The Republican Party - What went wrong in 2008 – The Brand and The Entertainment Factor

There is a lot of finger-pointing going on at the moment – from within the Republican Party and from a gleeful press - as to what caused the failure of the McCain campaign. From McCain’s “soft of Obama” demeanor to an “untested” Palin, a feeding frenzy is taking place – to what end? After eight years of an administration that was never accepted by the Democrats or a press who relentlessly attacked every policy move, foreign or domestic – it was inconceivable that any Republican would be successful in 2008. Additionally, “we the people”, are fickle. The Presidency has devolved into nothing more than a personality contest – from Ophrah to the View and Leno to Letterman, the candidates we’re treated as more “celebrity” than politician – Cable and Broadcast news followed suit, paying as much attention to what was said on the “View”, as to any policy positions. It’s about connecting with and pandering to an Entertainment medium in order to reach the “masses”. It is also degrading to the office these individuals seek.

President Bush was besieged by negative press and negative publicity the moment he set foot in the White House – bitterness over the 2000 elections was nothing compared to palpable hatred that followed in 2004. While it is a fact that the media leans, for the most part, left, it is also a fact that little was done to reach out to the American public through the media – when attacked by the New York Times or any cable or broadcast network, the administration remained silent. When the Democrat leadership used the medium to consistently attack the President, he did nothing to fight back, rather, refused to dignify the consistent attacks. Unfortunately, in today’s age, refusing to acknowledge the power of the media is short-sighted to say the least.

There were, of course, other factors: the biggest being the disconnect between Washington Republicans and their base – in the last 6 years it was difficult for many conservatives to tell the difference between a Republican or a Democrat when it came to spending, special interests and scandals. That said when the new “crop” of candidates emerged in 2006 – those that were most comfortable with the media appeared to fair better; whether it was a question of mutual admiration or not.

Former Arkansas Governor, Mike Huckabee could be found on every network, news to talk shows – Huckabee had a instant connect with the media, until of course, he looked more like a front-runner, the gloves came off, and the attacks began; and they will continue because Huckabee, and those Republicans that can connect with the people on a more personal level through Entertainment, are a real threat to the Democrats and those “progressive journalists” who know how fast four years go by.

Sarah Palin is a stunning example of random and specific attacks by both her own party and the press. Palin, who’s support among the Republican base (which itself is derided by the press), is at 60% or better, connected more with those that were working class, than McCain, who represented Washington as usual, despite his long history of bi-partisanship. That history was what bothered most conservatives, it was Palin who brought them back to the fold and now she is paying the price. From the ridiculous squabble over a wardrobe to the anonymous tips emanating from staffers who want to hitch their wagon to Washington, there are, a week after the election, consistent negative articles as well as requests for interviews – Palin, a danger to the left because of her popularity, is also a hot commodity with the press for the same reason, and like Huckabee, she is not backing down, rather standing up and taking the time given to reach out to the base and beyond.

The charge that the Republican Brand is damaged is interesting in that it ties politics to personality - placing a political party in the same category as fast food restaurant or hybrid car – that is also true of the Democrat Brand, which faired this election – simply because they understood how to manipulate the media and the entertainment mediums. Enter the fickle “we the people”. One has to understand that President-Elect Obama is now under great scrutiny and in even greater demand, not only must he govern based on the campaign promises, he must also continue to play the part of “rock star politicians” in the press. Should he fail in either, he will begin to face the same criticism as his predecessor. Those that cannot conceive of this scenario need only look back at the love-hate relationship Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had with the press, the difference being that those Presidents did not have to deal with Leno, Letterman and the View. There stakes are greater today, and the pressure for “celebrities” to continue to please the American Public is unprecedented. Sarah Palin understands this better than most, so do other “off-beltway Republicans” like Michael Steele, and Mike Huckabee. Should the interviews and interest, be it love or hate, continue past 2009, then one can see a new “Brand of Republican” emerging, one which can compete with the other brand – Coke vs. Pepsi, so to speak. Is this new idea of politician as celebrity dignified and does it represent the Office of the Presidency? In simple terms - Yes.

Obama – on Partial-Birth Abortion – A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing

Barack Obama has recently decided that a woman should not qualify for a late-term (partial-birth) abortion if the only qualifier for the procedure is “mental distress”. There is absolutely no medical reason for a partial-birth abortion, with the exception of “mental distress”. (Physicians for Life) In cases of “Mental Stress” reasons include the development of certain defects in the unborn child, (perhaps it’s not the correct gender), or the emotional distress (becoming a parent may be too much for the woman to stand). Barak Obama, in courting those who are less liberal Christians, has made this concession as he must believe those that are clutching to their guns and bibles were also born yesterday.

In a recent interview with Relevant Magazine, a publication that is focused on God, Life and Progressive Culture, he speaks about his Faith Based Initiative (shades of George Bush!), and why he feels the Congress would pass his version (no need to state the obvious), and goes on to talk about his personal disdain for abortion. Strangely contradicting his reaction last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions - Obama disagreed with the ruling because it was a departure from precedents that safeguard a pregnant women’s health.

He has also defended his opposition to restrictions placed on partial-birth abortions in his political past (one term as a state senator and half a term as a US Senator). He voted against the “Born Alive”Illinois Senate Bill.

Let’s call a “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”, a “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”! Barack Obama accepted NARAL’s all important endorsement, (otherwise known as a key issue when it comes to Democrats seeking election or re-election – they are always “pro-choice” – which, by the by, should be called “pro-abortion”) knowing full well what the qualifiers were for partial-birth abortion, abortion in general and the no-holds barred approach of this particular organization. To learn more about the political arm of NARAL and how they see the differences between John McCain and Obama, visit
Pro-AbortionAmerica.org/Elections Apparently, John McCain is a candidate that is “pro-life” or, “Against Abortion”.

The distinctions between these two candidates were made clear to the 90 Christian church leaders recently in Denver by Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas and 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate. These same leaders met last week to unite behind John McCain’s
(WZMM13) candidacy.

Apparently, Barak Obama’s recent conversions vis-a-vis partial-birth abortion and Faith Based Initiatives have brought to light his support for those things that are anathema to the very people he is desperately trying to pursued. Barack Obama - “less evil”? (Jeff Greenfield, Slate Blog – “How Obama Can Lessen the Opposition”) Perhaps so, or perhaps “less careful” when it comes to fooling all of the people, some of the time.

McCain Critical of Bush Handling of Katrina Crisis

From Reuters. Apparently, John McCain would have handled things differently. Really? In an election year full of bluff and bluster or the do and say anything in order to get elected realm of politics, one hears statement after statement that is simply ludicrous. Should McCain, or anyone running at this time, been the President when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and the levees broke (Led Zeppelin), they would have come up against the same management team on the ground.

Louisana Governor Kathleen Blanco

Most striking at the time, was a governor’s failure to call for a mandatory evacuation New York Times Article. followed by her refusal to give up her national guard in a power struggle with the federal government. Of course it was President Bush’s fault for allowing the law of the state to supersede the law of the federal government - or, do exactly as he was supposed to while adhering to the Constitution. Of course, the governor, a Democrat, had no other course, but to point a finger a Washington in order to cover her own incompetence. Nearby Mississippi suffered under Katrina, but management on the state level was exemplary.

Mike Huckabee to Publish New Book

Mike Huckabee (CNN)

From CNN Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (10 Years as Governor), will be releasing another book two weeks after the 08 elections. This work will detail his bid for the presidency with notes from the campaign trail. Huckabee’s “From Hope to Higher Ground” offered up a reasonable 12-step program to restore America, expect more of the same from this candid “man of the people”.