How Low Can You Go?

Does the Borat Obama campaign think that criticizing those don't use computers or e-mail will draw more 40 watt voters to the fold? What are these cretins thinking?

Did MLK use e-mail?

Brian,
I don't want to drag this out but let me just clarify my earlier statement here and on another thread.. Obama is a smart guy, that is, he is very clever and has a good sense of how to play people. The guy is a Harvard grad, so let's assume he IS very smart.

He reads the national papers and understood that for a while, Palin owned the "lipstick" line. Mention lipstick last Monday and most Americans don't remember McCain or any other politician using it. In fact, the lipstick line was perhaps the most memorable quote of Palin's very talked about speech. Her rise shocked the Democrats and Obama must be smarting from her speech getting more Press than his wishful and vague speech at the convention. Do you think Obama wasn't a bit taken by the public reception of Palin?

Many I spoke to in the last few days (mostly Liberals) admit that using lipstick by Obama should have been recognized by Obama as invoking the short term collective memory and a poor choice. lipstick - Palin. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand this basic social psychology with media pushing the association 24/7 for days. So Obama uses lipstick so soon after Palin using it, knowing full well that most Americans would reflexively associate the word with Palin's recent self characterization of being an attack dog with lipstick. Follow so far? Can you really argue that such an assumption is not reasonable? I have heard high schoolers come to this conclusion. And add to the line Obama used, pig. Wasn?t he the least bit sensitive to the charges of sexism? Not arrogant Obama.

Just look at the effectiveness of the McCain commercial. It merely points out the association most Americans see despite the fact the actual context Obama used was not the actual context of the commerical. Yes, he used the line in a way that did not directly characterize Palin.

Now I am not alone and the fact so many Liberals (and I would include myself) find it poor taste is that for someone as smart as Obama is, it must have been conscious. Can you imagine Obama not saying to himself, "if I use this line, won't people think I am blasting Palin?". No, even you or I would weigh whether it would be a good move.

Now there ARE candidates that this insight would not dawn on, but Obama is not one of them. He could have apologized for choosing a line that could be construed as an attack on Palin, but watch him on Letterman. Can you honestly not detect his ploy was to bait the Republicans into an attack and claim being a victim? He thinks he is so smart, but the poll numbers don?t reflect it. He has done this ploy time and again (see the actual unfolding of the race card). He had his wife give a Press conference to suggest Bill Clinton had said racist things. Then later he claimed he had no part in escalating the race issue and that he was a victim. This rope a dope tactic is not lost on the observant.

Well, that is my take. Had he said his pig line weeks after Palin's remark, the association would no longer be there. He thinks he is clever. He is not clever enough for me. In fact, I think he is far less clever than he thinks he is and I find his antics quite insulting. He refused to acknowledge in Europe the surge worked, but on Fox he accepted it had accomplished some positive things. Did he learn something in a few weeks? No. He just read the polls saying he was being immature to give NO credit to the surge. He read that General Petreous is well respected. Obama does not want to go up against the General. He told the Press, Wright was not controversial and a few weeks later rejected him after Wright had attacked Obama's honesty and character. He told Union workers in the Chicago debate that he wanted workplace laws enforced and then went on to suggest to Union members that illegals should get better pay and insurance. That is the enforcement he wanted. Then he read the polls and in a later debate accused Bush of failing to enforce workplace laws, which he clarified as determining worker status. Did the Press vet Obama?s shift and show the viewers that Obama tried to scuttle the Amnesty Bill by introducing legislation that would have prevented employers from determining the status of workers? No.

So the pattern is Obama reacting to polls and making decisions based on what he thinks works. Second Amendment, immigration, Iran, drilling, you name it. Even Capital gains tax. The irony of course, is that McCain is using such tactics on Obama as Barak now cries foul.

As Tully said, Brian, Obama certainly knew pig and lipstick would be associated to Palin in the short term collective consciousness. That is social reality as Obama tries to trademark Hope Faith Change or whatever nonsense. Remember, he cried that Hillary had copied his mantra when in fact, "Yes We Can" is a former Soviet mantra. And Obama has a a history of lifting lines. I think you get the point. Hypocrisy. You must take in the whole behavior starting from the race card in the primary. He gets away with this game because media is in the tank, but polls now reflect the public is catching on. When he claims McCain voted 90% with Bush, the public knows Obama voted 97% with the do nothing Congress.

I say this as a person who is Center Left. I strongly oppose creationism in science class or a Constitution Ban on ALL abortion. I don't want assault rifles in every home or prayer in the classroom, but to be true to reality, I cannot accept someone pretending his real aim was not at Palin when he intentionally used lipstick on a pig so soon after Palin's line was front page on most newspapers. He knew what the reaction would be and he was ready with another round of playing the victim. He did this with race and even the weak vetting of his life long associations. Sorry, I ain't buying it and Obama shows his truest colors when he feels under the gun. He will lie, have his minions get foul and even resort to ploys like the ones he has been making lately. I think McCain is catching on.

P.S. Beware of Obama's gracious gestures. They are usually a set up for allowing him (in his own mind) to say some rather nasty things. I have heard many empty gestures cast towards Hillary, but the real grit was all those things said that defeated her by painting her an untrustworthy, Republican lite and then stealing most of her positions as he pivoted towards center. If he loses, his VP decision will stand out and give some insight to the real sincerity behind all those "gracious" things he said about Bill and Hillary.

