freecounterpoint: Getting the vapors

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Getting the vapors

6 comments:

Mr roT said...: Kaus disagrees on the efficacity of the ad. We gonna believe a bunch of amateurs at NRO or we gonna go with Kaus?

What exactly is so terrible about that North Carolina GOP ad?** Sure it's a double bank shot--X has endorsed Y who is associated with Z--but it seems like a legitimate double bank shot. Obama wrote a best-selling book casting favorable light on himself for being drawn to Rev Wright--and quoting the sermon that did it for him, a sermon that involved denouncing "white folks' greed." Did he really not know Wright was saying other inflammatory things from the pulpit? ... Hard to say it's unfair to link Obama with Wright. And it's not unfair to link North Carolina Dems with the candidate they endorse. That's true whether or not the ad is a stunt. ... The same ad using, say, William Ayers--whose relationship with Obama is more tangential--wouldn't seem legit to me.** ... Is Howard Dean's real problem with the ad that it's, you know, devastating? ... P.S.: I'd say North Carolina GOP chairwoman Linda Daves, who has the sort of non-FM voice you don't hear on NPR too often, rather gets the better of All Things Considered's Melissa Block in this argument. ...[Via Page]; 4/26/2008 3:46 PM
Tecumseh said...: This is total red herring, JJ, and you know it. The question is not whether the ad is effective or not -- it's amateurish, yes, and kind of a stretch, that's right. The question, rather, is why (a) McCain interferes in local politics (is he the King of the Republican Party, or something?), (b) why does he rule out in advance any mention of Obama's connection to Wright, and (c) why does he always seem to pick on people to his Right, but never those on his Left?; 4/26/2008 8:40 PM
Mr roT said...: NYT calls it race-baiting. If they do, then it is (by definition, I am afraid) and it's poison to McCain.

Maybe Romney would've had the guts to fight this one out on Ruby Ridge with his barefoot waifs and wives behind in the cabin, but he would lose to Obama in a 48-stater.

I agree I put up a red herring. I am discrediting the NRO guy's whole article because he disagrees in an unimportant part with a real expert (Kaus) on it.

It's not fair, but it's good enough. The NRO guys cannot be trusted for campaign strategy when in comes to McCain because they really hate him.

Wehner is the only one sort of decent among them. The rest might as well be from the NYT.; 4/26/2008 9:26 PM
Mr roT said...: The reason it's poison to McCain is that the double bank shot back from that race-baiting (as deemed by the grey lady) would then be fair game and devastating in November.

These guys are pros, AI. NRO is still out in WFB land writing Lagrangians, not at CERN.; 4/26/2008 9:29 PM
Tecumseh said...: Selling cucumbers to the gardener, are you, JJ? Of course, I was the first to point that spiteful NYT editorial. So what if the Gray Old Lady defines that ad as being "racist"? They will do that for any and all attacks against Obama, by definition. If McCain does not have the guts to stand up to the NYT, and throws in the towel before the general campaign has even started -- by conceding preemptively that he cannot criticize BHO (or even mention his full name!), and forbidding any and all from doing that -- he has already lost the election, and we may as well give up.

By the way, McCain is also a lousy fund-raiser -- both Hillary and Obama beat him at the raise-cash game by 2.5 or 3 to 1 (wonder why!) Now, he wants to suck up some $80-$90 million from the Nanny State in campaign funds. Well, if he basically concedes already the election (and, make no mistake, despite your braggadocio, that's what's he's doing) -- why should my hard-earned tax dollars go to support his half-assed effort?; 4/27/2008 7:58 AM
Tecumseh said...: Follow up: Reading again what Kaus says, I don't get it at all why you think he supports your position and not mine. He comes down somewhere between sycophantic adoration of McCain (JJ) and healthy skepticism (AI), but closer to the latter, I'd say. In fact, look at what he added there in the meantime:

McCain, for his own positioning and righteous preening reasons, is making a big issue of the less legitimate target (Ayers) while condemning the North Carolinians for making an issue of Wright.

Powwwww!!!!! Where's my case of VCP?; 4/27/2008 8:04 AM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)