I know, some might say that the Southern Male Democrat naming my favorite Republican is sorta like naming my favorite Tarhole - there just aren’t that many. (I kid! There are LOTS of Republicans I like… 
) However, as I watched some of the Sunday political talk shows, there is some interesting buzz regarding Colin Powell and Barack Obama that reminded me why — Colin Powell is my favorite Republican. Look at what he said regarding my man Obama -
Asked what he thinks of Barack Obama’s political success this year, former Secretary of State Colin Powell had this to say yesterday on PBS: “I’m terribly excited, I’m impressed, and I’m happy for Barack Obama.” You can watch the video here.
As AFP notes, Powell urged Americans to “enjoy this moment where a person like Barack Obama can knock down all of these old barriers that people thought existed with respect to the opportunities that are available to African-Americans.”
“He is putting himself forward not as a black man but as an American man who wants to be president of the United States of America,” Powell added. “We should see Barack as a candidate for president who happens to be black, and not a black candidate for president.”
It’s pretty old news that Powell and Obama talk regularly and that the Secretary informally advises the Senator. Now it seems that Powell’s endorsement is truly up for grabs and that he talks with both presidential candidates on a regular basis. (Sorry libertarians - when you actually win some major elections we’ll talk…) Most of the pundits seem to think that Powell’s endorsement of Obama is a done deal. (For McCain, what has to be even scarier than all the positive press that will generate is the fact that Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel may go along with Powell. )
From the time that he first talked of running for President, Colin Powell has always made it clear that his country comes first and that his party comes second. We need more political leaders like this. Unfortunately, our political system punishes such values. Let’s be frank - had Powell made a name for himself strictly in politics rather than the military, he would be the same way many other politicians are. Serving the nation in a high-profile military capacity gives a person the luxury of proving their mettle to the American people without having to take political positions.
And while I was bummed that Powell didn’t choose the Democratic party, I knew that he was a different kind of Republican, more like Eisenhower and George H. W. Bush than the current crop of dittoheads. That perception was confirmed the night that I heard Powell speak at the 2000 Republican National Convention in Philadelphia. (Yes, the SMD has attended a GOP Convention. It’s a loooong story. ) Powell told his fellow elephants that they could not in good conscience protest loudly about welfare for the poor, while turning a blind eye to corporate welfare provided by the government. Let’s just say that those words were not what one would call an “applause line.”
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think that if there is an endorsement of Obama by Powell, it will not happen until September, at least. What better way to take a little of the edge off of McCain’s post-convention bounce?
Whether he ultimately endorses Obama or not, Republicans would do well to listen to what Secretary Powell says. His values can take their party back to the center, away from where the neo-conservatives and evangelicals have hijacked it to. Just remember where you read it when Secretary Powell goes to run the Pentagon for the Obama administration.
48 responses so far ↓
Commish // July 13, 2008 at 11:22 pm
I wouldn’t let Powell within 100 miles of the Pentagon. His presentation to the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq gave the Bushies the “moderate” cover they needed to close the sale. Sorry - this guy has too much blood on his hands.
inadvertentgardener // July 14, 2008 at 12:18 am
I’m still trying to figure out why he did that, Commish. There was nothing in it for him beyond the inevitable loss of integrity, which baffles me, because, like SMD, I feel great affection and respect for Colin Powell.
Ben K // July 14, 2008 at 1:03 am
I dont think anyone on either side cares who Chuck Hagel endorses.
southernmaledemocrat // July 14, 2008 at 8:44 am
My theory on the UN presentation has always been that it was a result of Powell’s being a military man through and through. They are loyal to fault, especially to the Commander in Chief, so as to keep the chain of command. I don’t agree with that and it’s not an excuse, but a plausible explanation.
Wookie // July 14, 2008 at 8:55 am
And here I thought this was going to be about me…
DJ // July 14, 2008 at 9:18 am
Interesting.
Why is it important for people like Powell to bring the pubs back to center? Isn’t Obama as far left as they come (the most liberal voting senator)? I don’t see Dems calling for him to more centrist. What you’re really saying is that you want the pubs to think more like the dems. In essence it’s still all about party-first mentality. It would be fine, I’m sure, if we could rid ourselves of such a political system that “punishs such values” and divides our country (along party lines) as long as our ONE united party was most like the Democratic party.
I do agree we need more politicians to be like Powell and put country ahead of party, but that’s just not gonna happen. Look at us (non-politicians). We pretty much toe the party line. If the Dems say it is so then it’s pretty much gospel, isn’t it? Can you name one single thing on Obama’s platform with which you disagree? And if WE are that way then there is really no impetus for the politicians to be any different because we are the ones who elect them.
southernmaledemocrat // July 14, 2008 at 9:19 am
^^Then it would be titled - “My Favorite Argl.”
southernmaledemocrat // July 14, 2008 at 9:59 am
^^Is there a doctor in the house?? Woot woot!
Doc, here’s the problem with your analysis; Saying that Obama is the most “liberal” Senator is VERY subjective. Conservatives love to trot that one out (just like they did with Kerry last time) but that label is in no way objective. For example - the so-called “rankings” of liberalness are based on certain votes, but not all votes. So the rankings would change based on how you build the list.
