the Culture War - Paris, Brittney and Obama

**GooMaiRoo** · 31-07-2008, 02:27 AM

I saw this John McCain ad today, which associated Barack Obama with Hollywood drug abusers and degenerates Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton:

It didn't take long for the Republican fear machine to get into high gear for the 2008 presidential election. It's ironic that a man like McCain, who deserted his crippled, wheelchair-bound wife Carol to marry his mistress, would claim the moral high-ground in what is often referred to as the Culture War. As if his behavior toward Carol McCain wasn't enough, there are also indications that McCain cheated on his 2nd wife (home-wrecker and drug abuser Cindy) by spending 'quality time' with lobbyist Vicki Iseman. If Obama doesn't sling mud back at these hypocritical attacks, he could very well lose the election. Obama has a history of being a responsible, monogamous family man, and he seems to be last person deserving of such attacks. Does the current Republican leadership have any justification for taking the moral high ground in the Culture War? What would you do if you were an Obama campaign strategist after seeing such an ad?

(links to Carol McCain and Vicki Iseman articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us...mccain.html?hp

The wife John McCain callously left behind | Mail Online

**sabang** · 31-07-2008, 03:45 AM

Indeed, it has become apparent now that since McCain hired several PR merchants that are acolytes of Karl Rove to take over his campaign (with Rove in the background as an adviser), he has done a total about face on his original 'high minded principals', and is now appealing to the lowest common denominator with his campaigning. What a sad inditement on the current state of Republican politics in the US.

It never used to be like this, before dubya and the Loonies (neo-cons) hijacked the party- if anything it was the Democrats that were more prone to appeal to populist themes and use low brow imagery and stereotypes.

Even more worrying is the number of people who are apparently concerned it might work- then it would become a sad inditement on contemporary American culture. Plenty of people however- including GOP- think it will backfire. I hope they are right.

See- "McCain Goes Negative, Worrying Some in G.O.P." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us...342&ei=5087%0A

Anyway, todays Editorial from the NY Times says it better than I could:-

Low-Road Express

Well, that certainly didn’t take long. On July 3, news reports said Senator John McCain, worried that he might lose the election before it truly started, opened his doors to disciples of Karl Rove from the 2004 campaign and the Bush White House. Less than a month later, the results are on full display. The candidate who started out talking about high-minded, civil debate has wholeheartedly adopted Mr. Rove’s low-minded and uncivil playbook.

In recent weeks, Mr. McCain has been waving the flag of fear (Senator Barack Obama wants to “lose” in Iraq), and issuing attacks that are sophomoric (suggesting that Mr. Obama is a socialist) and false (the presumptive Democratic nominee turned his back on wounded soldiers).

Mr. McCain used to pride himself on being above this ugly brand of politics, which killed his own 2000 presidential bid. But he clearly tossed his inhibitions aside earlier this month when he put day-to-day management of his campaign in the hands of one acolyte of Mr. Rove and gave top positions to two others. The résumés of the new team’s members included stints in Mr. Bush’s White House and in his 2004 re-election campaign, one of the most negative and divisive in memory.

Almost immediately, the McCain campaign was using Mr. Rove’s well-honed tactics, starting with an attempt to widen this nation’s damaging ideological divide by painting Mr. Obama as a far-left kook. On July 18, Mr. McCain even suggested that Mr. Obama is a socialist to the left of the Senate’s only avowed socialist: Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Mr. Obama’s politics are hardly far-left, and anyone who has spent time in a socialist country knows how ridiculous that label is for any member of Congress. It would be bad enough if Mr. McCain honestly believed what he said, but we find that hard to imagine....

Mr. McCain repeatedly said Mr. Obama “would rather lose a war to win a political campaign” and that he “does not understand” what is at stake in Iraq. He also accused Mr. Obama of canceling a visit to wounded American troops in a German military hospital because news cameras were not allowed. That’s a false account of what occurred — and Mr. McCain ignored Mr. Obama’s unheralded visit to a combat hospital in Baghdad.