Yes yes, Michael, in your not-so-humble opinion it's not in the least low to mock the war injuries of decorated veterans, even inadvertently. Why, the Obama campaign is positively heroic for doing so, and I'm partisan scum for even noticing they did it! Or for noticing you overtly extending and expanding that mockery with NO potential for misunderstanding the nature of it on your part. However could I doubt? (PS--I'm currently a registered Democrat.)

Sorry guy, but intentional or not, it's freakin' low. Snake-belly low. Whale-feces low. And you are just as low or lower for actively spinning it and defending it and overtly expanding it, and for personally attacking and ridiculing people for objecting to same. You passed over the opportunity for the "reasonable mistake" excuse and went direct to retaliatory ad hominem that overtly condones and repeats the behavior. If you jump in the hole and wield the shovel, don't expect anyone to take you seriously. Name-calling won't change that.

Tactically speaking, it's also freakin' stupid. While the ad may firm up the left base a touch, it highlights both McCain's service record and personal sacrifices in uniform and the clumsy amateurishness of the Obama campaign. Coming on the heels of the "lipstick" remark, it presents an image of the Obama campaign as deaf and dumb to anything resembling nuance or perception, which plays right into the stumbling-neophyte meme now hounding Obama among swing voters. The alternative view is the smirking "who me?" Obama campaign, sliing in digs and pretending they don't really mean what people think they mean. So, clumsy-and-clueless, or conniving-playing-innocent? Niether is a good image to present to swing voters.

When in a hole, the first step is to stop digging. The second is to climb out. You don't accomplish either by more digging.

Note also lead sentence of post, particularly the phrase "Really Stupid Mockeries." You think this was a really smart mockery? Pray tell why. This I gotta hear.

If he has trouble with reading computer screens, he may in fact have some subtle form of brain damage from beatings he has incurred. If so, that would be extremely unfortunate. But it would also, IMO, be something we have a right to know

you have a point, but if we can have FDR (paralysis from polio) and JFK (Addison's disease as well as war wounds) and Lincoln (depression) and A. Jackson (hardheaded) *and* praise them for their decisions, I think McCain can do the job. Being well is not the same as doing well. And don't forget Wm Henry Harrison died within a month of obtaining office.

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink

I can't really believe that McCain is simply physically incapable of using a computer due to his POW injuries unless someone explains to me why its so.

He actually CAN use a computer, but due to his injuries typing is extremely painful, and he has plenty of assistants. He has no need to sit at a desk and use a keyboard. The ad is thus not only an affront on the war-injuries line, but also false-to-fact. (I know, I know, as if THAT ever stopped a campaign...)

If you would like to know why it's painful, he had one shoulder crushed and the other bayoneted when he was captured, was beaten several times a week for the YEARS he was a captive, and was often hung up with his arms behind his back. BY his arms. As a result he cannot tie his shoes. He cannot lift his arms above his shoulders, nor hold them above his waist for extended periods, or lift any significant weight above his waist. If you are simply unable to "believe" those effects, well, we are not responsible for your limited imagination and lack of rudimentary medical knowledge. Also see below re: medical records.

If that still doesn't satisfy you, please feel free to volunteer to demonstrate on yourself that it shouldn't have that effect. Ever known anyone with a crushed shoulder, as compared to the more common and simple breaks? I have. Apparently it's about as painful as you get, even when properly and immediately treated. Which McCain's injuries were not.

As I said, it was a STUPID ad. In effect, they spent money to boost McCain.

If McCain has disabilities, we have a right to know the nature of them if they might effect his performance.

Leaving aside the rhetorical nature of your claim of a "right to know" (Is it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights? A carryover from the Magna Carta?) McCain's ENTIRE medical records, many thousands of pages of them, were released by his campaign long ago, so go do your own research if you think they're hiding something.

By contrast, Obama's campaign has released a one-page "summary" letter from his doctor stating that he is in pretty good health. Among many other things also as yet unreleased by the Obama campaign are his office records from the Illinois Senate, his grades from Columbia, his admission documents file from Harvard Law, and his specific client list from his years with his Chicago law firm. (In place of the latter he has disingenuously released a list of ALL that large law firm's clients for those years. Heh.)

Besides, I can admire McCain and STILL prefer a 21st-century President with computer skills.

If McCain has disabilities, we have a right to know the nature of them if they might effect his performance. I know he can't lift one of his arms very high, and that doesn't matter. Is he unable to use his fingers? What's the story? If he can use his fingers, and he can read a computer screen, then he can use a computer.

If he has trouble with reading computer screens, he may in fact have some subtle form of brain damage from beatings he has incurred. If so, that would be extremely unfortunate. But it would also, IMO, be something we have a right to know.

I find this whole set of comments to be offensive and idiotic. Even worse that it is coming from the liberal side that champions ADA and issues like that.

I would be far more concerned about possible brain damage from Obama's admitted drug use than McCain's torture. I just find this argument sick and disgusting. Not to mention that fact that I consider the ability to operate a computer to be one of the least important qualifications for a President. I put it right above being able to flush the toilet in things that are important.

Max:
I was screaming that Iraq was lost back when I was one of the few voices saying we needed to put more men in. The thing that became the surge. I was riding that hobby horse long before McCain figured it out.

But I appreciate your admission that I'm not a partisan water carrier.