Fellow President Obama Supporters and Former Ones"
AS the founder of the Obama Group named YESWECANSOLVEIT...
I have taken the liberty of forming still another group called
AmericaNOchange. I doubt this one gets approved.
Thought I'd better hurry and write this and send it to all groups that
I am still a member of before I am banned here forever. Why would
that happen? you ask. Because I just formed a new group with a little
kid yelling "Hey You" while flipping off the viewer. Hope the president
and his staff gets the message.
The esculation of the war in Aftganistan is the last straw. Three strikes
your out!
First, he keeps the same people on the payroll that got us into this
financial disaster. He let's Bush and Cheney walk scot-free. He continues
to bail out the banks, "all too big to fail" why they screw us in every way.
And tonight on national tv he will try to convience us all that the way to
end the war in Aftganistan is to exculate it. This did not work in Vietnam,
I know, because I volunteered to go there, and it will not work in Aftganistan.
To add insult to injury. The powers that be, the ones backing McCain in
my city in Northern California, are all meeting to determine what the same
good ole boys get to do with local stimulus funds...So my question is?
WHAT THE HELL HAS CHANGED IN AMERICA PRESIDENT OBAMA?
I am so damned mad right now, I swear, if I could afford it, I'd trade in
my next presidential ballot for a passport.
Al Boek, Ex-Supporter of a One-Term President
earlallenboek@yahoo.com
530-549-4315
Redding, California
However enthusiastically we worked and still work for the election and governance of President Obama, restoration of the Rule of Law in the U. S. is as high a priority as anything on the national agenda. But reality is that FISA/State Secrets/Sovereign Immunity/Rule of Law issues seem not as urgent as the others. There is little public clamoring for restoring life to the Constitution.
This represents a wholesale failure of American education. New college graduates have no idea what the Constitution contains, or why, or how it relates to their lives. But President Obama does. He's an expert.
Our task is to keep these issues front-and-center in national media, and to let the President know that he may need to trade away some parts of his ambitious program for public and/or Congressional support, but he is NOT to trade away Constitutionally-protected rights. He is NOT empowered to destroy our democracy in order to save it.
The Justice Department filing April 2 in the Jewel et al v. United States et al case (See: Obama Invokes State Secrets Claim) is identical to claims Bush made. President Obama promised not to do this, when he explained his dissapointing vote last July on the FISA Amendment.
It is not a trivial issue. It's our Constitution. It's our national heritage. It's our freedom.
This close to the election it is so very important to try to pull in every possible vote. There are so many Republicans and independents that are still on the fence and, though they disagree with the policies and politics of the Republican candidates, they still cannot bring themselves to vote Democratic. There is a tremendous ground game out there but these people, through experience, are likely to take offense to a Democrat showing up at their door or calling them during dinner. They can, however, be persuaded to vote "for the other side" if their privacy and pride are respected.
We attended a candidate's forum last night that at one point featured Will i Am's "Yes We Can" video. It is a powerful video based on an equally powerful speech. I propose an ad that gives the same message, but to those people who are traditionally Republican or lean Republican. This ad would be quick, easy and cheap to cut and it carries a positive message.
*******************************************************************************
"YES YOU CAN" (in black and white)
[Fade into a man holding his head in his hands, looking dismayed]
Announcer: "You feel that your party no longer represents what you hold dear."
[Fade to a woman looking off through a window]
Announcer: "You feel that your party doesn't listen to what you want."
[Fade to a contractor in Carhart clothing looking sad/worried and hugging his kids.]
Announcer: "You worry that your party broke the economy and doesn't know how to fix it. It doesn't have to be that way. Together we can be better.""
[Fade to a smiling family in a picnic setting."]
[Transition through pictures of smiling people] Announcer: "You can vote Democratic this time. You can make a difference."
[Slowly fade in each word and out each word]: "YES...YOU...CAN. Vote November 4th."
