Don't Blow It, Netroots Bloggers
By Al Giordano
Marc Ambinder, blogger-journalist for The Atlantic, asks aloud:
Does the McCain campaign think that their ticket can win if they go to war with the press 60 days out?
The answer is, most definitively, yes.
And the question reveals the very hubris on the part of so much of the media that makes such a war an irresistible and smart gambit by the McCain-Palin campaign.
What members of the national media don't understand - what they have never understood - is why "running against the media" is such a good strategy.
Most members of the commercial media don't want to face what everybody else knows - that as institutions go, that of "the media" is as hated or more so than George W. Bush and the US Congress.
Unfortunately, in recent days, too many bloggers and their commenters have forgotten that truth, too.
Bloggers, in general, claim to understand just how much the public distrusts the media. We bloggers have been "running against the media" from the get-go. It's one of the biggest keys to our success: that readers turn to us instead of the commercial media it distrusts. The one thing that could most rapidly destroy that for us would be if we became, in the public's mind, associated with the same sloppy arrogance which it associates with the media.
That ought to be a no brainer. But in recent days, too many bloggers and their commenters have aped the worst qualities of the commercial media in such a way as to allow the McCain campaign and the far right to lump us in with the reviled commercial media to make us, too, the receptacle of that public hatred.
It's about the "unvetted diaries," stupid.
Netroots and pro-Democratic party blogs have become the staging areas for "unvetted diaries" - some planted, no doubt, by covert McCain backers, others as sincere as they are imbecilic - that screech about McCain not vetting his vice presidential pick while behaving just as irresponsibly as their target. Too many bloggers and their commenters have jumped on rumors - about pregnancies and other matters - that turned out to be false, and have harmed the messengers' own credibility by stating them as fact.
And in cases where the front-page bloggers at websites did not engage in such boneheaded activity, but their rank-and-file diarists or commenters did, we who run our blogs have a special responsibility to step in and put things right again.
The logic in too much of the blogosphere - left, right, and other - is that if a claim is potentially damaging to the enemy, it gets shouted as "fact" far and wide, even before the claim is investigated and vetted. Beyond the already double-edged sword of preggers-gate, this occurred in recent days with blogger claims that Governor Palin was a "member" of the Alaska Independent Party (now swatted down with documents; she's always been a registered Republican) and that she "supported" Pat Buchanan for president in 2000 (she supported Steve Forbes).
Those misstatements were based on kernels of truth that the bloggers and commenters quickly exaggerated and distorted in ways that hurt the argument. Once you've overstated a case, you can't then walk it back and say, "well, okay, she's not a member but she attended a convention," or, "well, okay, she didn't endorse Buchanan but she once wore a his button." You've already poisoned the waters for the real facts to do harm, because you've given the target your errors off which to pivot.
Fellow and sister bloggers: We, of all people, should know better. Had AP or the New York Times or Fox News overshot on a claim about one of your own, you would be ramming it down their throats. Now the tables are turned and too many of you have opened yourselves - and all of us as a group - up to that counter response.
And, excuse me, but the justifications I've been hearing - "too bad about that kid, but we have to jump on the child pregnancy as a teaching tool for sex education," or, "the Alaska Independence Party will be seen as a terrorist organization to which Palin belongs" or "but if Obama's kid, or Chelsea Clinton, was pregnant the racists would do the same" - are as lame as lame can be. They are devoid of the most important context of all: does repeating such claims help win an election? Or does it weaken and distract in ways that invite defeat?
And this will happen again and again - giving the McCain campaign more fuel for its ploys to public sympathy as victim-of-the-media - until bloggers stop repeating and linking to (and "reccing") unvetted claims and begin to vet each other's claims with the same vigor and aggressiveness that we insist McCain should have done with his VP pick. Bloggers that state undocumented claims as fact deserve the same scorn and ridicule as any other member of the media when doing so. We have been far too soft on the most counter-productive and slothful colleagues in our own ranks. And yet we have already perfected the "smackdown" skills to clean up such messes in our comments sections and the overall Netroots. The hour has come to deploy them.
Hatred of the media is a real force in American life; the secret and only scapegoat that the media can't offer up to the crowd as ritual sacrifice is itself. In a very meaningful way, the media are more intrusive in the daily lives and emotions of the American public than government. A family might be suffering because a parent is ill without health care, or a son or daughter might come back from Iraq gravely wounded (or might not come home at all), but coping mechanisms are such that people deal with hardships, move on, and even in the worst of situations find closure or adapt with coping mechanisms.
The dynamic with the media is different. Like other addictions or "negative pleasures" the media never offer any closure, but, rather, just the constant drip, drip, drip of distracting noise which, paradoxically, we invite into our living rooms and bedrooms even as it offends us daily. There is a dysfunctional relationship between the media and the citizenry that is akin to battered spouse syndrome: they beat us down, tell us we're worthless, invade the privacy of people just like us, and yet we turn and keep the TV and radio (and, yes, the Internet) on even through social and family gatherings. They are babysitter to our kids and live-in nurse to our elders, the guests that won't leave and that we love to hate and gossip about.