Now, I will grant you that when you look at the whole of Obama’s voting record, it is definitely left of center. But the last time I checked, supporting government wiretapping, and so-called faith based initiatives, and opposing same sex marriage (just to name three) were hardly “liberal.”
The point is this - we can go back and forth about the man’s record all day long. But if you look at the substance of what he has said in his two books (I would encourage you to read either of them.) and on the stump for these many months - it boils down to the fact that politicians have to stop putting party first and can’t be afraid to admit when the other side has it right.
All through the primary season, Obama wasn’t afraid to say when he agreed with Hillary. Heck, he’s already said how much he agrees with McCain on with regards to illegal aliens, global warming and Hamas, just to name a few items.
This is a marked contrast from the past 8 years where the Bushies considered their 50.1% enough of a mandate to ram through their specifically partisan agenda, regardless of what the other party - or some people in their own party said.
A centrist agenda works best for this country and politicians such as Obama and Powell are the best hopes to achieve it. We’ve seen what 8 years of doing things one way can do. Heck, look at what a centrist Bill Clinton was, the 90’s weren’t too bad were they?
As far as naming things I disagree with Obama on -
wiretapping
faith-based initiatives
gay marriage
his BS calling out of lobbyists
Would you like more??
C’mon, you know if you send me one over the plate like that I am going to take it to the yard!
DJ // July 14, 2008 at 10:25 am
Dude, it was you who told me how far left Obama has been (when I asked who was more left, Obama or Hilliary). It was your subjectiveness, not mine.
I don’t think I could stomach his books, but I think I should read them just we can “argue” politics more!!!
That Girl // July 14, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I’ll move Powell to the top of my list (very short mind you) of favorite Republicans once he has the guts to do the tell all on his time in the Bush Administration. Powell knows a lot and he could help confirm (or deny for good) a lot of the things many believe went in to the shaping of this war we’re in. If Powell woudl do that, he’d definitely become Republican Numero Uno in my book!
packpigskinfan25 // July 14, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I would have to say that I agree that Powell is one of my favorite Repups as well, and need I remind you all that I am a moderate.
However… SMD, I would have to argue that it is NOT the Republican party that needs to turn more center, but in fact the Dems. John McCain was one of the two more centered of Rep choices during the primarys- and came away with the win. Obama was the more left of all the Dem choices and came away with the win. McCain, while he has “flip-flopped”(I really hate that term!) on a few things, not so much as Obama. Obama is the one moving center now, and for good reason… he HAS to. I dont necessarily see this as a “move” for Obama like the media portrays it. I feel it is Obama REALLY describing what he believes for once… unlike during the primary.
DJ // July 14, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I would disagree vehemently, pigskin. I think Obama is simply trying to appear more center NOW in order to assure victory in Nov. Then we will see just how left he is. You think he had MORE PRESSURE to vote left BEFORE he received the nomination? I doubt it seriously. That’s when he COULD vote the way he truly felt. Now, he must appease the pubs who are on the fence per se and try to gain their votes by appearing to be more centrist. He also wants to win back those Hilliary dems that he ticked off in the primaries. He’s trying to “every man’s” pres…but I tihnk he’s a tarhole in wolf’s clothing.
That Girl // July 14, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Them are fightin’ words DJ. You can say what you will about Obama - clearly he’s not your guy. But, save the REAL insults for those who deserve them! A tarhole???? Obama doesn’t deserve that.
southernmaledemocrat // July 15, 2008 at 12:00 am
Packpigskin - I would disagree that Obama was one of the more left candidates in the bunch. Was he to the left of Hillary? Sure. But that was mainly on Iraq. She was to the left of him on healthcare. Looking at the other candidates - Edwards, Kucinich and Dodd were all to the left of Obama. Biden and Richardson were roughly equal.
Regardless, I don’t think that “where” a presidential nominee may be on the left-right spectrum is the only criteria that defines where the party is.
I would strongly disagree with your contention that Obama is “REALLY describing what he believes for once, unlike in the primary.”
To me, that sounds like a big, assumptive mischaracterization. That means the man is disengenous. Does the record show that? Despite what the press has written - his position on Iraq has not changed. (see the oped in the Times today.)
He has changed on the public campaign financing stuff, but my God, he’d be a fool not too with the huge advantage he has. That’s just political reality. Other than that, you’d have a hard time building a list of positions he has out and out changed that didn’t come parsed from the conservative echo chamber.
DJ - tell you what - why don’t you list some of these votes, and ways that Obama is trying to appear more center now. Also - please tell exactly how you know how “left” he really is.
Of course, that assumes that “left” is some sort of bad thing, which I would vehemently argue it is not.
Look what eight years of “right” has brought us.
I think that you are forming some political perceptions without doing your full research. (which is a perception in itself - but I know you, so I like my odds…
) As I’ve blogged before - think about the 6 to 8 issues you care about the most - and then take each issue and look at what a variety of sources say that each candidate’s position is, and also look at the ramifications and cost of trying a given policy versus the cost of not trying or letting a given problem continue.