[Fade In]: "Obama/Biden '08"
Did you happen to catch Hardball on Friday, the 17th of October? A guest -- Rep. Michelle Bachman made some pretty offensive statements about America, Americans and members of Congress.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27243547#27243547
To all:
PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION TO CENSURE MS. BACHMANN
I urge you to use the form at the speaker of the house website and tell her what you think of Rep. Bachmann's despicable comments on Chris Matthews show yesterday:
Here is my letter, submitted using this form: http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
Dear Madam Speaker Pelosi,
Yesterday, I heard Michelle Bachmann, representative of Minnesota, make some of the most reprehensible and despicable remarks about our government and America on national television (Chris Matthews Hardball). Her rant about "anti-American" "liberals" in Congress and in our country -- as IF she had the final word on deciding just WHO is "American enough" -- could have been words uttered by Joe McCarthy -- a man who represents one of the lowest points in our country and our government. Michelle Bachmann (I won't give her the courtesy of a title, since I feel she is not deserving of it) spewed out demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations about Congressmembers -- public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents that seem to be the main strategy of John McCain, Sarah Palin and quite a few other REPUBLICAN surrogates... including members of the House and Senate.
It is easy to flame the fires of hate and few were better at it than Joe McCarthy. Another famous "leader" said:
"...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Substitute "liberals" for "pacifists" and you have the essence of Ms. Bachman's statements. Who said that, you ask? Why, Hermann Göring - and the statements coming out of the Republican campaign resemble his type of remarks every day, from the rants at rallies of Sarah Palin and John McCain to the "robocalls" being made by the McCain campaign and the Republican Party in states like Minnesota, Pennsylvania, W. Virginia and other states. Some of these calls are about terrorism; some even use the vile "N" word, per this article on fivethirtyeight.com, made in a "fake Obama" voice as if Senator Obama were making the calls personally.
"Over in Indiana, PA and Northern Cambria, PA, volunteers fielded complaints of a massive wave of ugly robocalls both paid for by John McCain's campaign and those paid for by third parties. The third party call was interactive, and purported to be from Barack Obama himself. The call starts out reasonably, and then "Obama" asks what the listener thinks is the most important issue. Whatever the response, "Obama" then launches into a profane and crazed tirade using "n***er" and other shock language. From what we've seen, this IS the McCain ground campaign. Robocalls count as "touches" on voters, as do direct mail pieces such as this one. As David Plouffe said in today's fundraising letter to supporters, "These tactics are all that the McCain campaign and their allies have left."
"Over in Indiana, PA and Northern Cambria, PA, volunteers fielded complaints of a massive wave of ugly robocalls both paid for by John McCain's campaign and those paid for by third parties. The third party call was interactive, and purported to be from Barack Obama himself. The call starts out reasonably, and then "Obama" asks what the listener thinks is the most important issue. Whatever the response, "Obama" then launches into a profane and crazed tirade using "n***er" and other shock language.
From what we've seen, this IS the McCain ground campaign. Robocalls count as "touches" on voters, as do direct mail pieces such as this one. As David Plouffe said in today's fundraising letter to supporters, "These tactics are all that the McCain campaign and their allies have left."
As an American and a voter, I am appalled and I believe this woman deserves censure for her unfounded and defamatory accusations, on behalf of ALL AMERICANS, not just those in Minnesota.
This post originally appeared at Fire Dog Lake's Oxdown Gazette:
Does anyone else notice a pattern?
Here's how the debt has fared under Presidents of the past 30 years:
Jimmy Carter (D) -3.2% Ronald Reagan (R) +11.3% Ronald Reagan (R) +9.2% George H. W. Bush (R) +13.1% Bill Clinton (D) -0.6% Bill Clinton (D) -8.2% George W. Bush (R) +6.9% George W. Bush (R) +3.9% projection
A clear pattern of increasing debt under Republicans and decreasing debt under Dems.
The debt has gone up $4 TRILLION under Bush/McCain -- a 71.9% increase. Biggest increase in U.S. History. The bailout/rescue bill raises the National Debt Limit for the 7th time under Bush.
This massive, crippling debt is not exactly what the Bush Admin was selling to the American people. Check out this remarkable statement from Bush's "Blueprint for New Beginnings" (Feb 2001):
Indeed, the President's Budget pays down the debt so aggressively that it runs into an unusual problem—its annual surpluses begin to outstrip the amount of maturing debt starting in 2007.
Annual surpluses! That worked out real well.
So what's McCain's plan?
A dangerous government-wide spending freeze.