Yet as in any other dysfunctional relationship, our resentment grows and sometimes hits a boiling point.
It is that boiling point the McCain campaign is trying to conjure up for Governor Palin's speech tonight.
When McCain strategist Steve Schmidt said to media critic Howard Kurtz yesterday that the media are "on a mission to destroy" Governor Palin with "a level of viciousness and scurrilousness," Schmidt wasn't really angry. He was - and is - secretly rejoicing at the opportunity that the media, including bloggers, have provided his campaign:
In an extraordinary and emotional interview, Steve Schmidt said his campaign feels "under siege" by wave after wave of news inquiries that have questioned whether Palin is really the mother of a 4-month-old baby, whether her amniotic fluid had been tested and whether she would submit to a DNA test to establish the child's parentage.
Arguing that the media queries are being fueled by "every rumor and smear" posted on left-wing Web sites, Schmidt said mainstream journalists are giving "closer scrutiny" to McCain's little-known running mate than to Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
The McCain camp has been unusually aggressive in pushing back against the media, and it seems to hope to persuade journalists to back off in their scrutiny of Palin.
Kurtz is just plain wrong about that last point. The McCain campaign isn't so stupid as to think it can get the media to "back off." Rather, it wants to goad the media to overshoot, to become more vicious, to ratchet up the public's simmering resentment and hatred toward them and - in an act of political jiu-jitsu - use the media's gigantic size and strength against them to galvanize Palin's "Hockey Mom" image into tough political Teflon.
Ambinder's question, above, reveals a very common hubris among those that count themselves as members of "the press" that he mentions. It's a "don't fuck with us" mentality, and, in mafia terms, if his media "take it to the mattresses" with the McCain-Palin campaign, they may very well lose, and harm Obama's chances in the process.
A "war" like that - McCain-Palin vs. the media - will make all the legitimate questions about Palin's public policy positions, the extreme right-wing and out-of-touch stances that she shares with McCain, play second fiddle to the more compelling narrative that will push voters to declare for or against the media. If the 2008 campaign becomes a referendum on the media, McCain wins. Large swathes of the voting public - if offered a choice between "Palin vs. the media" - will naturally begin to root for her even as they disagree with her policy stances.
And the part of the American public that will make her their own identifying signifier - if the McCain strategy succeeds - includes small-town Americans, the butt of late night television jokes by urban elites on both coasts, and by privileged academics (and yes, some liberal bloggers) everywhere, the sort of folks that the Clinton campaign succeeded in frightening about Obama during the primaries. And these small-town voters hold the key to various Electoral College prizes: they will help the GOP retain teetering "red states" Ohio, Virginia, Indiana and Missouri. They might even allow McCain to pull off surprise victories in big "blue states" Michigan, Oregon or Pennsylvania. They might also push back the Democratic tide rising in the Mountain West, particularly Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada. If the dispute achieves just two out of three of those scenarios, say hello to President McCain.
As I look at the Electoral College map, the only "red state" where McCain's choice of Palin might hurt the McCain ticket in is Florida, with its elderly urbane East Coast settlers and large Jewish population that the Republicans have chipped away at so successfully in recent elections. (Unlike the overshooting regarding Palin and Pat Buchanan, the video of Palin present during the anti-Semitic "Jews for Jesus" sermon was rolled out based on documented fact. But that's not going to be a game changer in other swing states, whereas the Palin-as-media-victim meme can be, although in the opposite direction.
Running against the media is a risky strategy - as the media remind us, all the focus on Palin could implode on the GOP - but politics, like life, is not about avoiding risks. As I've said again and again, here, it is about taking the right risks. The personalized attacks that not destroy Palin's nomination by tomorrow will have served to make her stronger for the rest of the campaign.
And here's the saddest part of all: We can't control how the media is blowing it by volunteering for the role of the evil buzzards circling around the hockey mom, her family and her small town, and neither can Obama. But the way that bloggers and the Internet have been woven into the narrative, fusing two natural adversaries - bloggers and the media - into one hated national enemy ought to be a realm where we can and must use reason, argument and a big heavy dose of peer pressure to get at least those blogs associated with Obama and/or the Democratic Party to heed their candidate's advice to "back off," or at least marginalize and diminish those sectors of it - and their commenters - that have fallen into the trap.
If Palin steps up to the plate tonight and successfully "runs against the media" in a way that generates sympathy and empathy among small town Americans, we may look back on this week and say, with sadness, that "mistakes were made" in the liberal blogosphere that handed her that opportunity on a silver platter.
The hour has come for a pushback against those in our own ranks that have behaved exactly like the piranhas of the commercial media that they claim to be against.
If anyone in the Netroots wants to complain now that Obama has chosen to go on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News program on Thursday, they need only look in the mirror to find the culprit. It was the excesses in the blogsophere that forced him into it. The whole point of appearing with the Netroots-obsessed-and-hating O'Reilly is to invite the question: "Senator, what do you think of what those blogs wrote about Palin and her family? Do you reject and denounce them?" And Obama will smack down the perps so cleanly that even O'Reilly will have to cheer. And that smackdown will hit all of us, even those that didn't take the bait and don't engage in making such unvetted claims.