Then, if you match up best with McCain, go vote for the geezer and have a blast.
Short of that, if you’re going to characterize where and when Obama has been center and left, your arguments would be stronger with facts that didn’t come from the office water cooler, FOX News or whatever forms your political perceptions.
Before I forget - you should thank Sen. Obama for voting to block the White House efforts to CUT doctor’s medicare payments by 10.6% last week. McCain didn’t vote.
DJ // July 15, 2008 at 8:13 am
Thanks for the vote, Obama. I’ll thank him again when I pay 20% more in taxes. He still didn’t earn my vote.
Again, SMD, my “perception” of how left Obama is came directly from YOU. We were discussing Hilliary and Obama and you told me Obama was, in general, THE most liberal senator. I remember it so distinctly because I was rather shocked he was so far left of Hilliary (based on what you were telling me) and it was that info that directly led to my hopes that Hilliary would get the nomination. Maybe I TOTALLY misunderstood you or maybe you’ve changed your position…either way, the defensive tone above is quite ironic given that my perceptions (right or wrong) of Obama’s liberalism come directly from discussions with you.
I don’t need to list votes to suggest Obama is trying to appear more centrist. I never asserted he is doing so. Pigskin did, and I simply responded with what I believe would be his motivation behind such move.
I also don’t need to research 6-8 issues most important to me. There are only 3, and I know where he stands on 2 of the 3.
While I am not a politico like you and therefore will NEVER spend the time “researching” candidates and their voting habits, I do feel this election has the potential to effect my family in very real ways. Therefore, I have much more time reading about these candidates and forming what I feel are rational opinions. Please don’t try to belittle my political perceptions or knowledge just because I’m not drinking the kool-aide.
southernmaledemocrat // July 15, 2008 at 11:05 am
You’re kidding me, right? Look at how I typically argue - why would I have told a conservative voter that Obama was THE most liberal Senator?If that was said - it was merely my repeating the charge of others and was never my opinion. I don’t even typically use those terms because they are so subjective. But whatever - he said/he said will get us nowhere. Whatever I may have said to you about liberalness in Obama was only as it relates to Hillary.
Only 3 issues are most important to you? Wow. With all the problems going on that affect us all directly, that seems a little narrow, but whatever floats your boat. What’s the third besides medmal and taxes?
And since you brought up taxes, let’s just stick with that. The 20% figure you gave is a prime example of how conservatives spin these tax figures.
First, the Bush tax cuts don’t expire until the end of 2010, two years into Obama’s first term.
But seriously though - that 20% figure is just the percentage of the INCREASE. In actuality it would represent about 6 % more than you pay now.
Which gets us back to the circular argument we had over the phone the other day. You can easily bemoan the extra taxes - OR - you can figure out what all of the collective problems that aren’t being solved are costing all of us on the back end.
Your contention from a previous discussion is that upper-income earners such as yourself will have less to plow into the economy, thus helping everyone, has been disavowed by the guy who built the gambit for President Reagan - David Stockman. That money doesn’t trickle down.
In any event, someone in a higher bracket can certainly afford the 6%, as opposed to someone on the lower end of the scale who will have a hard time affording 1%. That’s the price of trying to achieve fairness and solve problems collectively. You can’t go too far one way because that would be socialism - but now we’ve gone too far the other way. But even with the 6%, you’ll still have enough to gas up the boat!
I would point you to a great non-partisan website for tax stuff - http://www.taxpolicycenter.org . You can get tons of info comparing the two candidates tax positions.
Having fun yet?
southernmaledemocrat // July 15, 2008 at 11:08 am
^And another thing - “drinking the kool aid” Really? When I listed the things I clearly disagree with the man on? Let’s not confuse enthusiasm with kool-aid, there’s a difference. As a proud political insider - there are TONS of Obama kool-aid drinkers, I’ve met them. Trust me, I am far from the kool aid.
DJ // July 15, 2008 at 11:38 am
Don’t get me wrong…I didn’t mean to suggest YOU are drinking the kool-aid because I respect the time you spend inside politics. I was merely saying, as you alluded to, that there are TONS of Obama supporters who really no have clue what the man stands for nor what his plans are. The like him because of his skin color, the fact that he’s anything but republican, or that he calls for change (though they have no idea what those changes entail or how he can bring them about). Dude can sell it, that’s for sure. Just like Bill could. Question remains, can he deliver it?
The 6% only takes into account simple income taxes (and by my calcs it’s 7%). The increases in SS taxes and capital gains raise that number quite a bit. The tax table comparing the 2 plans I have used as a reference puts at about +117,000. That’s alot of jack. It’s easy to justify that and think it’s cool until it’s YOUR pocket he’s taking it from. Then you step back, look at what you paid last year, and say, “Wait a minute.” It’s easy to be generous with other people’s money, isn’t it?
Obviously, our country has more issues than the three I worry about most, but none of them affect me as DIRECTLY as those 3. The war affects us all greatly in indirect ways. As a nation it is certainly one of our greatest challenges and is a serious issue in this election. But for me personally it is not an issue that will make me VOTE one way or the other even though I agree with the thoughts of one candidate more than the other. Taxes and Health care will affect me DIRECTLY each and every day. These are issues that (along with a couple of others) will rule the day for me when it comes time to vote. Not saying the other issues aren’t vital, and likely much more vital to many Americans than those I find most important personally.