Like Mr. Bush, Mr. McCain confuses opposition to an unnecessary war with a lack of spine and an unwillingness to use force when the nation is truly in danger. Obviously, Mr. Obama is untested as a commander in chief and his trip was intended to reassure voters. But Mr. McCain is as untested in this area as Mr. Obama, and it is hard to imagine a worse role model than the one Mr. McCain seems to be adopting: President Bush.

Many voters are wondering whether a McCain presidency would be an extension of Mr. Bush’s two disastrous terms. If the way Mr. McCain is running his campaign these days is an indication, Americans don’t have to wait until next January for the answer to that one

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/op...on&oref=slogin

I suppose, thats politics- or at least modern politics. Even Hillary tried the same thing as a last gasp effort to revive her faltering campaign. It didn't help her, and I'm of the opinion this will not help McCain either- but it's sure to get the rabid right wing blogs working overtime again. We know their vote anyway.

Shame to have to say it, but the demographics of the undecided vote in this campaign are increasingly looking like the professional,educated vote based on current Issues to Obama, the lowbrow vote based on emotion, jingoism and fear to Mccain. Thats what the tactics adopted by the two campaigns appear to be saying, at least.

**barbaro** · 31-07-2008, 03:47 AM

McCain said in the past he'd run a straight campaign and not reduce himself to such shennanegins. But he and his campaign folks are sending out false comparisons and misinformation. Just like the "failure to visit wounded troops in Germany b/c there were no TV cameras."

This may persuade some low-info voters, but honestly, I see many voters rejecting this type of ad and it may backfire a little on McCain. (Just a hunch, I cannot prove this.) IMO, it makes McCain look bad, and also a little desparate, when he not necesarrily need be.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 09:27 AM

it's sure to get the rabid right wing blogs working overtime again

No doubt, they need very little of substance to work themselves into a lather. No substance at all actually.

The whole cycle, from slavishly repeating unfounded allegations to conveniently ignoring facts that prove them wrong, would actually be quite funny were it not for one thing; people actually read this stuff and adopt it as fact. Because it's on the t'internet so it must be true you see.

**pai nai ma** · 31-07-2008, 09:33 AM

Absurd and ineffective. McCain is a not ready for prime time player. As his mother said, even those that like him have to hold their nose.

**britmaveric** · 31-07-2008, 10:49 AM

Good ad, shows Osama has no substance, same as Britney/Paris. All image no substance.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 10:50 AM

Congrats Brit, you're just the target audience they were after.

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by floorpotato

I saw this John McCain ad today, which associated Barack Obama with Hollywood drug abusers and degenerates Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton:

Negative campaign ads are the last resort of the desperate. McCain has been whining about his lack of media attention and has resorted to what can only be described as childish attacks on Obama's every move in order to try and mitigate Obama's popularity and media attention. These comments demonstrate his inability to effectively provide the leadership needed to address the problems facing the US. Whining, name calling and making unsubstantiated accusations are not effective leadership traits.

McCain is playing with fire with these type of ads and comments. Yes a few will latch onto them but many of his supporters will be turned off by what is in the end nothing more than his inability to speak to the issues and a demonstration of his frustration at Obama's popularity.

It would be refreshing to see both McCain and Obama provide more detail on their policies and conduct campaigns around the merits of their policies. I'm not holding my breath though. If the last several presidential campaingns are any indicator the rhetoric and the ads will become more and more negative as the election date approaches.

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

Good ad, shows Osama has no substance, same as Britney/Paris. All image no substance.

Leaves us with a clear choice then. All image and no substance vs no image and no substance.

**britmaveric** · 31-07-2008, 10:57 AM

McCain has substance, unfortunately Osama does not.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 10:58 AM

Funny thing too, this associating Obama with Britney Spears - she's a well known supporter of Dubbya and therefore presumably most likely to be inclined to vote McCain (presuming she could drive herself to the voting poll without incident and actually work out how to vote).