I will be among those that receives the smackdown applauding, and who will lend a helping hand to spread the smackdown to those that whine or portray themselves as victims because of it. And I invite you to join in that as a group effort to support from below what Obama must now say and do from above.
This sad episode explains why I've always disliked the slogan, invented by Jello Biafra and quoted on so many Indymedia websites, "don't hate the media, be the media," because the commercial media is not a positive or desirable role model, and behaving like it or becoming it will and should earn us the same legitimate scorn and hatred that we, as communicators who are closer to the public, have toward it.
Obama is six-to-ten points up in the national polls right now, and ahead in the Electoral College. This is his and his supporters' to win. But it is also ours to lose.
And too many bloggers have joined with the same media we distrust to hand to the McCain-Palin ticket, on a silver platter, the opportunity to run against us in a way that can turn it around and earn it votes in key electoral swing states.
Don't blow it, denizens of Netroots, any more than some of ye already have.
Email this page
Thanks Al!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by arelle_dee (not verified)Great piece Al,
Can you PLEASE posted this at daily kos and huffington post....Palin is all they are talking about...................
the bloggers and media have set expectations so low, that she could get more out of this speech than she should.......
For the love of all that is holy and good Al
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Trinity (not verified)PLEASE post this at Kos and everywhere and anywhere you can! People are freaking out.
It is embarassing. Look what we've let Karl Rove turn us in to.
The Commenter above said it
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Janey (not verified)I was also going to chime it that your perspective on the risk of creating a netroots-media backlash is worth getting on other sites.
Nicely said Al and worth a look for many of us - even those of us who think they are objective already (grin!). A good check or check up for all of us.
Excellent excellent article
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Karen DesmondExcellent excellent article Al. Please get it posted on Huffington Post and Kos, and email it to Kos also. It is absolutely beyond time to back off this story - the whole thing is most certainly bait for the media, the Obama campaign (which has so far resisted the bait), and Obama supporters (who have not).
KD
Agreed 100%
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Ken in California (not verified)Al,
Kudos to you for naming the strategy. I agree with everything you said here. The more this conversation becomes about wedge issues like abortion, school prayer, gay marriage, and Bristol's dilemna, the greater likelihood of a Republican win. Older male independents that were leaning for Obama can be switched to McCain out of a chivalrous attitude, "they are protecting Sarah".
The focus needs to be on McCain's judgement and character in harping on Obama's inexperience and then selecting someone with even less.
We don't need to attack Palin, we can already win by going after McCain and Bush.
thanks for the great blog
Ken in California
Hillary didn't exactly gain much
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Emma (not verified)by complaining about the media, did she?
I understand the Democratic primary electorate isn't the same as the general electorate, but still...
Al, I never thought I'd say this, but I think you're chicken littling. People won't vote for McCain simply because they pity Palin for the vicious media coverage. McCain will not win on November 4 by telling voters: "Remember how mean the media were to us back in Septemer?"
I think Palinmania will have blown over in a week or so, simply because there aren't any more scandals left to cover. The scandals (especially the abuse of power ones) will have settled in the back of voters' heads though and have caused lingering doubts about her. McCain-Palin, and not Obama-Biden, will have emerged as the risky choice.
Strategy to Pre-Protect Palin?
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by charley (not verified)Al, do you think this is a GOP strategy to "protect" Sarah Palin from having to do hard-hitting interviews with ____? It seems to me as if the McCain campaign is ramping up the anti-media talk in order to have a reason to decline interviews from Meet the Press or Joe Klein or whomever. It's been a week, and the only folks she spoke to worked for People, I think.
McCain vs. the Media
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Shawn (not verified)Al,
While I agree that the bloggers need to tone down the ad hominem attacks and the overreaching, I disagree that McCain can win by running against the media. There is a large swath of low info voters in this country who trust outlets like CNN and the big 3 networks for news. Just look at how quickly public opinion polls change when the media runs with a new narrative. The MSM is is still very influential.
At this point, most voters have made up their minds as to who they will vote for. Most of those that remain "undecided" at this late stage are voters who haven't been paying attention i.e. low info voters. If McCain takes on the media, he runs the risk of sullying his chances of winning over the remaining undecideds.
Well said, Al
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Chris (not verified)I guess its part of the weakness of being human that allow us to justify in ourselves that which we condemn in others. I know Kos has an 'everything goes' policy when it comes to diaries, but this is one time when he could at least post a front page article saying that anything to do with Palin's family is a no-go zone. I'd rather they just deleted diaries on the topic, but that ain't going to happen. I'll echo the call to post this as a diary over at Kos, though-maybe it'll wake a few people up.
Personally, I don't think running against the media is a long-duration tactic-at some point it becomes whining, and as Exhibit Z in Obama's case that McCain wants to talk about anything but the real issues. As long as the Obama/Biden of the last week are with us the next two months, its a W for the Dems in November.
Ditto...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Pamela Hilliard...Everything they said...as usual, Al, you are SO right...
PLEASE cross-post this on every relevant blog on your blog roll...
waterprise2 AKA Pam
Liberal with a Capital L!