DJ // July 15, 2008 at 1:50 pm
BTW, it is fun. I enjoy the fact that I can have “heated arguments” with you about our differences without getting too offended, pissed, bitter, or upset. Plus, I always learn something about the opposite “school of thought.”
One last observation and this is what I think truly separates us in our political thinking: I tend to look at politicians and their platforms in a very personal manner (almost selfish, in that I’m worried about how they can affect me and my family first and foremost), while you have the ability to look in a broader sense and see what you truly believe is best for our country as a whole. Whether I agree with you politically or not, I definitely respect that about you.
Holly // July 15, 2008 at 2:05 pm
In the words of a famous LA philosopher…”Can’t we all just get along?”
You two are something.
That Girl // July 15, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I’ve enjoyed watching your conversation - that is what this is all about. It’s awesome to see so many more people engaging in the process.
DJ - you mentioned that Obama can “sell” it, but can he deliver? It’s a valid question and not one that anyone can answer honestly. My take on it is, we know what DOESN’T work - the constant partisan bickering, letting the system be run by the “insiders”, not including the average American in the process of building our country. We’ve clearly seen from the current administration the littany of ways to NOT accomplish these things.
For me, I’m willing to roll the dice and give Obama the chance. What I can say for sure is that he has engaged more Americans from a rainbow of backgrounds than have been engaged in a long, long time (or ever?). And, by doing that, he’s taken what I consider to be the first big step in the right direction. One man can’t fix our country, but together, we just might be able to do it. (pretty cheesy, eh?)
DJ // July 15, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Yes, cheesy…but true. I cannot really disagree with much you said, and I like the spirit of your thoughts. As SMD knows, I’m pessimistic by nature (an optimist is never pleasantly surprised), but I’m scared of a country run by Obama (for many reasons I will leave unsaid). I agree that he has engaged many, yet I fear he could be the most polarizing figure in U.S. history in the end. I also cannot blame the partisan bickering on the current administration alone. By definition that requires both parties, and I would argue that Dems are so fed up and vocal that they are more to “blame” for the widespread division we see now.
In the end, you’ll likely get your wish and Obama will get his chance. I’ll pay my ridiculously high taxes and witness health care blunders (I don’t think the uninsured is our biggest problem, I think the under-insured is worse. Government insurance is awful, and now they’re proposing 47 million more). It’s certainly not an enviable role he will assume. How could he possibly clean up this mess? I certainly hope he can deliver…because if he doesn’t things will get uglier. I’m personally scared of the next 4-8 years.
southernmaledemocrat // July 15, 2008 at 8:40 pm
^Oh, brother. Drama, party of one.
You say that you are “scared”, yet you don’t say why. Is this “fear” based solely on the 2-3 issues you care about the most, or beyond that?
If I can live through 8 years of Bush, you can live throught 8 years of Obama. The half (plus whatever else he gets) of the country who support Obama just merely have different policy priorities than you do. Political differences aren’t a recipe for disaster to be “personally scared” about, especially since we’ve tried one political way already. Where has that gotten us?
Oh wait, I forgot - Obama is really a Muslim sleeper agent.
DJ // July 16, 2008 at 7:50 am
Nope, I’m more scared for this country than me personally, and for reasons (as I said) I will leave unsaid on this forum.
I also think I was quite clear in saying I have different political priorities than many in the last sentence of my 11:38 post.
Isn’t that the pot calling the kettle black? Trying to tell me that political differences aren’t a recipe for disaster? All you do is bitch, moan, and complain about the “Bushies,” the “last 8 years,” “already tried one political way,” blah, blah, blah, blah. You obviously feel the current pub way is a recipe for disaster; in that same light, I’m entitled to feel (for whatever reasons I so choose) 8 years under Obama is potentially a recipe for disaster. As That Girl pointed out, we just don’t know yet. But I think we’ll find out. Maybe it’ll be great like you think (but cannot know yet). I hope so. He speaks of bringing us all together, but I fear his presidency will be devisive.
Drama? Give me a break. Why? Because my opinions don’t agree with yours? I’m not sure that you have ever considered that your political opinions, no matter how well-researched, may just be wrong every once in a great while (the exception is your obvious change in heart with regards to John Edwards). Again, I hope you are correct when it comes to Obama. Time will tell.
DJ // July 16, 2008 at 7:59 am
Oh, forgot to add…party of one? Only on a site called SMD. If you think I’m the only person scared of 4-8 yrs under Obama you are sadly mistaken. Post these blogs on that conservative BY and the things I’ve said will seem like child’s play. It’ll be interesting to see if he actually gets 50% of the popular vote. If memory serves I don’t think even precious Bill did that.
DJ // July 16, 2008 at 10:35 am
P.S.S. (I love this stuff. It’s almost as fun as State vs. unx)
I do agree with you on two major points.