**ChiangMai noon** · 31-07-2008, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

McCain has substance

unlike yourself eh brit?

maverik is trolling again.
i believe posters can be excluded from certain forums.

quite sure brit shouldn't be allowed into issues anymore.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

McCain has substance, unfortunately Osama does not.

What's he got to do with any of this?

Sheesh Brit, if you're going to make claims like that least you could do is get the blokes name right.

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Sheesh Brit, if you're going to make claims like that least you could do is get the blokes name right.

Or even better, give some detail of McCain's substance vs Obama's lack of it.

**britmaveric** · 31-07-2008, 11:45 AM

Well all I have heard from Osama is word CHANGE - nothing more.

McCain actually spelled out his plans, Osama basically says one thing than changes his mind next minute.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by blackgang

OK,,Heres what I think...

Is that actually what you think or a cut 'n paste from an email or some such?

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

Well all I have heard from Osama is word CHANGE - nothing more.

McCain actually spelled out his plans, Osama basically says one thing than changes his mind next minute.

I think I'm starting to lean towards CMN's theory that you're a bit of a troll.

**britmaveric** · 31-07-2008, 11:50 AM

Not a troll, however easily wind you up - especially when you know you are wrong.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 11:53 AM

^Wrong about what? You've not actually made any arguments here Brit, just repeatedly gotten the name of a Presidential candidate wrong.

**britmaveric** · 31-07-2008, 11:58 AM

I said the candidate has nought to say - never says anything but change. The other candidate least spells out his vision of the future in concrete ways compared to just lofty/dreamy ideals and empty rhetoric.

**AntRobertson** · 31-07-2008, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

I said the candidate has nought to say - never says anything but change. The other candidate least spells out his vision of the future in concrete ways compared to just lofty/dreamy ideals and empty rhetoric.

Yes I know what you said, you've repeated it often enough.

Ironic though isn't it, that you've pointedly refused to give details of McCain's substance vs Obama's lack of it. You could actually say that you've got nought to say - other than repeating the same rethoric.

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

McCain actually spelled out his plans, Osama basically says one thing than changes his mind next minute.

McCain and Obama have both consistently opposed off shore drilling in the past. Obama as of today is still opposed. McCain has suddenly become a strong advocate of off shore drilling. Could it be because polls show 70% of the public favor it even though off shore drilling will have no immediate effect on prices at the pump. Bush and his puppeteer Chaney are putting pressure on congress to pass the off shore drilling bill. McCain is again showing he is nothing more than a GWB clone.

McCain's consistent assertions Obama "flip flops" on issues is ludicrous given McCain has done the same on several issues.

**ChiangMai noon** · 31-07-2008, 12:07 PM

always found the idea of 'changing your opinion' being a wicked thing to be a very strange.

Things change, people change, I find looking back at voting records from the ages very odd. Is this a uniquely American phenomenon?

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by britmaveric

I said the candidate has nought to say - never says anything but change. The other candidate least spells out his vision of the future in concrete ways compared to just lofty/dreamy ideals and empty rhetoric.

Interesting take away you have here. The Iraq war, one example of a major issue where Obama has certainly laid out his plans in a far more "concrete" way McCain.

If I may summarise:

Obama - I will withdraw troops from Iraq within 16 to 18 months.

McCain - I will keep troops in Iraq for as long as it takes to achieve "victory". "Could be 100 years"

Agree or disagree with their policies, IMO Obama's position is very "concrete".

**Norton** · 31-07-2008, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

always found the idea of 'changing your opinion' being a wicked thing to be a very strange.

Agree. Changing ones position is the result of learning from mistakes or changing conditions which require a rethink. I too have a problem with the constant accusations by McCain's campaign that Obama is a "flip flopper". I feel the same when the Obama campaign accuses McCain of "flip flopping". I would expect both to change their positions if conditions warrant.

Thread: the Culture War - Paris, Brittney and Obama

Thread Tools

Display

the Culture War - Paris, Brittney and Obama

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions