When All Else Fails – Democrats on the Offence

Barack Obama’s campaign strategy, so far, has been to compare John McCain to George Bush. This has been the go-to tactic since the primary process began to wind down. It does nothing to contrast and compare policy – the charge that one man is so like another, when evidence strongly suggests otherwise, is fairly transparent. Playing off the fears of the base, many of whom have been in therapy for the past 8 years, is the biggest card that the DNC has to play – one has to ask, if it did not work in 2004, then how can they expect it to work in 2008? There are a finite number of elitists who are airing concerns to their steadfast followers on the standard issues that the DNC holds: abortion, Republicans who go to church and war – adding lack of experience into the mix when it appears that the general public isn’t engaged, is fine on both a state and national level. Obama, and Democrats in general, were supposed to have run away with the 2008 election, yet polls appear to indicate otherwise. The problem stems from a disconnect between the general public and those who feel entitled to hold office – the tantrums of children who have lost a turn – so to speak – to rule the playground. What’s a politician to do? Dispatch lawyers and journalists to Wasilla Alaska and go after every single shred of what might be a scandal or a negative against an increasing popular Republican Vice Presidential nominee.

The latest test appears to be Palin’s religion – her affiliation six years ago with an Assembly of God church – complete with You-Tube videos and in-depth analysis by CNN – all warning of extreme faith in God – or “Christian”, a cry that appears fine when referring to Obama (lest someone refer to him as a Muslim), but worrisome when it applies to someone with conservative values. The danger – abortion may be at risk, or worse, someone with faith may pray when faced with a serious decision.

On abortion, the issue has not given Democrats the traction they need to win over Independents; apparently all that is left is a candidates Religion as well as comparisons and ties to the current Bush administration. What is truly important to those caught in middle America – security, the economy, the dismal state of public education – are barely discussed – there is no contrast to be had simply because nothing has been done in Washington over the past two years – and Republicans and Democrats alike spent like there was no end is sight – making it difficult to tell the difference. The exception has been those committed either right or left – the right calling for reform, the left calling for investigations of the Bush administration. It is Us vs. Them -and although they should realize that the general public is tired of this tune, they just can’t seem to help themselves.

Now, in a heated campaign, the left is left holding the bag – so to speak. They must attack – but lacking any real substance, they turn to the old standbys – even when the players are on the same team. A group called Dems For Kerry, in defense of Senator John Kerry and his campaign for Senate (Kerry is facing his first challenger from inside the party.) is going YouTube. As Ed O’Reilly, Democrat challenger appears to be more serious than first thought and with a primary less than one week away, a video charging that O’Reilly is best friends with Jeff Beatty, Republican challenger is up on YouTube. The fact that O’Reilly and Beatty are both pleasant and reasonable men is used in this ridiculous video as an “attack”.



Actual campaign ads for Kerry (all two of them), are downright boring – one rehashes his ties to Veterans and the other his ties to Al Gore. They may do well in certain areas within Massachusetts, but one has to factor that the majority of voters are Independents or Unenrolled – (not unlike the entire country) or the wild card in the state and national races. People in general want to hear about the issues, not about what church someone belongs to, or if they actually are pleasant when speaking to someone with opposing political views. Should the trend continue Obama and Kerry may find themselves in similar situations as Matthews and Oberman - allowed to play to a point, but left out of the main event.

As John McCain Leads in the Polls – Obereman and Matthews downgraded by NBC

There is an interesting piece of data in the USA Today/Gallop poll that gives John McCain a decent bounce from the RNC Convention – who was polled. The article notes the following: “In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/— 3 points for both samples.” One has to wonder, why those 63 unregistered voters were included in the poll in the first place and how it might affect the results – it begs the question: How then can this particular poll have an error of margin of plus/minus 3 points? One has no doubt that McCain received a considerable jump in the polls and that Palin has served to stimulate that fact, however, any data and or “news” article coming from a media that is so clearly biased, has to be viewed with a bit of skepticism.

The news that MSNBC is reigning in Oberman and Matthews after their antics during both conventions, should come as no surprise. The article appearing in the New York Times, noted that the “experiment” of placing two “incendiary” hosts in an anchor position appears to have failed. The fact that the experiment was allowed to continue while the ratings for this network tanked, not the fact that the two became an “embarrassment” (also true), may have had more to do with NBC’s decision. Additionally, the article notes that this move came after Sarah Palin harpooned the media for bias, chants of "NBC” were heard coming from the RNC Delegates. Considering that anyone with minimal knowledge of the electoral makeup knows that 50% of the country leans right and 50% leans left (based on the last two elections), ramming a progressive, inexperienced democrat (Obama) down the throats of Middle American night and night can only lead to one thing: losing that half of their ratings. Apparently, NBS understands that it has to appear to be a bit more fair in it’s coverage – note: remove Michael Moore from your speakers list, and/or add someone to the extreme right (if there is someone as extreme right as Moore is extreme left), but what about the rest of the media?

Sarah Palin: from the LA Times another sexist hit piece.
Sarah Palin: from the NY Times another hit piece on Palins motherhood (containing a few discrepancies if one has read or seen other stories from the Alaskan Press regarding Palin’s pregnancy - as if it is an issue at all).

As John McCain and Palin’s numbers continue to climb in the polls, regardless of the fact that unregistered voters are used to bump numbers up for some candidate (considering USA today may also be biased – which candidate received the benefit of 63 additional votes?) , The Times show their true colors through antiquated sexist attacks on Palin, and even local newspapers reports are on the verge of incredulous reporting (Berkshire Eagle) viewers flee and subscriptions are lost – will they never learn? (The list could fill pages, from local ABC, NBC and CBS affiliates to the smallest daily newspaper.)

The elite media stopped reporting long ago and began to “guide” and “pontificate” so that the masses (us) would be swayed to their point of view. Talk radio has taken a bit of wind out of their sails, as well as the blogs, but that said, instead of blaming the Internet for their woes, or like MSNBC, throwing two anchors under the bus hoping that will suffice, it would behoove those who claim to be news sources to consider taking the op-ed out of reporting. The facts may not favor one candidate more than the other – but the results may improve readership and viewership overall. If one is losing half of its market due to bias, even if it is perceived bias (which would be a stretch), then it makes for a sound business decision.

Oprah Bans Palin - How Relevant Is She?

Oprah Winfrey is getting some press out of Sarah Palin. The Drudge Report started the little brouhaha when “sources” indicated that Oprah’s staff was divided over her unwillingness to bring Sarah Palin on the show. Oprah quickly issued a
denial – one that stated Drudge allegations were simply untrue! Her staff was not divided, and she had no intention of bringing on any politician that would interfere with her support for Barrack Obama.

What, one has to wonder, is the problem with that decision?

One has to look at Oprah's background: she made her start in Chicago, famous for losing a ton of weight and pimping overpriced products to those who were home during the day to watch her pontificate about women’s issues. Of course, that’s not really a problem for some of her audience because it must be assumed that those watching have the luxury to stay home. (That is not of course the case, most watching have no other recourse being stay-at-home mothers, or unemployed.) She also sells books, tons of books – she is an entrepreneur – credit is due for her ability to brand herself. Her support of Barrack Obama should come as no surprise; they attended the same church, and most likely share the same political ideology. That said - if she is certain that she is speaking only to the base of the Democrat party, she’ll be fine, but if she errs and those women really want to know more about Palin, they may have to either tune Oprah out or look elsewhere.

Palin dose not need Oprah to further her cause – in less than a week she has risen far about those “celebrities” to become an American Darling (not to mention a darling of the Euro press). The Times (UK) article on Palin and McCain is but one startling example. The fact that the RNC Convention had more viewership in three days than the DNC in 4 is not going unnoticed (with the exception of the NY Times and company). Sarah Palin is the buzz in the office, on talk radio, across the neighbors fence, in urban areas, the suburbs and yes those rural areas – she is crossing party lines and empowering women in a way that not one single woman, including Gloria Steinham (that alleged feminist who married well to prove her point), ever has. The bonus, men like her too.

How then are those so heavily vested in Obama fighting back? – with smears, lies and serious denial. Winfrey is in the later category. She is obviously in denial. NOW, with it’s huge membership of 250,000 plus, is in all three. An article entitled ”Have Conservatives discovered Sexism” is their ridiculous contribution to the Obama campaign. Palin embodies the feminist mold as it applies to those who understand what it is like to work for a living and who have been in the trenches and granted, who have values that include an anti-abortion stance. Palin is one of “us” not one of “them”. Oprah is one of “them”- one who would guide her viewers from an assumed elite position of wealth and media power into Obama’s camp. As the now infamous Palin Cover of US weekly (the tabloid Arm of Obama driven Rolling Stone), has that publication bleeding subscribers and being left on the shelf), Winfrey's refusal to invite Palin onto her show (and it is the Oprah Winfrey Show), is of little consequence. Those who are watching, millions of Americans - seeking one more proof that media, including daytime entertainment, is biased towards Palin - will merely change the channel and those who never have, won't bother to tune in.