...he offered few details, other than to reiterate his call for a “one-year spending freeze on every agency of the federal government, excepting only national defense, the care of our veterans, and a few critical priorities.’’ He called it a spending “pause” when he first proposed it in April. And, although independent fiscal analysts said that Mr. McCain’s tax cut proposals would make it virtually impossible to balance the budget even before the fiscal crisis hit and the bailout was proposed, he said, “I am committed to billions in spending reductions that will balance the budget, and get us on the path away from ruinous debt.”
...he offered few details, other than to reiterate his call for a “one-year spending freeze on every agency of the federal government, excepting only national defense, the care of our veterans, and a few critical priorities.’’ He called it a spending “pause” when he first proposed it in April.
And, although independent fiscal analysts said that Mr. McCain’s tax cut proposals would make it virtually impossible to balance the budget even before the fiscal crisis hit and the bailout was proposed, he said, “I am committed to billions in spending reductions that will balance the budget, and get us on the path away from ruinous debt.”
The only question remains... Why do Republicans LOVE debt?
Find the original post here:
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/419
I know this is a thing that Senator Obama says a lot. I'm not worried so much about him saying it, though he does say it too much.
But now he has Robert Gibbs and Chuck Todd and others saying it, too. Gibbs said it 4 times in a single interview this morning on one of the cable channels (morning joe?)
The little things that bug me REALLY bug those who are looking for a reason to show disdain for Obama... for example, I don't mind an occasional uh, or um... but some totally hate it.
Another example: McCain uses "my friends" and we ALL hate that. "Well, now, look" or "Well, look" is getting a little overused.
Just my two.
The problem with the bailout is that it is a band-aid where a tournequet is necessary. The current financial crisis is directly due to the inability for homeowners to pay their mortgages and defaulting. No amount of bailout money will protect the Wall Street financial sector if something doesn't happen to keep people in their homes instead of walking away or willingly go into foreclosure.
Staunch conservatives often state that the people knew what they were getting into when they get these mortgages. I beg to differ. While I purchased well under my means, I was told by my loan officer that I could afford a lot more. We almost bit considering that the difference of $50,000 in my area is the difference between a new or newer house with a lot more ammenities in a much better neighborhood with a better school. As a parent, if I was thinking solely about the well being of my child I would have jumped at the chance to own such a house. Doing so, however, would have put us in over our heads. As for the 100% financing, our loan officer urged us to take advantage of it. We had money to put down, but she said we should keep it and/or put it into the house. After all, housing prices never go down and even if the market slowed we would still come out ahead. Why should we put it into the mortgage when we could use it to make our house nicer? We took the 100% financing. Mind you, I was my own realtor and had 17 years in the business and still I took the chance. The potential risk seemed minimal.
We won't get hit as bad as those who took the shorter-term, super low rate adjustable-rate mortgages that are currently sinking the financial sector. Nonetheless, our house is worth about $20,000 to $35,000 less now than we bought it for. We won't be able to refinance that adjustable rate mortgage. Those people not as savvy who took the 100% financing on a 5-year adjustable rate and the larger mortgage will soon see their mortgages skyrocket in 2009 and 2010. If you think that we are in trouble now, $700 billion won't cover nearly what will be needed over the next two years if we don't do something to keep these people from going under.
What can be done? We cannot reward the very stupid and deliberately greedy house flippers. They took the risk and should lose their investment. We can, however, spread out the damage from the honest owner-occupied homeowners. If the government institutes, as part of the bailout package, a freeze in the adjustable rate for five years after the note is due to adjust will give these people time to sell the house and get out from under the debt. There does need to be a caveat, however. If they prove over the course of the freeze that they can make their payment on time every month they can be qualified at the end of the five years to convert their mortgage, along with the home equity loan, to a conventional loan with a higher, but fixed rate. If they make even one payment over 30 days late, they are ineligible and must put the home on the market beginning that month at current market price as determined by a certified appraiser. At the end of the 5 years, if they are unable to sell the house they must leave immediately and then the government can step in to take over the mortgage and sell the house. They must make payments throughout the extension period or they lose the rate freeze regardless.
