look like an outsider. In fact, he is an outsider. Ask any conservative. The association of McBush is just as valid as the one with Ayers. Obama has a slim political record to go by. But he does have a history he don't want us talking about. Why is that?


Tones said...

Interesting points - yes, which is worse is subjective - even though I despise the ads, I feel compelled to view all of them. To me, the contest is a tie thus far. I don't think McCain even has a shot at the win. Hey Brian, as a Universalist, I'm curious - I would guess that Neither McCain nor Palin would claim to be a Universalist - what do you think Obama would respond to the question? Good post!

Brian said...


Excellent question. My guess (I'll probably get in trouble for this but hey...)... My guess is that John McCain is not a universalist. If I were a betting man, I'd put money down that Sarah Palin thinks a lot of people are going to hell and rightly so (based on the types of churches she has attended. I could be wrong). Obama- now that is a good question. Being a member of the UCC, there is no official universalist doctrine that I know of. But, as a member myself for the last almost two years, I've never heard a UCC person talk about hell or having to save people from hell. I discussed it with our former pastor who I would describe as a Universalist (although he didn't use the label. Back to the question. Obama converted as an adult. I seriously doubt he bought off on the idea of an eternal hell after being raised the way he was. So, my guess would be yes, he's probably a Universalist. But, again, I doubt he'd use the label. I think if we could question him on his beliefs though we'd probably put him in that category.

Oh, on the ads, I watch just about all of them. Even though I probably miss many on TV, I catch 'em on YouTube and on McCain's website. I cringe at a lot of Obama's ads, too. He has a great one running right now though about health care. I hope to see more.

kc bob said...

"Who is Barrack Obama? Why is he running in the same circles as people like Rezko and Auchi, Odinga, Ayers, The New Black Panther Party, La Raza, Farrakhan, and finally Rashid and Mona Khalidi?"

You seem to have made up your mind about these associations Someday.

Maybe you can point me to some places that speak to the facts about Obama's relationships with these people. For example, are these folks people that Obama represented as a lawyer, or people that he has publicly endorsed in some capacity or are they just casual associations that he has had.

I regularly get these guilty-by-innuendo emails on Obama that seem to usually be debunked by places like Snopes or other fact checker sites. I would really like to get some facts about these "associations" if there are any. Apart from that I take the allegations as anecdotal ones fueled by innuendo and insinuation.

Don said...

Brian, I'm not sure it's worse than any other particular election (since I've been voting 1968). I guess I'm just fed up with the whole election process. No recommendations on improving it. Just tired of it. REAL tired of it.

Someday said...

Alright. Let's take a look at Senator Obama's not so shady associations.

I'm thinking here.....

I can't think of any other friends he has had over the years. Since he has thrown every association under the bus, who does he have left? OK, he has new friends. But that is just that. New. Who were his friends before he ran for potusa? Can you name any? Is there one political person he has sustained a friendship with?

How does anyone get to where Senator Obama is without any friends? No associations? None?

Look, he trained trainers at ACORN. They keep getting investigated all over the place for fraud. Is he going to throw them under the bus next? My guess is yes. But the media will ignore that connection as soon as he does. It's a pattern.


Brian said...

Yes, Someday. I'm sure Obama is a dangerous socialist who has been groomed by nothing but left-wing ideologues who mysteriously escaped the scrutiny of his competition for the Illinois Senate and the United States Senate. Now that they've launched him into national prominence, the liberal media is conspiring to keep the associations hidden and he appears to have come from nowhere. Brilliant plan.

When you've lost on all the issues, you reach for the Rove playbook. Hey, it's worked before. Why not try it again?

kc bob said...

If anyone is interested in shady connections they might want to check out McCains ties to casino legislation alleged by the NY Times

Brian said...

Interesting, Bob. I'm not a big fan of gambling, personally. Ohio just had an issue on the ballot to build a casino. I voted against it.

kc bob said...

I'm more concerned about his associations with casino owners in Vegas and his sponsorship of "gaming" on Indian reservations.. but, according to the article he does seem to be somneone who likes to roll craps at casinos.