Al, a true Gentleman!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Sandy in Chicago (not verified)Al, you're absolutely right. There needs to be a ground-swell against this kind of nonsense, and the candidate has led the way. Hopefully, his less strategically-minded followers will head your advice.
All this nonsense is distraction. This is a big election about big issues, and as the candidate himself said so eloquently, they can only win if it's about the small stuff.
Sarah Palin is unqualified for the office she seeks and extreme in her positions on the issues of substance (those positions that we know of at least; as far as I know she still has yet to really answer a question about the war in Iraq). Everything else is tabloid blather that only serves McCain.
I agree with arelle_dee, the liberal netroots must read this.
Hey look! An adult has arrived!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Dorey (not verified)Well finally, an adult has appeared in the blogosphere.Thank you Al.
Agreed
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Jeanne in AZ (not verified)Last Friday when the announcement was made you warned us to just ignore Palin and keep the focus on McCain. You were right, but the media feeding frenzy totally washed your wisdom out to sea, where it bobs all alone and virtually unnoticed.
I do have one question -- how come the media victim angle works for them but never for us? Ever ever ever?
Dugg!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Allan BrauerAnd you have a consensus that this needs to be cross-posted at Kos. All of us will follow you over there to rec it up and add our comments.
Standing up and cheering
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Kat (not verified)One of the best things you've written,Al. I've completely stopped even reading one of the leading netroots blogs because I felt like I was screaming into the wind for people to Just. Stop. I can't believe how badly they have screwed things up this week. I will not patronize a site that is actively hurting my candidate. I have to say, my blood pressure and anxiety level have dropped considerably. No drama is the way to go.
I certainly hope that Obama does deliver a smackdown of the netroots on O'Reillly, and like you I will be cheering, not offended.
And forward to Andrew Sullivan as well
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Anonymous (not verified)He's certainly near the heart of the Palin media storm.
I am in full agreement with
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Kelcie (not verified)I am in full agreement with this entire article and with everyone here hoping you will/have cross-posted it. Thank you, Al.
I was disgusted when I saw Huffington Post's headline about Palin's daughter's "baby daddy." It was so completely hypocritical and distasteful (how angry did everyone get when FOX did that to Michelle Obama?), and the comment I got back when I posted something about it was, "If you recall, FOX did that to the Obamas. All's fair! And it is factually true." ...Right.
I'm going to be sending this to everyone I know.
Dugg!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Pamela Hilliard...Me, too..Allan!
And I certainly do not mind a smackdown from either Al or Barack...
waterprise2 AKA Pam
Liberal with a Capital L!
Yes, Al, Let's move on, but....
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Norm W. (not verified)why shouldn't a focus be made on Palin's so-called experience?
What if Senator Obama had chosen Govenor Sebalius to be his running mate? Do you think for one second that the first words out of McSame's/right wing surrogates mouth wouldn't be that she has no foreign policy experience? If Sebalius had also had some family problems on top of that, how many weeks would it be before we got to hear about policy differences between Obama and McCain? I agree with Jeanne above-- why oh why are Democratic candidates never seen as smear victims?
Again, I agree with Al that the victim card is useful to the GOP at present. Will it swing the election? Ask HRC -- she tried (sometimes successfully) to play the card repeatedly, but it can only be played a few times over 9 weeks. After this week's storm, I predict it will come down to McSame and Gov. Palin's own campaign statements biting them in the butt. Playing Poor Mrs. Palin will only last so long.
Having said this, I won't be posting about Palin again. I'm already bored with her and the Repubs. I'm more excited to get out and register new voters and call folks on the weekends. Who's with me?
I have a slight disagreement
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by George (not verified)I have a slight disagreement with this. Sorry. My sense is that most of the attacks have been against McCain and not about the baby or anything much like that, though when those have occurred they have been virulent.
But how do you say that Palin is the one who "exposed" her daughter to this without saying that she was "exposed" to the nation as a whole and to the press. Why hasn't she protected the privacy of her daughter? Yet we are supposed to keep hands off? It's not the daughter who we question. It's the mother! And I think that's fair game. Not that Palin should be disqualified because she has a pregnant daughter, or small kids so how can she do the job, but rather that she put her daughter in this public position and now is blaming everyone else for noticing and questioning.
I'll also point out that the forces on whatever the other side is aren't so quiet either. You ever hear anyone tell the right blogosphere or bloviators to keep quiet about Michelle Obama or Rev. Wright or any of that? Nope! But the left should be meek.
In general, Al, I agree that strategically it would be better to let this just play out without so much hysteria. However, I'm not sure that no matter what anyone would have said in any negative light wouldn't have been spun as "the left media that favors Obama and the crazy netroots" attacking this poor, helpless small-town regular just-like-you-and-me woman. They were looking for a bogeyman, even if they had to invent one.
Very trenchant analysis,
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by pufferfish (not verified)Very trenchant analysis, Al. You should propagate this post far and wide throughout the progressive blogosphere. Let's remember that we should conduct ourselves better than the wingnuts, and let's not lose sight of the prize!