To be honest, the mortgage industry is more to blame than the homeowners and they should be held accountable. I don't like the bailout plan that helps the banks that caused the problem. As one of those who could have fallen for the worst situation because I was intentionally sold on the benefits of the greater mortgage will lead to a better life for my family, I know the blame lies almost exclusively in the loan origination market for the benefit of getting two fees for two loans. We need to help those who were deceived into taking these loans if we want to curb this crisis, not stick a bandaid on the current crisis.
Sen. Biden's best bet for this debate is to let Sarah Palin talk. If anything is clear over the past few weeks, it's that every time she opens her mouth to speak to a question, she pokes more holes in the Republican boat floating her candidacy.
Senator Biden, please just give short, accurate, unexaggerated answers to the questions... we all know you have command of the facts. Simply state them. Be yourself, in summary.
Give Sarah Palin as much time as possible to hoist herself on her own petard.
GOOD LUCK SIR!
There is only one thing that Senator Obama needs to do during the debate that will instantly discredit John McCain and win him debate #1 in the eyes of the American people. At least once during the debate he should turn to John McCain in response and say: "Now John, that could put us at war with [insert country name here]. Do you really want another war?"
This statement could be used in response to any number of foreign policy topics: Spain, Iran, Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, China, etc. Either answer, yes or no, would bring his previous debate answer into question. A "yes" and he's an economy-killing warmonger, a "no" and he just discredited his previous statement. Then go in for the attack on his response.
*UPDATE*
There is another thing that Senator Obama can hit McCain with that would be devastating and it involves both the economy and foreign policy. Hit him with the statement: "The war in Iraq, which you, John McCain, have and continue to support through to its end, is costing the American taxpayer $10 billion per month. Senator, if you truly put country first, then you would have to agree that bringing that money, $120 billion per year, home to the American people is far more important than continuing that war. It's time to admit your mistake and bring our soldiers home for the sake of our country." It would put McCain on his heels and probably push his temper over the edge.
I was excited to see the following come across the Lansing for Obama mail list. Here's my two-cents: Young women are the most likely eligible voters to be single heads of households, with jobs they can hardly afford to be away from, with children needing childcare, transportation and medical attention, to be enrolled in higher education so they may provide a better life for their kids. We must, as a nation, do all we can to offer to babysit, pick up the kids from school, cover their hours at work, take notes for them in class...do all we can to help them exercise their rights to vote. Who are you going to help out on November 4?
It is not enough to vote this year, it is not enough to register more voters than the opponent. We must commit ourselves, our time, our energy to helping others get out and vote. These young women in need are indeed the least likely to vote and most in need of the Hope and Changes that the Obama_Biden ticket will bring. Let's all do our part!
I tried following the links below and found no formal group heading up the registration drive for Ingham County including Lansing Community College, Cooley Law School and Michigan State University. The links provide contacts for other counties, and a link to the Secretary of State web site where voter registration forms can be downloaded. If someone knows of contacts in Ingham County working with areas with high populations of young women "potential" voters, this information should be passed along.
I'll be doing my part.
"Young women are the least likely to be registered and the least likely to vote." Change that: Time to GET OUT HER VOTE! http://www.feministcampus.org/vote/default.asp The Feminist Majority Foundation's massive Get Out HER Vote Campaign (GOHV) is the nation's only student voter education and registration initiative aimed at significantly increasing registration and voting by young women. GOHV legally targets young women and students of color because they are traditionally underrepresented Here's your chance to get involved!
After years of telling us that the economy is fundamentally sound and that the crisis that we Americans have been feeling for the past few years is all in our minds, NOW we are asked to bail out those same corporate libertarian "ownership society" Reaganites who, now that they've raped and plundered and taken every last vestige of wealth FROM this country, want the COUNTRY to bail them out?
WHY is it that capitalists are all for subsidizing RISK, but privatizing WEALTH?
Some call that the price of doing business. I think most Americans would call that THEFT.
I don't believe that any non-elected official should have discretion over $7B-$8B of America's money... especially since we'll have to BORROW that money to even have it.
Let them FAIL. Take that SAME money, put half into IMMEDIATE Energy Technology Research and Jobs all over America and sign on T. Boone Pickens to help oversee that. Put the other half into bailing out every single American with a failing mortgage and providing IMMEDIATE and extended unemployment benefits and aid to failing workers and families.
