Skip to main content

This will sound concern trollish, but there is really no other way to put it.  It's time to back off on the Palin attacks.  The bulk of the dirt that is being found is turning out to be untrue, overblown, or unprovable.  

The speed and intensity of the attacks are creating slipshod narratives that don't hold up to close scrutiny and are perilous with backlash possibilities.  

The frames are all over the place, inconsistent, and are not producing a net positive result for our side.

I quote McCain talking points directly.


• Mayor Rudy Giuliani will be on all three network and cable television stations defending Governor Palin’s family and her historic candidacy.

• The McCain campaign will launch a television ad directly comparing Governor Palin’s executive experience as a governor who oversees 24,000 state employees, 14 statewide cabinet agencies and a 10 billion dollar budget to Barack Obama’s experience as a one-term junior Senator from Illinois.

• Former Democratic Vice Presidential nominee current U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman and Congressman Eric Cantor will hold a press conference calling on Barack Obama to condemn and/or dismiss his official campaign spokesman who implied Governor Sarah Palin supported Nazi sympathy because she wore a Pat Buchanan pin on one single occasion.

• McCain-Palin surrogates Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, Former Ebay CEO Meg Whitman, McCain Senior Advisor Nicolle Wallace, McCain Communications Director Jill Hazelbaker and McCain Senior Advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer will do television and radio interviews to demand better treatment for Governor Palin’s family.

The push back strategy is two pronged.  They are going hard playing victim on babygate, and are calling out anyone in media or the Obama campaign buying into the slipshod smears.

The Buchanan thing will sink Wexler.

"John McCain's decision to select a vice presidential running mate that endorsed Pat Buchanan for president in 2000 is a direct affront to all Jewish Americans," said a statement by Wexler.

"Pat Buchanan is a Nazi sympathizer with a uniquely atrocious record on Israel, even going as far as to denounce bringing former Nazi soldiers to justice and praising Adolf Hitler for his 'great courage'".

Wexler went on to accuse McCain of having "failed his first test of leadership."

 There is no workable defense to his statements.  Palin is on the record as not officially supporting Buchanan, and like it or not Buchanan is not widely understood to be a Nazi sympathizer.  He is on MSNBC every night across from Rachel Maddow.

He will be gone from the campaign, hopefully before Lieberman has his press conference.

That is the danger in pushing these smears.  I'm not saying don't do your research, but don't go nuts on stuff without full verification on the facts of what you are doing.

I realize DailyKos is not part of the campaign, and Obama has no power to control what goes on here, but he will be on with Bill O'Reilly this week and will most likely be asked questions about some of the troubling things that have appeared on this site as of late.

If we had followed his request not to push scandal and stick to issues, he would not be having this problem.

Sarah Palin is not being dropped from the ticket, no matter what else comes to light about her.  She will give a good speech tonight and the media will be back on her side.  The only scandal that has achieved any media traction is the baby story.  There is no honorable, effective line of attack on that issue for Obama or for us.  It is a private matter.  Leave it alone.

Sarah Palin will be easily defeated on the issues.  She holds out of the mainstream social conservative views.  She is being fed her foreign policy directly from Bush.  She will hold the McCain line on all issues.

Stick to issues, and win.  That is what Obama wants, and what we should be giving him.

That is all.

Originally posted to furiousxxgeorge on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:34 AM PDT.


Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Come again? (27+ / 0-)

    I don't agree.

    The fact that they are in push back mode is a good thing.

    They are playing defense.  They need to do so.

    Obama can sit back and make the election about issues...

    and these fools can try to prop up the worst pick for vice president in modern history.

    Republicans, drink your Kool Aid.

    Maverick McCain Mango/Perky Palin Pomegranate '08.

    by wmtriallawyer on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:37:46 AM PDT

  •  Ooh, Republicans are defending Palin! (14+ / 0-)

      Let's just curl up into a little ball and die.

  •  Backoff???? (8+ / 0-)

    From Vetting someone who the Government Agencies and the Campaign Should Have!!!!!!!!