Oh is there ever a need for vetting.
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Chris Rich (not verified)My hope for this emerging medium is that it can exceed the abysmal standards of a dying corporate media assemblage by merely having a higher quality product.
But I have seen many of the usual suspect blog sites turn into some cyber version of the raucous pamphleteering of the nations earliest days.
Without trying to sound like a tin foil hat wearer, I have seen lots of false flag posts and troll overruns in many of the ineptly moderated venues. Some are so sloppy that there were whole runs of diaries that were plainly phony usually pretend PUMA's or some such thing.
Al's added dilligence is what adds value to The Field and the absence of this effort at so many wanna be shops is why they are descending to low value crap.
Sorry...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Norm W. (not verified)for misspelling her name: Governor Sebelius.
Important
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by TrueBlue (not verified)A very important piece, Al, and not a moment too soon. Those less involved who have been drawn to the blogs by the enormity of McCain's audacity in picking this unqualified, unvetted right-wing trojan horse have jumped too enthusiastically on the bandwagon. The blogosphere has a very clear role here, which is to root out facts, then contextualize them and help move them into the mainstream media. Anything not based on documentable fact alone, including comments from dissident Alaskans themselves (unfortunately, because these are fascinating to read), should be treated with skepticism until they can be proven. Period. McCain and his henchmen have screwed this up royally, don't give them a lifeline!
On top of this - brace yourself for McCain negative attack ads
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Karen DesmondBrace yourselves, according to Plouffe:
"In the next 36 hours, the McCain campaign will be pouring millions of dollars -- if not tens of millions -- into negative attack ads against Barack Obama.
Before John McCain accepts the Republican nomination on Thursday, his campaign has to spend every last dollar of primary funds they've raked in from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs."
KD
Don't dig it
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by JC (not verified)This line of thinking gives McCain way too much credit...if there's one thing he's not, it's calculating and careful. Yes, he's an opportunist, and the campaign staff is desparately trying to spin this as positively as they can, but this is not a trap for Dems.
Really, this is about damage control. Keeping the focus on Palin's family is much easier to defend than her record. This is what the spin is about. Obama sat down with Fox some time ago, and the timing speaks for itself - Thursday night as McCain is ready to speak.
Experience, yes, but...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Kat (not verified)Norm W. - If the blogger firestorm had been only about her experience, then I would agree with you. But there has been some of the most scurrilous, conspiracy theory, wack job stuff posted about her son, Trig and her daughter, Bristol. It made ME feel sorry for her, and I find her deeply terrifying.
It's hard to be grownup...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Kathleen HarganSalicious stuff has it's own appeal... and the connected netroots were ripe for this kind of onslaught. Each time I find myself getting caught up in the drama, I become angry, upset and discouraged... then I come to the Field for a shot of grown-up (you'd all laugh--I've got grandchildren!!), and remember that anger, upset and discouragement only makes a willing victim.
Glad there's a community like the Field... "smart dissent" ... My daily tour of the blogesphere is getting shorter, as I can't bear the hysteria; and how very sad if we allow this potential antidote to the corporate media to follow it it's same deadly path...
DUGG!!!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Forrest (not verified)Great observations!!! I've been watching (some) bloggers tear themselves up over this!!! Thanks, Al--and the Obama campaign--for being the adults here!
Now that you've laid it out the McCain strategy is clear and we need to BACK OFF the Palin distractions ASAP. WE MUST leave the Bristol/Levi soap opera to the like of the NE.
Lets focus on substance, judgement and vetting (or lack thereof) as it pertains to McCain and leave Gov. Palin to give what I'm sure will be a well received and well delivered speech tonight.
Again, great call, Al.
If theres anything that
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by D.Quayle (not verified)Republicans know how to do, its appeal to the worst/most counterproductive aspects of human nature. At least after she gets her teflon coating Biden will be able to deal with her like a more conventional politician.
The blogs have been crazy the last few days with hubris filled attacks because of the poll bounce. I think they believe they caused it. Even worse some are saying that forcing a statement out of Gov. Palin is a vindication of the tactics. Maybe its time for a diary showing the effects of the Palin bounce now that its importance has been hyped and viewing figures will likely exceed obamas official figures. Its a shame the AIP thing wasn't true or she could have called her speech "a more perfect secession"
Maybe Biden can say something stupid to deflect attention and invite comparisons between McCain and Biden.
Flash Burns
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Brendan CorcoranAl's is a strong argument for keeping the focus where it needs to be--on the big issues central to this big election. The Republicans didn't plan this drama out six months ago, but they have demonstrated that they know how to tactically work this political landscape to their short-term advantage. They are demonstrating that they are still good at the kind of retail discipline that wins enough skirmishes to have the war called in their favor. They may have a lackluster convention and their Presidential candidate may be temperamentally ill-equipped for the Presidency, but they can take "problems" and make them "assets."