1. I wish the pubs would move more to the center, just as I wish the dems would do so.
2. The current situation IS a disaster and changes need to be made. I wish I were as confident as you that the answer lies in one of these candidates.
Personally, I don’t think EITHER candidate is the man for the job and I’m not a “party” guy. Until this election I couldn’t name the differences between parties except liberal vs. conservative (whatever that meant, though I figured I was conservative). I know I cannot vote for Obama, but I’m not sure McCain is the lesser of two evils. It’s like trying to vote for a tarhole or a …tarhole.
southernmaledemocrat // July 16, 2008 at 11:02 am
^It’s called sarcasm, thus the smiley face. Let me explain it for you - I was speaking like a matre’d (I know, I just slaughtered that spelling) would in calling out a “party” to be seated, and your “name” was drama, because I was making fun of the fact that you said you were scared, which seemed a little overdramatic to me.
It was not a reference to party in the political sense.
In any event, I do think it is being a little over-dramatic to say that you are “scared”. That’s not a knock on your political beliefs, but your characterization of them.
Have you ever heard me seriously advocate that I am “scared” of political policies that I don’t agree with? Not a tongue in cheek or sarcastic comment - but really mean it?
Of course not, because though I’ve got strong beliefs, and do this stuff for a living - I know that at the end of the day I’ve got a job and a roof over my head no matter who is president. Heck, in some ways - a right wing presidency keeps me busier with my job!
So again, I was not knocking how you think or your political beliefs, (that’s too easy..
) only your characterization of being scared.
If you are genuinely “scared” by what someone with different ideas than you may do as president (ideas that are shared by a gazillion other people in the mainstream.) than you need to research these things that scare you to separate fact from perception. You might be surprised.
We lived through Carter and Bush II, a depression and numerous wars. The country keeps on rolling no matter who is in charge. Hyped up language like “scared” doesn’t help anyone.
Last - keep in mind that unlike the BY - these posts don’t go away over time. It will be interesting to come back in a year!
Actually - not quite last - Obama will get over 50% - bank on it. “Precious” Bill couldn’t do that because of this dude called Ross Perot. GWB barely did it once, by the skin of his teeth, because the campaign masterfully put gay marriage on the ballot in swing states to turn out the bible thumpers. Boy, that’s a mandate. (haha, I just inadvertently made a terrible pun. “man-date”
DJ // July 16, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I think you took the word “scared” a little too literally.
Love the pun BTW. (Does that make me liberal or conservative?)
That Girl // July 16, 2008 at 2:47 pm
And just as Ross Perot threw things off for “Precious Bill”, Bob Barr will do so for McSame. I agree with SMD - Obama will win in the high 50 percentile. I can’t believe I will have a reason to “like” Barr!
packpigskinfan25 // July 16, 2008 at 3:07 pm
wow! what a response… I sat with the window open, hoping for a response, but I guess refresh wasnt working on this page.
Anyways- to save myself from typing a book here…
I cant agree that “Obama is simply trying to appear more center NOW in order to assure victory in Nov.” The thing about Obama is I dont think its assuring him anything. It might make things worse. I like the things that Obama is saying. The media and the Rep party make him sound like a flopper though. Its funny how the McCain camp has pressured Obama to take his stand on Iraq, then rips him for not going there yet… and saying his stand is invalid for it. Gotta love politics.
Back to what my original post was about- IN MY VIEWS, the Dem party in general(because of uniting behind Obama) has moved much more to the center than the Rep party has. The only Dem nomanies that I knew well were Edwards, Clinton, Obama, and Richards. Obama was at least equal to the left of all of these(again in my opinion, and there is NOTHING wrong with his leftness), and still got the nomination from THE PEOPLE of the Dem party. Now they have to move center for the average person- the Reps nominated a somewhat centerist to begin with- so now they are sitting happy where they are.
my prediction- McCain wins by 5%. My vote? Undecided.
DJ // July 16, 2008 at 9:50 pm
I’m not sure many average Americans can even tell you who Barr is…certainly not enough to have a Perot-like effect. EVERYBODY knew who Perot was, and many even LIKED him. Hence, his effect on the Billster.
Pigskin - didn’t mean to come so offensive. I see what you were saying. I still feel Obama is only trying to appear more centrist, though (since I think he’ll win) I hope you are correct. It just seems to me a politician will lie, cheat, and steal to get elected and the most difficult task for voters is to wade through the BS and make an informed decision. There sure are a lot of promises being made right now, many of which will be extremely difficult to deliver (no more nucs, universal health care, lower taxes for some, withdrawal from Iraq, lower gas prices, equality in pay, tougher on hate crimes, better environmental legislation…the list goes on). I do realize that is the norm in an election year. But what I’m witnessing from the Dem camp reminds me so much of Bob Rumson in the “American President.” “He is interested in two things…making you afraid of it and telling you who’s to blame for it. That, ladies and gents, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle aged, middle class, middle income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character.” Sound familiar? Andrew Shepherd was right on time. Same old thing every 4 years. Proof of such political tactics from the Obama camp? As easy as reading the name “McSame.”
southernmaledemocrat // July 16, 2008 at 10:58 pm
^You’re kidding right??
I would remind you that just a few posts up, you are the one who said you were “scared.”
