Mud Pies for ‘That One’

areyoushittin'me? · #1 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:38 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/op...in&oref=slogin

By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 7, 2008

Quote:

Some of John McCain’s friends, from the good old days when he talked straight, feared that his Greek tragedy would be that he would be defeated by George Bush twice: once in 2000, because of W.’s no-conscience campaigning, and again in 2008, because of W.’s no-brains governing.

But if McCain loses, he will have contributed to his own downfall by failing to live up to his personal standard of honor.

John McCain has long been torn between wanting to succeed and serving a higher cause. Right now, the drive to succeed is trumping any loftier aspirations. He cynically picked a running mate with less care than theater directors give to picking a leading actor’s understudy. And he has been running a seamy campaign originally designed by the bad seed of conservative politics, Lee Atwater.

It was adapted in 2000 in Atwater’s home state of South Carolina by Atwater acolytes in W.’s camp to harpoon McCain with rumors that he had fathered out of wedlock a black baby (as opposed to adopting a Bangladeshi infant girl in wedlock). Sulfurous Atwater-style rumor-mongering by Bush supporters — that McCain had come home from a Hanoi tiger cage with snakes in his head — aimed to stop him during that primary after he had zoomed in New Hampshire.

Atwater relished teaching rich, white Republicans to feign a connection to the common man so they could get in office and economically undermine the common man. In the 1988 campaign, the Machiavellian ran to help George Bush Sr. defeat Michael Dukakis with this unholy quintet of charges:

The Democrat was a ’60s-style liberal who would raise taxes and take away guns. He was weak and would not protect the country militarily. He was a member of the elite “Harvard Yard’s boutique.” He had a foreign-sounding name and was not on “the American side.” He was on the side of the Scary Black Man.

Sound familiar?

Certainly, at some level, John McCain must be disgusted with himself for using the tactics perfected by the same crowd that used these tactics to derail him in 2000. He’s now curmudgeonly, even hostile, toward the press — the group he used to spend hours with every day and jokingly describe as his base.

He unleashed Sarah Palin to slime their opponent and suggested that the Democrat with the foreign-sounding name who came from the Harvard Yard boutique is not on the American side.

Campaigning last weekend, Palin cast their Democratic rival as “someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.”

The woman is sounding more Cheney than Cheney. Palin said that Obama’s relationship with the former Weatherman William Ayers proved that he did not have the “truthfulness and judgment” to be president. Asked by William Kristol if the Rev. Jeremiah Wright should be an issue, she said, “I don’t know why that association isn’t discussed more.”

Atwater gleefully tried to paint Willie Horton as Dukakis’s running mate. With a black man running, it’s even easier for Atwater’s disciple running McCain’s campaign to warn that white Americans should not open the door to the dangerous Other, or “That One,” as McCain referred to Obama in Tuesday night’s debate. (A cross between “The One” and “That Woman.”)

On Monday, McCain made Obama, who has been campaigning for almost two years now, sound like an ominous intruder, questioning his character and motives, telling a New Mexico crowd that “even at this late hour in the campaign, there are essential things we don’t know about Senator Obama ...

“All people want to know is: What has this man ever actually accomplished in government? What does he plan for America? In short: Who is the real Barack Obama?”

The new McCain TV ad, “Dangerous,” calls Obama “dishonorable,” “dangerous” and “too risky for America.”

McCain aides have been blunt in their need to change the subject from the economy. But, as with Bush Senior’s re-election campaign, slithery character attacks don’t scare as well when Americans are already scared about keeping their jobs and retirement savings. Maybe that’s why McCain didn’t bring up Ayers or Wright during the debate, instead leaving it to Sarah Barracuda.

Palin finally took questions on Tuesday from her traveling press corps on her campaign plane. Asked if she thought Senator Obama was dishonest, McCain’s Mean Girl meandered:

“I’m not saying he’s dishonest, but in terms of judgment, in terms of being able to answer a question forthrightly, it has two different parts to this. The judgment and the truthfulness and just being able to answer very candidly a simple question about when did you know him, how did you know him, is there still — has there been an association continued since ’02 or ’05, I know I’ve read a couple different stories. I think it’s relevant.”

Of course she does.

Commissioner · #2 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/op...in&oref=slogin

By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 7, 2008

Maureen Dowd, huh? Other than picking your ass, what else do you do with your time.

areyoushittin'me? · #3 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commissioner

Maureen Dowd, huh? Other than picking your ass, what else do you do with your time.

Are you disputing the points in the article or just here with more of your childish bullshit?

(rhetorical question)

hackteck · #4 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?

Are you disputing the points in the article or just here with more of your childish bullshit?

(rhetorical question)

i say hes here for more childish bullshit

kgpoolerev · #5 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 09:54 PM

Fascinating, she is tearing McCain down for what Obama has been doing since the day he got enough super delegates.

When McCain looses it will due to being a whimp and not taking Obama to the woodshed. It will be due to the media talking about polls instead of reporting on Obama and McCain not taking them to the woodshed. But most of all it will be due to McCain being on the wrong side of issues like illegal immigration, 150 billion of pork in the 700 billion bail out, the 700 billion bail out, getting the government more involved with healthcare, and not being willing to admit that there were many borrowers who lost their houses due to speculating. Speculators like the nurse in Florida who owned a home and took out an unwise mortgage to buy a second home thinking she would flip it and make a lot of money. Even today many people are easily getting credit and buying houses with only 3% down.

Obama is the worst presidential candidate in the history of the US. Any other Democrat would be up 15 to 20%. Yet McCain without strong support from the Republican base if almost within the margin of error. As bad a candidate as Obama is the media has had to prop him up and McCain is too whimpy to take Obama to the woodshe and has moved almost as far left as Obama.