    You're more than a Concern Troll!!!

    Do We Need Change, You're Damn Right We Do, And The World Needs Us To Change, Now!!

    by jimstaro on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:38:12 AM PDT

  •  Read some Sun Tzu.... (9+ / 0-)

    It's time to attack!

    This woman has more skeletons in her closet than the catacombs of Paris.

    •  Sun Tzu? Sure: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Here's a quote that could apply to both McCain's VP pick and an overly zealous Daily Kos attempt to trash (rather than research) that pick:

      Now the general who wins a battle makes many
         calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought.
         The general who loses a battle makes but few
         calculations beforehand.  Thus do many calculations
         lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat:
         how much more no calculation at all!  It is by attention
         to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.

      Make your calculations before the battle.

      faith is no substitute for empirical evidence

      by Rudyard on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:01:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sun Tzu would never advise (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      making your primary "attack" an assault on a machine-gun nest by untrained troops armed with papier-mache swords.

  •  You Can Have My Sarcastic Jabs at Sarah... (12+ / 0-)

    ...Palin when you pry them from my cold, dead, sex-educated hands.

    --- It's SPELLED "TooFolkGR" but it's pronounced "Throat-Warbler Mangrove."

    by TooFolkGR on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:38:17 AM PDT

  •  Are you kidding me? (15+ / 0-)

    McCain makes his biggest pre-presidential decision on an impulse that demonstrates amply his lack of judgment and the risk of putting him in the White House, and you are recommending "backing off"?

    Are you kidding me?

    •  Sort of (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larry Bailey, Rudyard

      Back off on what can't be proven, or is not supported by strong evidence.

      •  Are you talking to me? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Read my diaries first before suggesting I need to back off on unproven charges.

        If you have an issue with a particular diarist, I recommend you take it up with that diarist, not the entire community.

        Your diary above is a recipe for electoral defeat. Going into a fetal position because the McCain campaign wants to try to muddy the waters is simply concern trollish. All your diary does is bolster their argument and does nothing to move the story forward. If you want to help, write a diary about the substantive issues surrounding Palin instead of cribbing about what a few fools are saying.

        The amount of information coming out on Palin is astounding. It is THE story because of what it says about McCain's decision making process.

      •  Swiftboaters (0+ / 0-)

        Back off on what can't be proven, or is not supported by strong evidence.

        Well, the Swiftboaters in 2004 sure ignored your advice. And look what happened. They beat the crap out of us. Hopefully at least some Democrats will have learned the lesson!

        •  Bad analogy (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Swifties invented bullshit as if it was the truth. Every Palin debacle is based on facts! Trooper-gate, Broken-water-gate, Pregnant Bristol Gate, secession-gate, librarian-gate, car-wash-gate, Ted Stevens Gate, Drill-gate, Big Oil Gate, Bridge-to-nowhere-gate. Did I forget any? Hope more are on the way.

  •  Screw That! Paybacks a bitch (6+ / 0-)

    Ready, aim , fire.

  •  The Jews of Florida (9+ / 0-)

    and many other places would take issue with your characterization of Pat Buchanan.  And they vote.

    This is a winning issue.

  •  I agree that it's time to back off. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rudyard, leevank, furiousxxgeorge

    I think a lot of the stuff here has just been over the top. Diaries about the boy who got her daughter, pregnant for pete's sake, and questions about whether Sarah's husband had impregnated the daughter. It does seem like we have had a double standard here. While most people said that the private life of John Edwards, a contender for the VP position and most certainly for AG, was off-limits, the same standard does not seem to apply to Palin.

    We've never gone after McCain with this ferocity. Wish we would

    •  The Babydaddy stories are all over the MSM (0+ / 0-)

      the target is going to be the "liberal media" not DKos--which most people have never heard of.

      Secondly, DKOS is like a big bus station with all sorts of anonymous people who come and go.  Getting "us" to do anything is impossible.  If anything, I think one of the pushbacks should be to explain to anyone who cites DKOS that it is an open and uncensored blog and that it attracts a wide variety of people with all sorts of agendas.