Tell me which party campaigns on the “values” BS - using issues like gay marriage and flag burning. Yup, that’s why the GOP calls it the “defense” of marriage act.
Or why did Jesse Helms use a BS, inaccurate ad on racial quotas - that showed a white person “losing” a job to a minority?
More fear from Camp GOP -
1. McCain strategist Charlie Black saying that a terrorist attack before the election would help their campaign.
2. McCain said this about a question on deporting illegal aliens…
“In case you hadn’t noticed, the thousands of people who have been relegated to ghettos have risen up and burned cars in France,” McCain said. “They’ve got huge problems in France. They have tremendous problems. The police can’t even go into certain areas in the suburbs of Paris. I don’t want that in the suburbs of America.”
3. Then of course we have NYT conservative columnist and former Quayle chief of staff Bill Kristol routinely saying that “fear is a pretty good argument for McCain to use against Obama.”
4. Rudy Guiliani said that if a Democrat is elected president in 2008 that America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of 9/11.
5. Then we have White House spokesperson Tony Fratto’s quote (and blatant mischaracterization) on the wiretapping bill -
“We’re exactly three weeks away from the date when terrorists can be free to make phone calls without fear of being surveilled by U.S. intelligence agencies.”
6. And of course, how could we forget our esteemed President’s comparing wanting talks with Iran to “appeasement.” ? (despite his administration doing that very thing.)
7. Then there’s this gem from Mitt Romney -
“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”
I suppose that Democratic fear and blame are also why all these rumors still circulate that Obama is a Muslim. (never mind the fact that a) he’s not and b) muslim doesn’t equal terrorist) And then we have the rumors that the fist bump was a terrorist sign.
Tell you what - don’t take my word for it. Just do a web search for each of the party names and the word fear.
The speech that you quoted aptly described every GOP campaign of the last 30 years. Can you find some Democratic examples? Sure. But there’s a gazallion more GOP examples. The question isn’t even up for debate among the political insiders on both sides of the aisle - that’s what the GOP does. The best GOP consultants will tell you that - and I have even joked about it with a couple of their big doqs who are routinely quoted in the press.
Think about it - why do you hardly ever hear some BS rumor about a Republican?
Given that the Republicans are the ones who turn out the “values voters” -IE- bible thumpers - in droves - who uses “family and American values and character” the most.
Heck - I just thought of this - Bob Dole’s 96 campaign was all about - “I want to be a bridge to a simpler time. Which of course Bill waxed him with by contrasting - “I want to be a bridge to the future.
But really - if you think you can prove that the Democrats use “Rumson-like” tactics, I’m all ears. Keep in mind - you are looking for systematic, widespread use, ingrained over many years and campaigns as I have done.
That dog won’t hunt.
On another note - if you read this in the morning - look on your TV for the re-play of tonight’s Colbert Report on Comedy Central and set the DVR - RUSH plays their first TV appearance in 30 years. It’s pretty cool.
Steve Freedman // July 17, 2008 at 7:59 am
Just curious, which republican VP prospect scares you the most? Not as in Dick Chaney scares, but as in could hurt the Democrats’ chances in November.
southernmaledemocrat // July 17, 2008 at 8:12 am
^Seriously? None of them. And that’s not anything cocky - a Republican politico would say the exact same thing. Why?
Veep candidates never help a ticket. Think about it - when was the last time you thought - “Gee, so-and-so made a swell pick for veep, and that tips the scale to vote for them.”
Having said that - a poor choice of Veep candidate can certainly hurt a ticket, because it makes voters question the judgement of the top person. But that’s certainly the opposite of - a good pick can help your ticket and hurt the other one. It just doesn’t work that way.
Steve Freedman // July 17, 2008 at 8:34 am
I’m not sure I agree with your saying that Veep candidates never help a ticket. Take Kennedy’s pick of Johnson. My favorite site, wikipedia says: “Johnson vigorously campaigned for JFK and was instrumental in helping the Democrats to carry several Southern states skeptical of Kennedy, especially Johnson’s home state of Texas”, and I agree. Can a Veep candidate do more harm then good, I certainly agree with that.
But, take your favorite Republican. Would Powell ever agree to be McCain’s running mate? I doubt it. But he would bring something special to the ticket. He could nullify some of Obama’s extreme lead in the African-American vote, bring more independents to his side and have a younger, much loved person ready to take over when he dies of old age during his 3rd year.
DJ // July 17, 2008 at 8:58 am
I definitely think both parties are guilty of such tactics. That’s what drives me crazy about politics. It’s like the 6th grade election when one of the candidates says, “I’m for shorter school days, longer lunches with more cookies, and no tests!!!” Well…who the f..k isn’t? The dems are for greener trees, better schools, lower/ higher taxes. The pubs are for a secure country, lower/higher taxes, stronger values. Who’s not? Good Lord, maybe we need co-presidents! Why can’t we have the best of both worlds? Because this is America, that’s why!
To say that Dems haven’t used mud slinging, blame, and scare tactics over multiple elections is a down-right lie. Both parties have done so. It’s the only real constant in any election.