Brian Hussein Crooks · #6 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgpoolerev

Fascinating, she is tearing McCain down for what Obama has been doing since the day he got enough super delegates.

When McCain looses it will due to being a whimp and not taking Obama to the woodshed. It will be due to the media talking about polls instead of reporting on Obama and McCain not taking them to the woodshed. But most of all it will be due to McCain being on the wrong side of issues like illegal immigration, 150 billion of pork in the 700 billion bail out, the 700 billion bail out, getting the government more involved with healthcare, and not being willing to admit that there were many borrowers who lost their houses due to speculating. Speculators like the nurse in Florida who owned a home and took out an unwise mortgage to buy a second home thinking she would flip it and make a lot of money. Even today many people are easily getting credit and buying houses with only 3% down.

Obama is the worst presidential candidate in the history of the US. Any other Democrat would be up 15 to 20%. Yet McCain without strong support from the Republican base if almost within the margin of error. As bad a candidate as Obama is the media has had to prop him up and McCain is too whimpy to take Obama to the woodshe and has moved almost as far left as Obama.

I'm going to say something that I'm sure is going to anger you, and you'll probably say it disqualifies me from making a valid point, and I accept that. Barack Obama is Black. Not only is he Black, but he's from the North too. The last Northern Democrat to be elected president was JFK. Northern Democrats have a very hard time breaking out of the coastal states in most cases.

To pretend that there are no voters out there who are voting for him simply because he's Black is outrageous. People who looked just like him were getting sprayed with fire hoses and attacked by German Shepherds when my parents were in middle school. That means the people who used the hoses and the dogs and in many cases the ropes and the guns and the clubs are still alive and still voting all over the country.

Two generations ago, Indiana was the national center of the KKK. Obama is trailing by 5, just outside the margin of error. We need not drag out the history of every state, but suffice it to say there are large numbers of people in many states who grew up thinking Blacks were inferior and still do, even if subconsciously. I'm not saying these people are racists; most probably aren't. However, when the mind is conditioned at an early age, things it is often hard to break long-held perceptions.

To Obama's credit, I don't believe he has once raised the specter of racism against John McCain nor his campaign. He didn't even go after the low-hanging fruit, McCain's record on Martin Luther King Day. When McCain's campaign runs commercials in rural swing districts connecting Obama to nefarious Black figures (specious connections at best), all of whom appear significantly darker in complexion than they really are, Obama and his campaign ignore it and stay on focus.

Of course, not all of this is racism. McCain has a true appeal among a lot of independents. I just find it remarkable that we've come far enough just since Iowa that "Race and the Race" doesn't scroll every 15 minutes on every cable news source. This is a historical election and we needn't forget that.

Heckler · #7 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Hussein Crooks

I'm going to say something that I'm sure is going to anger you, and you'll probably say it disqualifies me from making a valid point, and I accept that. Barack Obama is Black. Not only is he Black, but he's from the North too. The last Northern Democrat to be elected president was JFK. Northern Democrats have a very hard time breaking out of the coastal states in most cases.

To pretend that there are no voters out there who are voting for him simply because he's Black is outrageous. People who looked just like him were getting sprayed with fire hoses and attacked by German Shepherds when my parents were in middle school. That means the people who used the hoses and the dogs and in many cases the ropes and the guns and the clubs are still alive and still voting all over the country.

Two generations ago, Indiana was the national center of the KKK. Obama is trailing by 5, just outside the margin of error. We need not drag out the history of every state, but suffice it to say there are large numbers of people in many states who grew up thinking Blacks were inferior and still do, even if subconsciously. I'm not saying these people are racists; most probably aren't. However, when the mind is conditioned at an early age, things it is often hard to break long-held perceptions.

To Obama's credit, I don't believe he has once raised the specter of racism against John McCain nor his campaign. He didn't even go after the low-hanging fruit, McCain's record on Martin Luther King Day. When McCain's campaign runs commercials in rural swing districts connecting Obama to nefarious Black figures (specious connections at best), all of whom appear significantly darker in complexion than they really are, Obama and his campaign ignore it and stay on focus.

Of course, not all of this is racism. McCain has a true appeal among a lot of independents. I just find it remarkable that we've come far enough just since Iowa that "Race and the Race" doesn't scroll every 15 minutes on every cable news source. This is a historical election and we needn't forget that.

Pretty reasonable position....and yes, I agree, some will vote for Obama because he is black, others will not vote for him, because he is black...

I think the majority of Americans are getting tired of the distractions from the real issues of our times, of the endless manufacturing of mountains of mud...

LCOF · #8 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 10:10 AM

She is explaining to all the bitter taste of sour grapes. McCain kicked her off his plane. That aside she tries to make the point McCain has changed. She liked him when he was going against Republicans. That is "Straight Talk" to libs like her. But when you disagree with a lib, that's partisan.

It would be nice to have some straight talk from the media.

Commissioner · #9 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?

Are you disputing the points in the article or just here with more of your childish bullshit?

(rhetorical question)

I saw NY Times and Maureen Dowd, and concluded there wasn't much reason to even bother reading it.

Brian Hussein Crooks · #10 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 10:23 AM

So what I've seen is that any time any writer criticizes McCain-Palin, no matter what their conservative bonafides, they're called tools of the liberal left. David Brooks and George F. Will are not lefties, everyone knows that. Instead of attacking the messenger for not liking your candidate, try defending your candidate. If these supposed liberals are so wrong, set the record straight.