      •  You're right about that.... it is like a big bus (0+ / 0-)

        station. Quite a diverse bunch here..ranging from the explosively angry to the calm and thoughtful types.

      •  Um... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I think one of the pushbacks should be to explain to anyone who cites DKOS that it is an open and uncensored blog and that it attracts a wide variety of people with all sorts of agendas.

        That's really worked very well for us, hasn't it.

        All sarcasm aside, no it hasn't.  It may be true, but once you have to start "explaining", you've lost the battle.  That's why "Daily Kos" is still where the right wing goes anytime they want to attribute hate speech to the Democrats. Why play into their hands?

        faith is no substitute for empirical evidence

        by Rudyard on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:10:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're probably right--anyone who knows DKOS (0+ / 0-)

          knows what it is, anyone who doesn't know DKos doesn't care.  That's why the Republicans have gone to one of their favorites in the old playbook--"the liberal media".  

          It does drive me crazy when some commentator pulls out one quote from DKos as an example of what's being said--they never cite the lunatic comments made on the freeper sites.

  •  You're right, but it won't matter (3+ / 0-)

    Most members of this community seem to insist on ignoring the candidate they profess to support, and on proving that we're no better than the opposition in terms of scummy tactics.

    "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security." -Ben Franklin

    by leevank on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:41:20 AM PDT

    •  I wouldn't say *most* members... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larry Bailey

      but I completely agree with your point.  It's an election year and, for many, this is when emotions and wishful thinking tend to overcome cool rational strategic thinking.

      faith is no substitute for empirical evidence

      by Rudyard on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:13:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Republicans wanted a VICTIM. Picking (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Night Runner, The Red Pen

    Palin was exactly the ticket. The funny thing is the biggest attacks against her as a mother are not coming from the left, but from the real Fundies like Phyllis Schafly who are the biggest proponents of women staying home to raise their kids. Schafly is even more pissed now that Palin cancelled on her event.

    But no matter what we do or don't do, they will use even the most innocuous thing said on this site and twist it into a "sexist" attack against motherhood. So getting worked up about it is useless.

    That's not a Maverick. That's a sidekick!

    by DWKING on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:41:21 AM PDT

  •  Their response is called crisis management. (6+ / 0-)

    It is a reflection of the firestorm they are enduring from the MSM. Negative commentary is coming from the frontpage of the Washington Post and NYTimes. No one here controls either of these institutions. You are giving the GOP too much power.

    McCain is on defensive, frankly, I'd like to keep him there.

  •  "Demand better treatment for Gov Palin's family" (6+ / 0-)

    Give be a break.

    THe GOP is planning to parade the preggers teenager and her boyfriend in front of a national audience.
    The should be demanding better treatment - from their own hypocritical party.

    "My mother would have said that a woman voting for John McCain is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders." - Cecile Richards (TX)

    by blue armadillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:43:08 AM PDT

  •  You're kidding, right? (7+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    frandor55, Mr X, Fury, zhimbo, lifexpert, Mash, mnguy66

    The only scandal that has achieved any media traction is the baby story.

    Where have you been the last five days?  There are about a dozen stories that have surfaced that are far more significant than the fact that her daughter is pregnant.

    •  sure, butt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      They have not found media traction, and are not supported by strong evidence.  One good attack is better than 20 sloppy ones.

      •  Are you kidding? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zhimbo, Knarfc

        The press is widely condemning McCain's choice of VP.  Canada's national newspaper, the Globe and Mail, has made the embattled Palin the top story two days running.  Today, they had six articles in the paper, including an editorial that screams

        Shadow cast on McCain's judgment

        Sarah Palin represents the ultimate triumph of crass political opportunism over the gravity that should have been attached to the decision of who would succeed a President John McCain, in case of his death or incapacity. Her selection reflects badly not so much on Governor Palin (more on her later), as on the man who plucked her from obscurity, Senator McCain.