Many say that we can't "not" support Paulson's plan... if only because that means the average American will find that their credit card stops working. I say GOOD. LET THEM STOP WORKING. That will mean that the credit companies will FAIL. GOOD! Let them.
Start from the bottom up, Senator Obama. Demand that the injection of taxpayer money start at the bottom. With jobs, life will go on. With jobs and a sound energy plan, this country WILL become more safe and more stable.
DEMAND THAT CONGRESS START THE REPAIRS FROM THE BOTTOM UP! Then, let's vote out the damn deregulators, starting with John McCain.
Start by writing every single legislator you can. Start by telling Congress NO HOW, NO WAY, NO BAILOUT of the crooks and liars that got us where we are. Start by putting a MAJOR end to the ridiculous voodoo theories of "trickle down" Reaganomics right NOW. Let's show them that American wants it to start at the bottom and if, after all is said and done, there is something left -- THEN let the stock market, the traders, the game players, the republicans, the deregulators have something. Like a swift kick in the ass.
And don't tell me we can't. YES WE CAN.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJThPjvscFs
This is the message that the American public will understand, period.
Nothing could say it better than this open letter. I hope Senator Barack Obama reads it.
http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/strategist/2008/09/post_13.php
<NOTE: This item is a post from TDS Co-Editor William Galston>
TO: SEN. BARACK OBAMA FROM: WILLIAM GALSTON SUBJ: ADJUST OR LOSE DATE: SEPTEMBER 16, 2008
I'll get right to the point: You are in danger of squandering an election most of us thought was unlosable. The reason is simple: on the electorate’s most important concern – the economy -- you have no clear message, and John McCain has filled the void with his own.
This is more than my opinion. The Democracy Corps survey released yesterday proves the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Backed by a wealth of persuasive detail, here is the nub of their conclusion:
In the absence of a coherent change message from Obama, many voters are accepting McCain’s definition, particularly since they want to change Washington and clean up government. As a result, Obama has lost his double-digit advantage over McCain on the right kind of change.
When I say you have no message, here’s what I mean:
First, you are not offering a coherent account of what has gone wrong with the economy – why it is no longer working for average families. People are anxious and bewildered; they want to know why jobs are disappearing, why incomes are stagnating, and why prices are soaring. If you don’t offer an explanation, McCain’s will carry the day by default: the problem is the corrupt, self-interested politicians in Washington; the solution is getting them – and government in general – out of the way.
Second: you are not offering a focused, parsimonious list of remedies for the economic ills you cite. As a result, few if any voters can actually cite a single signature economic proposal you have made. It’s not that you don’t have ideas. If anything, you have too many. At some point, more becomes less, and you are well beyond that point. You need to decide which three or four economic proposals are most important and repeat them relentlessly for the next seven weeks.
Your campaign already contains everything you need to do this. You could offer a focused economic message with four elements: rebuilding the United States, with an infrastructure bank, generating millions of good jobs that can’t be outsourced; creating millions more jobs by leading the world in environmental innovation; significantly reducing the tax burden on average families; and offering health insurance to everyone at a price they can afford. If you say that about your economic plan – and nothing else – from now until November, there’s a good chance your message will get through.
Third: you are not drawing crisp, punchy contrasts between your plans and McCain’s. An example: the centerpiece of his health care plan is the taxation of employer-provided health care benefits. Pound away at that, and let him explain why throwing workers into the individual health insurance market unprotected is such a wonderful idea. And by the way, while your plan would increase coverage, his would do the opposite. Is that the change Americans want?
Fourth: your stump speech is too long and discursive. It shouldn’t last more than fifteen minutes, it should focus on your agenda, not today’s news story, it should feature short, declarative sentences, and it should leave no doubt about what you care about the most. Right now, regrettably, few Americans believe that you feel real passion about their economic plight and are willing to wage a tough fight on their behalf. It’s your job to convince them otherwise, and you don’t have much time to do it.
A message is a thought not only sent, but also received and understood. If your hearers aren’t getting it, it’s not a message. The essence of political speech is functional, not aesthetic. It is a tree judged by its fruit, and the fruit is persuasion. Right now you’re not persuading the people you need to persuade, and nothing else matters.