While the Republicans' have failed at both governing and real party-building or institution-building especially over the Bush years, this being symptomatic of the party's intellectual and creative exhaustion after 35 years of dominance of American political life and culture (recall Obama's "respect" for what Reagan achieved politically), they are not going to implode as an electoral force over the next 60 days. They are certainly not playing with a strong hand, but their cunning and viciousness when cornered are very very dangerous. Even as I believe the current media storm is more flash than conflagration yielding little benefit or harm to either side, with each passing day, the stakes are raised so that now is the time to quit the political voyeurism/faux-death watch and recommit to the ground game that is this campaign.
Just the facts....
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Norm W. (not verified)Point taken, Kat. I haven't spent any time looking at posts with those nasty subject lines, so as to keep my mind clean! I'll take your and Al's word for it.
But the second point of my post was that similar news on Sebelius would have had an even more virulent reception by the right. The difference is that the manure would not be spread by multiposters on a few websites, but would have already been spread on MSM by O'Reilly and Hannity. The lone voice in the MSM crying foul would have been Olbermann.
Basically Disagree With This Post
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Ben AlpersInteresting post, Al, but I pretty fundamentally disagree.
I'll keep this short. My disagreements are two-fold.
First, this seems awfully chicken-littlish to me.
Secondly, given how removed the McCain campaign's accusations about the blogosphere and the media are from the actual behavior of the blogosphere and the media, blaming the "netroots" for the McCain campaign's behavior seems seriously off-base to me. The McCain campaign is pretty clearly keeping to a run-against-the-media script that has nothing to do with what's actually happening at dKos. Will it work? I hope not...and I think it won't. But blaming dKos and other websites for this non-reality-based series of moves by the McCain campaign is part of the same "logic" that led the Democrats to nominate a war hero in 2004 in the vain hope that doing so would insulate them from Republican attacks on their patriotism.
And to go back to an earlier interesting, but off-base, post: sorry, Al, for better or for worse the Palin pick has changed this campaign.
I halfway agree with you, AL
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by rikyrah (not verified)And then I don't.
This woman is dangerous. She's incompetent. She's a Trojan Horse. She is a tool of the right wing evangelicals, and not since I was a child, have my rights as woman, been so at risk.
This is another Clarence Thomas.
The Democrats, afraid of being accused of racism, CAVED, and we see where that got us.
She must be called out.
She must.
She is dangerous, incompetent, and is supported by folks that would do domestically what the neo-cons have been able to do to foreign policy.
Under all circumstances, she must be stopped.
And Senator Country Last too.
It's not sexist to point out that she's a religious extremist, who has already abused her authority, and wanted to ban books, and is against the environment.
I agree that folks just need to repeat over and over her ISSUES.
Get her EXTREME religious views out to those suburban women. Make them understand that she's NOT tolerant, under any circumstances.
Make it plain to states like New Hampshire that McCain's choosing her means A COMPLETE SELLOUT TO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT.
We gotta strip him of that Maverick bullshit, when it's clear that he's a complete tool and pawn of the religious nuts even moreso than Dubya, and even I didn't think that was possible.
If we don't push that, who will?
The Point is...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Pamela Hilliard...On the one hand, it is precisely because she seemingly wasn't vetted and was seemingly chosen so quickly that it speaks to McCain's judgment and temperment, and Obama spoke on those in The Speech. On the other hand, all of this talk about "experience", when Obama speaks of "judgment" goes two ways.Then of course, there is the human "need" for gossip and juicy tidbits...
But on the other hand, this election isn't about her, it's about Obama vs McCain; and the issues, not the personalities.
Hillary tried to make it about personalities because they were so close on most of the issues, anyway. Even then, many said why doesn't Obama "hit her" with this or that? Even then, he still took the high road and stuck to his strategic game plan. We should have learned by now that all of the distractions meant nothing...besides, we saw how well that "experience" meme worked for her...
Obama has already jumped on the statement of the McShame's campaign that "the issues don't matter"...it IS about the issues...
I think we need to re-visit The Speech and realize that Obama called the Repubs out on every single issue and drew the "line in the sand" on each and every one...again fueling the speculation that *she* was picked as soon as they saw the transcript of the speech, and especially after they saw that the Dems didn't implode as they had hoped...
For a lot of women, including me, it's not the fact that her daughter is pregnant (as Obama said, his mother was 18; and quiet as it's kept, I was 19), it is the fact that *she* would put her daughter "out there" for her own political gain...but that is my opinion, best discussed in another venue. It is also the hypocrisy--and our anger that they all of a sudden cry sexism when they use racism as often as possible--of the Repubs that has our dander up...but again, those are secondary issues.
There is also the fact that after being so disappointed and royally screwed so many times, we are sensing victory and literally tasting blood. But the game ain't over yet; and we CAN lose it with our own hubris.
Just as we know that there are only about 60 or so real PUMAs, the numbers of the extreme right are drastically reduced from past elections. So...while there is lots to "talk about"...what we should really be doing is WORKING...it's GOTV, GOTV, GOTV. Period.
As a matter of fact, maybe it's time again for the Jay-Z song...