        That Ms. Palin is underqualified for the vice-presidency is not a point in debate. Even Republican commentators are having trouble finding attributes that make her suited to the office. Instead, they emphasize her very lack of them - as Washington outsider and hockey mom.

        I don't know what you're reading but the corporate media in North America isn't treating this as a pregnancy scandal--it's treating the Palin appointment as a debacle of historic proporitions.

  •  Here's what I will agree to - (3+ / 0-)

    Here family and the like are not places we need to go to.

    However, her positions on choice, creationism, book banning, her fiscal irresponsibility, her ethic issues, earmark issues, environmental positions etc are things I have no intention of leaving alone.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:44:59 AM PDT

  •  Every electron pushed through the intertubes (3+ / 0-)

    attacking Palin is one that is not attacking McCain.

    Just food for thought.

  •  'Morning Joe' (MSNBC) Has Totally "Backed Off" (0+ / 0-)

    Not a single mention of troopergate the AIP or any other legitimate Palin issues.
    ...I guess they read this diary, or got pressured from the GOP.

    Well I've been from Tucson to Tucumcari... Tehachapi to Tonopah--Lowell George/Little Feat

    by frandor55 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:45:42 AM PDT

  •  I'm a little lost here. (0+ / 0-)

    "I realize DailyKos is not part of the campaign, and Obama has no power to control what goes on here, but he will be on with Bill O'Reilly this week and will most likely be asked questions about some of the troubling things that have appeared on this site as of late."

    Do you know something about the relationship between DailyKos and the Obama campaign I don't?

    "The bulk of the dirt that is being found is turning out to be untrue, overblown, or unprovable."

    Briefly, huh?

    "The only scandal that has achieved any media traction is the baby story."

    Again, hun?

    •  I don't see what is confusing. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      O'Reilly will bring up what is going on here.  Of course Obama can't do anything about what goes on here, but it makes him look bad even talking about it, if he denounces us or not.

      Babygate is the only thing getting strong media play, it's a fact.  When was the last time you heard about AIP on CNN?

  •  but you are a troll a McCain troll. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    i am wondering how much money?

    If he keeps her she is an albatross if he kick her she is an albatross.

    your fears-leader-ready to bomb-Iran is FUCKED big time.

    get use to it, "we will go medieval on his ass"

    •  I admitted this is concern trollish in line 1 (0+ / 0-)

      You can look at the rest of my posting history and make a judgment from there.

    •  This is the sort of comment (0+ / 0-)

      I used to read on right-wing blogs (when I had the patience to see what they were up to). I'm glad the commenter is (apparently) voting for Obama. Otherwise, I find this sort of comment embarassing.  It's also a reminder that right wingers don't have a monopoly on an "attack the messenger" mentality.

      faith is no substitute for empirical evidence

      by Rudyard on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:17:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Most of the diaries have been reasonable. When (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr X, MindRayge, zhimbo, seeking amid

    not they are taken down.  I have yet to see a viral email with the distoritions I get daily about Obama.  Back-off, WTF? When they back off of Obama.  When they back off of Hillary.  When they quit calling us baby killers.  When they quit saying that stem cell research kills babies.

    Palin knew this was coming.  She is an aggressive politician who uses everything to get to power against her friends and enemies.  Don't stop.  Never enough!

  •  No-- (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lifexpert, A Man Called Gloom

    Let them spend every day from here until Election Day defending themselves against Dem attacks.

    Turns out that talking about abstinence is a lot easier than practicing it.

    by kayebee on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:48:04 AM PDT

  •  what is being proven untrue? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WIds, lifexpert

    I don't understand? Everything has checked out except the AIP thing, it turns out her hubby is a member and she WAS courtng them. I don't get this diary. There is still plenty of things in her closet and I want to know them all. Look, this pick is tooooooooo damn risky. we knew about Hillary, we know NOTHING about her and what is known is unsettling at best. This is OUR future and the repubs are playing with fire here. I for one want to know everything true and false. a pattern is emerging about her. The repubs have decide wrongly that this election is NOT about issues but about personalities. so, lets play their game. If she has more experience, where is it? What has she done? Frankly, I am freaked out by her pics weilding a gun!!! This is bad on all fronts and because of us a lot is coming out. so let it. They brought out the abortion issue and we own it. Mccain does not know what he is doing. That is SCARY.