Also, we need to look no further than Obama’s first general ad to see the values campaign (which was less than truthful). The “strong families and strong values” ad? Isn’t he the son of a foreign student who was married to another woman? Isn’t that why he was raised by a single mother? I’m not sayin…I’m just sayin.
My point is that I think both parties are guilty of lies, subterfuge, and deceit. They want to win an election, and absolute truth won’t get it done. That’s why we could spend all day googling these guys and tearing apart the things they have done and said. Those were great quotes you gave out above…you cannot be so naive to think any pub out there could not use the power of google to shoot back similar quotes from dems.
southernmaledemocrat // July 17, 2008 at 9:03 am
^Congrats Steve, you found the proverbial “exception that proves the rule.”
And that is the one exception.
As for Powell, we are of course discussing hypotheticals because there’s no way in hell that happens - he is probably the one person who could help McCain - this year- because of his race and his more moderate views. But I would assert that the “help” would not be as great as most people think since McCain and Powell are both part of the establishment - one doesn’t really add to the other.
southernmaledemocrat // July 17, 2008 at 11:01 am
^^Dang - I didn’t see that the good doctor responded, before my response to Steve - my bad.
I would urge you to re-read my post. I didn’t say that the Democrats don’t use those tactics. I said they are much more the provence of the Republicans. Again, don’t take my word for it - just google it and see all the gazallion stories that have been written about it. I never said one side doesn’t do it. But the facts don’t lie - the evidence is much more preponderant on the Republican side about how much they do it and how they use it effectively. I mean - which side gave us a new verb - “swift-boating.” - referring to the smear job done on John Kerry. How many verbs have been borne of Democratic campagn tactics?
Or even better - think of all the little BS things you hear about each Democrat every cycle - Obama is a Muslim, Kerry lied about his Vietnam service, Gore stretched the truth and said he invented the internet, was the basis for the movie “Love Story”, etc. And then all of those get proven untrue AFTER the election.
Now give me a list of anything similiar for the Republican candidates in the last few elections.
But beyond another he said/he said - while you are correct that the current Obama ad wears faith/values on its sleeve - surely you must know that is a tactical response to the fact that creating those perceptions works. Again, it is how the GOP has won so many elections.
Look back to Kerry and Gore and see how much they used the “values” language - in a time when the GOP had all manner of tactics to turn out those voters - those guys said very little. Clinton didn’t do it as much as Obama is - bit he used that language a little and it bought some votes.
It really comes down to the difference in words and issues. Does the Obama ad use the words? Sure. But GOP campaigns use those issues - “the democrats don’t support your values because of gay marriage/abortion/school prayer/flag burning/insert red herring here.” All of those issues and other represent changing values.
Think about it this way - we’ve only had two democratic presidents in the last 40 years, so by default - the GOP was defending the status quo and most of the time, the Democratic candidate was arguing for change of some sort.
The “change” argument cannot be inherently about fear, nor can it be about a “simpler time” because both of those things are more related to the status quo, since you can’t change the status quo, or really be afraid of the current situation. The only thing to fear is change.
Which party has been on the side of change more often and which one has been on the side of the status quo? (note - that is not an argument about the merits of either- just who has been in what position to use them.)
I know that many uniformed voters have the perception that “they all do it equally” - but the facts say otherwise.
packpigskinfan25 // July 17, 2008 at 1:48 pm
The VP canidates VERY much matter to me. Thats one of the things thats holding back my decision right now. If McCain pics a guy that is REALLY GOOD on Economy- he will probably get my vote.
I like Obama a lot, and the change he talks about sounds great… but I dont like that fact of ultra-liberals being put into the Supreme Court and destroying my right to bear arms, and I dont like the refusal to drill off the coasts. It needs to be done. Never in the Rockies….
I am really torn on this election. Especially because my vote actually holds a chance to matter this year with NC being a potential swing state. My vote has never mattered yet…
That Girl // July 17, 2008 at 3:41 pm
packpigskinfan25 - I can understand why the VP pick is important to you if you’re even leaning McCain. The old geezer is going senial (thinks Czechoslovakia is still a country) and could easily kick the bucket while in office.
So, the #2 spot on THAT ticket is very important….
DJ // July 17, 2008 at 9:31 pm
A few points:
1. When I said I was “scared ” I wasn’t referring to fear created by what McSame says about Obama. Rather it’s fear provoked by what Obama says about Obama. HUGE difference.
2.
DJ // July 17, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Oops.
2.That whole paragraph about fear and change sounds great, but in reality it’s a bunch of bunk. It’s completely situational. There are so many people who will vote for Obama because they want change, or because they “fear” the status quo. Hence the name “McSame.” You really don’t think people are scared of the current situation? Come on, man…you don’t live under a rock. Times suck right now, so the smart money is on making voters “fear” the lack of change, and therefore “fear” a McCain presidency. Certainly there are situations in all of our lives in which either change or the lack there of is a little scary. But to suggest the only thing to fear is change is a little ridiculous. Plus, I always thought the only thing to fear was fear itself.