OK, that was more that one point...
waterprise2 AKA Pam
Liberal with a Capital L!
overshadowing
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Jason Eley (not verified)The danger is of any nonsense drama about her family overshadowing the very real stories that have emerged. Palin has been the pick for five days and literally every day since has brought new revelations about how corrupt and incompetent she is, from the Bridge to Nowhere to her $27 million in earmarks to leaving Wasilla $22 million in debt to her undisclosed ownership of that car wash to her repeated firings of officials to her desire to ban books to etc. Nobody should care about her daughter, but everybody should care about these issues.
When the McCain campaign overreacts to a CNN reporter asking for evidence of Palin's much-vaunted executive experience, they're not running against the media, they're running against the truth. They didn't do their homework and are left with a running mate with a load of baggage. Maybe she can rise above it and none of this will matter in the end, but that doesn't mean plenty of legitimate issues haven't been raised in the past few days.
walking into the trap, part II
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Absentee Bob (not verified)I told my Republican friends last week that their party was making a big mistake by sowing Democratic disunity between Clinton-Obama. By making so much of the split and running an ad asking why Obama didn't pick HRC as his VP, they were essentially made something that was a foregone conclusion into a seemingly big accomplishment.
Now, the tables are turned. And the media attacks (the Obama campaign has handled it well but that is lost) on meaningless aspects of Palin's life has given her the opportunity to say "I love my daughter and stand by her and her unborn baby unconditionally" and make it seem like a home run.
OOPS!!! Open Mic hits Repugs
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Jonathan Jacobs (not verified)http://www.jedreport.com/2008/09/tell-us-what-you-really-think.html#disq...
Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy caught by an open Mic while on with Chuck Todd (MSNBC) today.
It's priceless.
Trying to reason with hurricane season
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Okke OrnsteinI agree with Al on the ethical side of this; it's a cyber lynch mob and I think they're taking revenge for all the swiftboating and Lewinsky and what have you in the past.
But in my opinion it's also the inevitable result of a political and media culture where everything private is used to further agendas and its getting worse every election. I don't think any Edwards affair is really an issue, and it shouldn't be covered anywhere but maybe in the yellow press. I also don't care if the father of some Palin baby comes to Minnesota or not.
But I'm also totally uninterested in learning that Palin is a happy mother of five or how she gave birth in an airplane or whatever, and neither do I care how Obama bought icecream for Michelle way back when or what he tells his daughters when he tucks them in. I hope Obama will smack this hurricane down while descending to the gates of hell to meet that poisonous snake monster tomorrow, but I can't help thinking that I saw his kids two out of four evenings on stage as well during the convention. And I don't think it's cute at all. It's child labor. It has nothing to do with any issues, and all this fuzzy family talk and parading on stage - on both sides - and in video portraits are providing exactly those warm waters and calm winds in which hurricanes like the ones we're seeing now develop.
This is also why I don't think I agree with Al on attacking the media being a succesful strategy for McCain, because they are themselves as guilty of nurturing this monster as the rest of them. Rove is practically the personification of dirty media campaign tactics. I think the only way out is for both campaigns to take the high road from here, in other words, McCain should follow Obama's example or maybe even strive to issue some sort of joint statement. And quit substituting political substance with fuzzy private crap.
Three observations
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Al Giordano1. A lot of people have told me to post this on other sites or send it to other bloggers. Why are you waiting for me to do it for you? You have the power of email (and you obviously know how to comment on a blog!). Do. It. Yourself.
2. Other arguments have been made that "well, if we don't do it, who will?" or "This woman is dangerous! We must expose her!" or "This would have happened to Sebelius" (the implication being that because the other side does it, we should too). You who are making those arguments don't have your eye on the ball. If you think that who gets elected to the most powerful position on earth (newly infused with far-reaching unprecedented executive powers) is important, you MUST ignore all other aspects of the campaign other than those messages that get you to victory. To do anything else is terribly selfish and self-indulgent, and sabotaging of that goal. Something about "that woman" (a phrase that in and of itself, even when said by a woman, carries centuries of misogyny on its shoulders) upsets you? Tough fucking luck. You're being too self-obsessed with what matters to you rather than what matters to winning. I'm not going to tip-toe around that crap any more!
3. Someone named Marc came on here and said basically "I'll do what I want on my blog." Fine. Be stupid over there, then, not here, Marc. Your comment has been deleted.
A couple other comments got through that, getting back from lunch, I found had been approved by the staff here. I deleted them. Yes, Al is on the warpath. The filter is being tightened here.
And to whomever called this post "chicken littling" here's the difference. People play chicken little over the things they cannot change. This is something in our abilities to change, from the bottom up. It is therefore a pragmatic call to arms, not a railing against gravity or natural law!
yes!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Kate_in_StPete (not verified)I figure, if Gov. Palin really is as bad of a choice for VP as she appears, to me, then that will become apparent to reasonable people as the campaign progresses into its next stages. To be slingshot onto the national stage the way she has been is almost a guarantee of gaffes, or mistakes, because absolutely no one could withstand the amount of scrutiny that a presidential campaign brings, without years of training.