Fifth: there’s no coordination between an economic message and the rest of your campaign. If you want the focus to be on the economy, that’s what your paid advertising and your surrogates should be doing as well. Attacking McCain for employing lobbyists is a waste of precious time and resources; it plays on his turf and accepts his definition of the problem. Moreover, It diverts attention from the core issue – a Republican approach to the economy, shared by Bush and McCain, that shafts ordinary Americans and does nothing to help them deal with the challenges of global competition. So far, while the McCain campaign has gone for the jugular, you’ve gone for the capillaries.
Some Americans won’t support you because they think you’re too young and inexperienced to be president, or that you’re too liberal, or not patriotic enough, or because you might raise taxes, or because you’re African-American. That’s inevitable. The good news is that by themselves, these Americans are not a majority. The bad news is that they might become part of a majority if they are joined by the many Americans who are open to supporting you but are turning away because they don’t hear you speaking to their concerns in a manner that they can understand.
This is not about you alone; it’s a matter of political responsibility. Millions of Americans have invested their hopes and dreams in you, and you owe it to them to campaign effectively, which isn't happening right now. Yes, the McCain campaign is replete with exaggerations, evasions, and outright fabrications. It’s your responsibility to defeat them, not complain about them. If this means listening to advice you don’t want to hear, and getting out of the "comfort zone," so be it.
I live in mid-Michigan where guns are more than an Urban Issue. Many of the undecided votors I speak with are worrying about their rights as hunters, and the Second Amendment as a civil liberty. It took some looking, but I did find some information at BarackObama.com under the Issues and Media tabs at this link: http://www.barackobama.com/downloads/. Here you will find Mr. Obama's "Blueprint for Change" along with his well-reasoned response to the gun issue. Unfortunately, the information is listed under "Urban Issues."
Mid-Michigan gun owners consider themselves a law-abiding group of individuals who pay more in National Rifle Association (NRA) contributions each year than McCain proposes they pay in income taxes. Why? Because the NRA mailings keep saying Mr. Obama wants to take their guns. They're so sure of it, they're willing to membership dues and extra contributions to the NRA, to just have their names placed on the only list of gun enthusiasts that I am aware of and protect their rights as sportsmen and women!
Did I miss something, or is there something that can be done to make the information more readily available to true sportsmen and women who visit the site for more information on the issue? Countless votes in Michigan and important swing and western states are hinging on this single issue, and here if we don't get the word out, Palin may actually get the jump on Mr. Obama.
Inasmuch as assault weapon-weilding hoodlums are likely not coming to this website before selecting a candidate for president, I'm inclined to believe the Campaign will not be risking votes in key swing and western states by moving the information above the fold, so to speak.
One thing that should be changed to the site is the addition of a very large button on the index page of www.barackobama.com to bypass the donation page. I am well versed in the web and have been on the internet since the days when Mosaic had to be ported to work with Windows (R). Even so, the ever changing location of the hidden button to bypass the donation page is frustrating and would frustrate me completely if I didn't know to look for it. If I was curious about Barack Obama but didn't want to donate or register I probalby would not go any further into the site and there would be a loss of potential voters as a result.
Another possibility that can be presented to marginalize the McCain campaign is the fact that they are the current tabloid candidates. This is a little risky because Barack Obama has been in the rags too but, if presented correctly, can put the focus back on issues.
The idea is to ask the American public what they want: "Do you want a President in the White House who cares enough about you to address the issues or do you want a tabloid candidate that you will have to guess what the next tabloid scandal will be? Haven't you had enough of the same old double-talk and CYA itactics n Washington. Don't you want change?"
Barack Obama cares about the things that matter to you most like a strong economy, affordabele healthcare for everyone, steady higher-paying jobs, low energy costs, and keeping your family safe from an icreasingly hostile world. He has outlined his plans clearly and completelely at www.barackobama.com for everyone with internet access to see. If you don't have a computer, visit your local library."
Done correctly, this tactic would neutralize Palin and lump the governor in with a candidate with no real policy changes. It would force McCain to avoid tabloid style affronts and treat the Governor like a liablilty instead of a plus.
Here is a strategy that can really hurt the McCain Campaign. While both candidates have stretched the truth on occasion, only Senator McCain and his campaign have outright lied. This can be verified on all of the fact checking sites.