3. The problem I have with the Obama “values” commercial is it’s lack of honesty about his life. Paints a nice picture…seems like a pretty little perception of his up-bringing. But the facts suggest otherwise. Google the commercial and read the editorials that abound. I understand it was smart campaigning…it was aired in battleground states, it forced McSame to drop some jack in states he shouldn’t have to worry about, it’s how the GOP won elections, and it portrays Obama as a boyscout. Smart…but deceitful.
packpigskinfan25 // July 18, 2008 at 4:17 am
Not meaning to bring the dismalness to this party… but do you guys honestly think that Obama will not have any attempts on his life?
This is the first realistically possible black man in office. His VP choice is VERY important.
I’m not saying it will happen… bit is more likely then ever. This world is not perfect.
I hope and pray something like this will never happen, but it Obama becomes Pres. then it is more likely then ever.
DJ // July 18, 2008 at 8:28 am
I totally agree with you, pigskin. It’s one of the many things I purposely left “unsaid” earlier. His veep choice IS important (for many reasons).
That Girl // July 18, 2008 at 8:43 am
I think that is a valid point. Sad but true.
DJ // July 18, 2008 at 9:57 am
lotta idiots out there…present company excluded
southernmaledemocrat // July 18, 2008 at 10:32 am
DJ -
I think we may be just about to the “agree to disagree” point in yet another epic battle.
But let me see if I can squeeze out another round or two…..
Let me respond to your points in order.
1. Just to clarify the “what Obama says about Obama” - you are referencing direct quotes from him, or documents from his campaign, such as the tax plan, correct? This is not a reference to other sources analyzing what they say he said, for example - FOX News breaking down the tax plan. Correct?
If that’s the case - then we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Whatever Obama has said about taxes, medmal, and whatever your third issues was (I looked back and couldn’t quite find it..) my contention remains that policies that differ from what you may want done are nothing to “fear”. Both you and I could have more or less money in our pockets from either outcome, but it would take something like a Great Depression for us to really be in bad straits.
And frankly - let’s just get down to brass tacks here - the words “fear”, and “scared” are a little insulting, when used to describe the political values which I professionally fight for every day and hold dear. Both ways have plenty of flaws - thus the best way is in the middle, but saying you are “scared” implies some sort of calamity if heaven forbid Obama is President.
I know you probably didn’t mean it to be insulting, you were just using the vernacular that many many voters like yourself use, but that is how it can come across.
2. I think we’re talking about two different things. You were talking about rationales inside of a voter’s mind - which are indeed situational. I was talking about tactical methods to influence those rationales.
I’ve got no problem with campaigns on either side drawing distinctions. “He says/wants X, but it will cause Y.” That’s politics. But those arguments typically contain more fact than a more rhetorical meant to create a perception or stoke a fear.
I will stand by my contention that Republicans use that much, much more often than the Democrats - which is why we’re probably getting to the end here. Through two different posts, I gave you concrete examples - that showed widespread, systematic use of those tactics over many years. You have yet to do the same.
(Yet another example - Bill Clinton in 1992 and the blow-up over whether he went to a Vietnam war protest while at Oxford. Again - each Democrat gets some BS like that, where’s the Republican??)
3. Again, you’re kidding right?? I googled “Obama values ad” - and see right where you are going - that his upbringing and background did not in fact provide the values he outlines in his ad.
That argument assumes that “values/faith” are more objective and can be measured against a set of facts. That’s a bunch of bunk to me. Values and faith are relative. There’s nothing wrong with the fact that he didn’t have two parents is a little suburban house growing up - it’s just different from how we may have grown up. Big deal. Any analysis or judgement of what that upbringing means relative to what he would do as President is meaningless - since none of us were there, or are inside his head.
Sounds like another “fear” argument to me - “Ooooh, Obama was raised all over the world in different cultures without a nuclear family. Man, there’s no telling how that would f-up his judgement as President.”
If Obama wants to use those terms to describe his upbringing, he has every right to.
If you could “stomach” reading his books, you might have a little more insight into that straight from the source.
Like I said - I think we’re about at “the point.”
DJ // July 18, 2008 at 11:42 am
Come on, Nancy, time to man up.
Insulted because I fear a Obama presidency? That’s being a little sensitive. No more insulting than you toeing the party line on medmal and healthcare when you have no real dog in the fight and it affects me directly each day. I would hope you would consider softening your stance on those two issues alone, but you continue to disagree with me on issues/values I professionally fight for every day and hold dear. It’s kool and the gang…we disagree on issues we fight for professionally every day. I’m not insulted by it, nor was I trying to be insulting.
It’s funny and ironic…I’ve overheard two different people today talking about how much they feared an Obama presidency. Drama, party of three.
In the end, we always agree to disagree, kiss, and make-up. You’re my boy, Blue, and you always will be despite our political differences. My vote will cancel out yours and we’ll be even.
Isn’t that the beauty (and the tragedy) of it all? Now matter how dumb and uninformed you are, your vote counts just as much as the smartest, most informed, most well-researched voter. (Not saying I actually fit into the former category…well, maybe.)
It’s been fun, dude. Hope it’s increased the number of hits on the site. Much more fun with at least one dissenter. Can’t wait for the next topic.
You da man.