The Obama Rules
by Rich Lowry
May 12, 2008
After his blowout win in North Carolina last week, Obama turned to framing the rules of the general election ahead, warning in his victory speech of "efforts to distract us."
The campaign can succeed in imposing these rules on the race only if the news media cooperate. Newsweek signed up for the effort in a cover story that reads like a 3,400-word elaboration of the "distraction" passage of Obama's victory speech. "The Republican Party has been successfully scaring voters since 1968," it says, through "innuendo and code." McCain "may not be able to resist casting doubt on Obama's patriotism," and there's a question whether he can or wants to "rein in the merchants of slime and sellers of hate."
We could take Obama's rules in good faith if he never calls John McCain a "conservative" or labels him in any other way. If he never criticizes him for his association with George Bush. If he doesn't jump on his gaffes (like McCain's 100-years-in-Iraq comment that Obama distorted and harped on for weeks). And if he never says anything that would tend to make Americans fearful about the future or divide them (i.e., say things that some people agree with and others don't).
Personal Note: As an extension of my previous post, this article clearly shows the hypocrisy of the Obama campaign. Dan suggested we can "disagree with policy X... [by] offer[ing] what [we] think is a valid reason," and as long as those reasons don't make mention of his middle name, the color of his pastor's hatred of America [which is truly "black-hearted," as anyone with ears to hear could discern.. as black-hearted as my own black heart [thank you ER]], or his business and civic relationships. We can't question his judgment, but we are expected to fawn over and yearn for the policy changes his "judgment" will foist upon us should he win the White House.
Something is just not right about this. Since when does any politician get to make the rules by which his candidacy is judged? Clinton had some of this mojo during his first term as president, but then, he was already president. Media covered and mitigated for him during the storms of his myriad scandals, and even carried water for Al Gore during the run-up to the 2000 election.
But media is a far more dangerous animal today than it was a mere eight years ago. It has declined. It has been wounded. And like any other wounded powerful animal it is dangerous to get too close... too close to the men [forget the women... Hillary was thrown under the bus by media months ago] they think will usher in the policies of the good ole days. The days when Democrats ruled policy with an velvet encased iron fist. Comforting the downtrodden while pummeling the " Evil Rich."
Democrats have never met a tax increase they didn't like. Next spring, should a Democrat win, will be no exception. In the meantime, Obama, his adoring acolytes, and media all will insist we play by the rules from which they exempt themselves... out of hand, sleight of hand, encased in velvet, cast in iron.
It amazes me to think that this nation once tore down an iron curtain only to, decades later, begin building one of its own.
10 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There's something to be said for media having lost its way. From the days when it objectively [as any human could possibly be] reported the news to today when every talking head is a pundit of weighty stature.
News media has certainly lost its way... Evolved, but not enlightened... Narcissistically propagandizing. And many other lovely things besides.
Hammer that, Brother Obama. That's all it'd take to win.
You just can't recognize snark when you see it.
Compared to our choices now? Yeah, howdy!!! In spades!!! In a freakin' heartbeat!!!!
(nimrod)
How dare you rebuke piety such as the Reverend Redneck displays, Marshall Art!
Don't you know his sh*t don't stank!
You should be ashamed! Ashamed, I tell you!
Quick! Grab the hem of his garment and plead for his forgiveness!