    •  well (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      1.  AIP, overblown.  She was never an official member.
      1.  Supports Buchanan, Nazi sympathizer BS.  She never officially supported him.  Overblown.
      1.  The video where she talks about the troops in Iraq/God's plan. She doesn't say it is God's plan, she says to pray that it is.   Misleading attack.
      1.   The diary that started it all, Sarah is the mom.  Untrue.

      All of this stuff dilutes the stuff that has evidence and can gain traction.  

      •  Well... (0+ / 0-)
        1. But her husband was until recently, and she clearly has had a cozy relationship. So it's a damn good thing this was followed up on - esp. since the AIP explicitly said she was a member (why NOT report that?).
        1. Pat Buchanan says she and hubby supported him and attended a fundraiser. Why not report that?
        1. That's arguable - what she said is certainly open to interpretation, I think - and she certainly has a history of explicitly invoking God for her political beliefs of all sorts.
        1. Yep...and it received more opposition than support, and subsequent diarists on the subject were routinely swatted down as 'trolls'.  What's your complaint?
      •  Also, WRT #4 (0+ / 0-)

        The McCain camp EXPLICITLY cited those reports as the reason they revealed that Bristol was pregnant.

        So, bonus.

  •  Whining about being called a Nazi sympathizer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    just brings more attention to the fact that she was called a Nazi sympathizer.  Don't the republicans know all about this?  They are operating like two-bit political amateurs.  

  •  Out of Touch (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    If you truly believe that everyone should back off, you don't understand what is going on. It is not like the MSM is going to really vet this woman until the heat becomes so hot that they feel as though they are missing out on the story (which they see as the avenue to their revenue).

    You can sit back and wait. But as far as I'm concerned, Johnny boy has limited funds and time. If he is going to spend it all trying to defend this choice, he won't have the time to spin the "5.5 years in Hanoi line".

    And when it comes down to issues, he doesn't have a prayer. Thus the combination of spent capital and corrupt ideas leads to a "Game Over" situation.

    I'm expecting one more "Hail Mary", Poor Palin goes back to the land of Yellow Snow and Maverick John picks Maverick Joe.

  •  Did you see (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Man Called Gloom, imamish

    the convention last nght? those people scared me witless. My husband who is apolitical at best said he wants to go volunteer with me at camp Obama on weekends. That woman and her pick has really troubled him and I have never ever seen him this unsettled.

  •  Since she is an "Alaska First" nativist type (0+ / 0-) makes perfect sense that she would have supported Buchanan's "America First" nativist campaign--which of course takes its name from the group of Charles Lindbergh, etc. before WWII. According to Wikipedia:

    Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan has frequently praised America First and often uses its name as a slogan. "The achievements of that organization are monumental," writes Buchanan, "By keeping America out of World War II until Hitler attacked Stalin in June of 1941, Soviet Russia, not America, bore the brunt of the fighting, bleeding and dying to defeat Nazi Germany."[1] For this reason the movement is still an icon to paleoconservatives and other Americans who wish to return to a foreign policy of non-intervention.

    Philip Roth's novel The Plot Against America (2004) is based on an alternative history developed by Roth, in which America First's ideology prevailed in the early 1940s and a Lindbergh presidency saw the growth of Anti-Semitism in the United States.

  •  Letterman disagrees (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Man Called Gloom, seeking amid

    Even Dave Letterman wants to know if the person who is going to be one heartbeat away from the Presidency had enough judgement to have a ten minute conversation with her teenage daughter about birth control. This isn't about the Palin daughter (God bless her and help her). This is about the judgement of the mother. Is she a pragmatic and principled leader, or just another extremist ideologue trying to impose her poor judgement on all of America?
    The Republicans have no choice except to invest heavily into spinning S. Palin as a "conservative folk hero" (their words not mine). Are you suggesting that we let that spin go unchallenged and that her record be unquestioned? Because it is impolite? Because women will be offended by us questioning the credentials of an anti-feminist token female?
    All of this scatter-shot of issues to see what sticks is exactly what the GOP and other Cultural Warriors have done to Obama for over a year now. And they've done it without regard for the truth (where is the truth when you constantly advertise that Obama will raise your taxes- when exactly the opposite is true for 95% of Americans) and with absolutely no remorse. Being the enemy of the Cultural Warriors is not a reason for concern. Defining the image of Ms. Culture Wars before the Republicans spin it is sound political practice, regardless of whether you approach it with delicacy.

  •  Attacking (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Man Called Gloom

    Attacking Palin on her professional and public misdeeds and statements is perfectly legit.  I disagree that the only story that's gained traction is the one about her daughter.  I've seen articles and TV media going after her on her performance as mayor and since she's been governor.  The firing scandals, the lobbyist ties to Abramoff, the cutting of programs to help teenaged mothers, raising taxes on food, etc.  These are legitimate lines of attack.  I was vehemently opposed to the ridiculous and false smearing of her family, but I'll not back off of these legitimate issues of her professional conduct and her ideology.  They're absolutely relevant and should be used.

    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Ghandi

    by Triscula on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:56:12 AM PDT

  •  Sarah Palin (0+ / 0-)

    Sarah Palin is on the Republican ticket ONLY because the Republicans haveto run on "social values" issues. They can't run on the economy. They can't run on health care. They can't run on the war on terrorism. They can't run on foreign policy. They can't run on more tax cuts that only benefit the wealthy. They haven't been able to move the election from being a referendum on the Bush administration with McCain so tightly tied to it to being a referendum on Obama which they so desperately need it to be.

    Sarah Palin brings only "social values" to the table and on that basis she can most certainly be considered fair game. Her daughter, no.

  •  If we had given up on the attacks against Myers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Man Called Gloom

    She would have been voted in.

  •  I wish you were right (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zhimbo, A Man Called Gloom

    Stick to issues, and win.  

    I wish you were right. Unfortunately the average voter don't vote on the issues. We saw it in 2004 and we saw it in 2000. We should easily have won on the issues in 2004.

    Instead, the GOP managed to make the election about Kerry vs Swiftboaters.

    This time they have tried to make the election about Obama and his celebrity status. And it was working. What do you think will happen if the spotlight no longer is on Palin? Yes, it will come straight back to Obama which will be bad news. We will lose.

    I wish at some point Democrats would learn to fight like Republicans. Until then they will win more elections than they deserve.

  •  "easily defeated on the issues"? You hope. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Never underestimate the willful ignorance of the rednecks who are STILL in the majority.

  •  The framing of the attacks doesn't matter to me (0+ / 0-)

    I just LOVE the fact they are being attacked. The best they can do is defend their sorry positions, both McSame and Palin. If they spend all their time playing defense, they can't play offense.

    Also, WHEN is palin going to answer ANY questions, about anything? Almost a week in, and she hasn't spoken to a single MSM outlet? THEY are going to attack the hell out of her, and McSame, for this.

  •  Frankly your strategy baffles me. (0+ / 0-)

    Do you speak for the Obama campaign in any official capacity?

    If so, suggest an alternative: Obama should write a letter to the editors of all the major newspapers explaining his view on how the media should vet Palin.

    Until then, I'll stick to the principles of the First Amendment and of the power of the people.

  •  Agree 100%. The ugly frenzies here since... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...last Friday have been embarrassing to many of us and your advice to the community at this point seems totally right.

    No Way, No How, No McCain.

    by Larry Bailey on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:22:33 AM PDT

  •  Dear Diarist: (0+ / 0-)

    I just now comprehended the "Buchanan story". I had not heard this until now.

    You need to understand that this story is something Rep. Wexler is pushing, and it is entirely directed at local South Florida voters. It's not a national talking point.

    I suggest you write to Wexler direcly with your concerns.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site