So what is the strategy? Call him out on it in a way he cannot refute: "John McCain will do anything to win this campaign including lying to you about his opponent. In fact, it is more important to him that he wins than it is for him to tell you the truth. That is not putting country first, that is putting himself first. If he lies to you now, can you trust anything he tells you? How can you trust that he will do anything for you at all?
The Republicans had control of the House, the Senate, and the White House for seven years up until 10 months ago. They passed none of the programs they promised to you. They passed no binding or significant anti-abortion legislation that they promised their base. They ran the economy into the dirt. They increased government spending and the size of the governement. They increased deficit to record levels and sold that debt to countries that do things we don't like. All of these things are the opposite of what they promised you and it resulted in the American people voting most of them out of office. It is time to vote the rest of them out too."
This line of attack is devastating because it is true and will strike an emotional cord of distrust with the people that he will not be able to get out from under. His only response can be to run an honest campaign, but the damage will be irreparably done.
So today the journalistically challenged--nix that....the journalistically negligent--media is pretending not to know full well that Barack's "lipstick" comments were clearly, incontrovertibly, absolutely, and with no obscurity or question whatsoever, directed at the BUSH POLICIES OF JOHN MCCAIN, and not at all at Sarah Palin. The sentence leading into the image was the same statement about John McCain's Bush-iness that Barack has been making all week.
Only a willful disregard for all standards not only of reason and truth, but simple journalistic reporting could result in the crap we are seeing in today's media. Only an implicit relish for Rove messaging could justify what print and broadcast media are doing with this non-story, while people lose their homes and their jobs and, in John McCain's case, souls.
McCain, however, has at least twice actually applied the phrase "lipstick on a pig" to Hillary Clinton. Once as recently as this May, and at the beginning of the campaign last November, and who knows how many times in between, given his penchant for message recycling.
There is only one sexist in this race, and its name is John McCain. There is only one campaign camp that owes an apology today, and that is the Karl Rove camp of McCain/Bush/Palin.
I think Obama should have the women in his audience yesterday as he criticized McCain come to the microphone and DEMAND an apology from McRove.
Well, it's official. As requested by Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, OPEC annouced that they will be dropping oil production to keep the price of oil over $100 per barrel. This means that we will never again see less than $3.50 per gallon gas before taxes. No matter how much we "Drill, drill, drill, drill here, drill now," we will never reach enough energy independence through domestic oil to lower the price of a barrel of oil below that threshold.
The United States imports approximately 65% of oil consumed from foreign sources. Even if we were somehow able to find a sustainable 30% more oil, we would still not be able to control world market prices and, since the world market is traded on the open market, all OPEC has to do if we find more oil is to reduce production to compensate.
People like Senator McCain with millions of dollars at their disposal don't see the difference between a few dollars more per gallon. On the other hand, the middle class, those on fixed incomes such as Social Security, and the poor suffer needlessly. We need to pound Senator McCain hard on this as being too blind to see that an increased drilling strategy would have little to no effect on the price of oil. He must be painted as out of touch and lacking vision to create real change.
John McCain is trying to create himself in Barack Obama's image. While immitation is the highest form of flattery, if McCain manages to sculpt this as a race of equally new programs he will be able to continue to make the election about man versus man instead of true progress versus stagnation. If he does, John McCain will win the election because the American people will see nothing more than a white man with many more years of public and military service versus a black man they are being trained to think is inexperienced. In this scenario, Senator Obama loses the white male vote, the military vote, the white female vote, and just about every fence-sitter in addition to those who will not vote for him just because of his skin color.
Sad to say, but the American public is manuevering back into the unenthusiastic "find a reason not to vote for someone" that got George W. Bush elected twice and away from the excitement and the movement that was built during the Democratic primary. If it comes down to that, the Democrats lose again. The best thing that Barack Obama can do now is to go back to those roots, reintroduce the programs, and energize the people. Do some more big speeches that outline the good things about the campaign policy platform. Who cares if they complain, every time they did Senator Obama's poll numbers didn't change or went up. It is a strength that needs to be exploited not ditched because the the republicans put it down. When their jealousy shows, they lose. Ditch the negative back-and-forth that the Republicans are experts at and retake the high road. Let the surrogates chastise McCain and Palin instead.