Liberals, progressives, the media, Obama supporters, citizens....all of us have absolutely nothing to lose by letting her, as my grandmother would say, show her ass. That is to say, let's let her make whatever mistakes she will or won't make. Let's let her do the heavy lifting here - she has a great burden of proof to carry these next weeks. The campaign to uncover all the dirt about her family and her record, her church, all of it, and sensationalize it only succeeds in allowing all of the aforementioned to project our own fears, prejudices, and yes, elitism into the discussion, where it can only muddy the water of the discourse.
I don't think we have anything to lose by treating Gov. Palin as a worthy opponent, albeit one with whom we emphatically disagree on many (most?) issues, and working hard and smart to win. Anything less is disrespectful.
or, y'know, what Al said.
You're half-right
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Jim (not verified)It's all well and good to say that people should not spread mere innuendo, but I don't agree with the suggestion that restraint here will prevent - or even deter - the right wing from making the media (and bloggers) a target. The fact is they will do this NO MATTER what happens on these blogs.
Further, I believe that the blogging world really should be governed by a different standard. I don't have a blog myself, but I can easily see how difficult it would be to police one. Moreover, spreading information or speculation on a blog, in my view, is fundamentally different from spreading information on network or cable news, simply because there are so many damn blogs and an infinite amount of information on the web.
To put it differently, I don't think that restraint from liberal bloggers will really affect the right-wing talking points, and I doubt that restraint is really much of a practical option.
On the other hand, I certainly don't argue with the premise that each of us, individually, should pause before giving voice to unsubstantiated rumors. That's simply a matter of fairness and courtesy.
I think most people --
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Stephen LaRose (not verified)I think most people -- whether Republicans or Democrats -- have to see the big picture.
Both Obama and McCain have made important decisions that reflect on how well they would govern. And both had the same time to do it -- about three months or so.
Obama went through a long list of people, along with his appointed vetting group. He chose Joe Biden, a Senate veteran (as Obama wasn't), an expert on foreign affairs (balancing an area that Obama was seen as weak on), a man of pretty good character, intellect, and wisdom. He's not the perfect choice (if he was, he would have, or should have run for president himself), but Obama made a wise and calculated decision after some reflection.
John McCain had one five-minute meeting, and a 15-minute phone call, and selected a refugee from the Jerry Springer Show.
Who would you rather have making decisions that would impact your life and the security of the nation?
I agree!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by KathinNC (not verified)This needs to be posted at Kos ASAP. A huge mistake was made. There was absolutely NO REASON to jump on the babygate, Buchanan, AIC bandwagen when Palin's record as mayor and governor provide such a rich line of substantive attack. Obama made this clear early on, but the blogosphere refused to listen to him. Now the Repubs have refocused the conversation on abortion, teenage pregnancy and crazy pastors. Not quite God, guns and gays - but close. After all the work that Obama has done to move the conversation to more important issues, here we are back again.
I absolutely expect him to come down hard on this kind of "reporting" when he goes on Fox. I hope people at Kos are prepared.
Levi
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Carrie (not verified)It almost seems like they are baiting the press and the bloggers by bringing Levi into all of this. It's like they want to catch someone saying something snobby about him so that they can say "see. you don't care about regular people. You are a bunch of snobs."
When I first read this post I started chicken litteling a bit. Could we really blow this thing? I sure hope not.
Now I think that because of the short attention span of the public and the media that once the newness of Palin blows over, we will get back to the same old stuff we have been doing all along.
Al...
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Pamela Hilliard...I didn't know people could cross-post another person's post without their permission...
waterprise2 AKA Pam
Liberal with a Capital L!
Al, once again spot on!
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Anonymous (not verified)Finally, someone who actually thinks. dKos and HuffPost seem to have a lot of hate in their diaries/articles since Palin was announces as VP candidate.
I mean, surely she's inexperienced but this can prove to be a double-edged sword:
Cheers,
Sérgio
Consider it done
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Elliot (not verified)Al, I didn't cross-post the whole thing, but I did add to what you've been saying:
At Election Inspection
And a copy cross-posted at Daily Kos
Great Post Al
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by Franco BertacciI do think that the repubs are overplaying it , even more than usual. I think how it all plays out depends on the "important" talking repub heads. I am sure you saw the clip of La Noonan and M. Murphy on hot-mike saying it is over. The spinners have lost 2 of their best surrogates now, so in my book, they have lost 2nd round......tonight is round 2 1/2 let's see how it goes down!
Here's the thing, rikyrah
Submitted on September 3rd, 2008 by gringoyo (not verified)Rikyrah, it goes without saying that her policies and ideology are a nightmare. But remember that what the blogutards have been doing has been to go after those aspects of her character that are in fact attractive to much of the electorate because many voters (including, gasp, me) can see ourselves reflected in them: Her less-than-perfect and perhaps dysfunctional family life, her imperfect attempts to balance work and family, her real (or perceived) ability to behave in a so-called "maverick" way, her history of taking unpopular stances. Questioning her public policy is one thing, but attacking her character is something the Republican stategists knew would happen precisely for the reasons that Al articulates so well, and her selection as running mate was designed in large measure for the media to grab the bait. THAT is the Trojan horse, more so than Palin's entry into the white house.
Moral indignancy gets us nowhere; strategy will get us everywhere.