Print Story Lipstick
Diary
By moonvine (Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 05:04:35 AM EST) (all tags)
pigs, bulldogs, and wasting effort on the dark side.


Has anyone read this article by Rowe here online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122108935141721343.html? Thoughts?
< Wait, what? | I had a great title >
Lipstick | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Yeah, Obama should focus on McCain by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #1 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 05:07:30 AM EST
rather than Palin.


Uh, I hope you're aware by R343L (2.00 / 0) #2 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 05:44:29 AM EST
But that's an article by Karl Rove. Karl Rove who was Bush's advisor for a decade. Karl Rove who is playing a neutral political analyst on TV while advising the McCain campaign. Karl Rove who is not well known for veracity or fairness. The same Karl Rove who almost certainly leaked Valery Plame's name. So, I would take any political argument he makes with a grain of salt -- he is not opposed to bending facts, telling outright lies and otherwise behaving unethically to help his side win. This is the Karl Rove that invented a smear 8 years ago during the Republican primary about McCain's "black child" that probably lost McCain the primary. Why McCain would even talk to Rove, I do not know.

So, after pointing that out, I would like to say this article is full of shit. Of the actual facts in there that support the idea that Obama is actually paying too much attention to Palin, we have:

I don't see how these three constitute much demonstration of the thesis that Obama is foolishly spending too much time on Palin.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot
and by R343L (2.00 / 0) #3 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 05:47:00 AM EST
I just realized you might have known all this, but really I don't think Rove's analysis in these contexts is all that relevant -- his analysis in public from now till election day will all be to help the Republican's win the presidency and to take back as many congressional seats as possible. So there's not much to think about here -- it's not like he's really an independent political analyst carefully showing flaws in both side's campaigns.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot
[ Parent ]
Indeed I was aware that Karl Rowe by moonvine (2.00 / 0) #4 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 06:23:57 AM EST
was Bush's adviser for a decade. Which is exactly my point. Whether you agree with his methods or not, I don't think it's smart to dismiss him altogether. His strategies for Bush have worked time and time again- how else would the man have gotten reelected for a second term? To dismiss Rowe's previous Machiavellian brilliant stratagems based on personal prejudices does not seem wise. If the Democrats had someone just as evil and brilliant, it would balance the playing field, and then both parties would combust simultaneously and then the two party system would be a thing of the past and then... progress? Ahhh. One can dream.

In the meantime, I think Obama needs to stop focusing on what is irrelevant and pay heed. He needs to keep cool and leave Palin alone. She's all fluff and a non-issue, but the attention he is giving her is making her more important than is necessary and could cost him the election. Mccain is where his focus and energy need to be moving forward. I agree with Rowe on this one, it's almost like a freebie bit of advice for Obama. He should take the advice; whether I think he is a dick or not is another issue.


[ Parent ]
Yes, but is he meta turbo inverto trolling? by gzt (4.00 / 1) #5 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 06:34:41 AM EST
This article is continuing the discourse of "Obama is attacking Palin", possibly well after Obama has tried to get beyond that, thereby continuing that perception and perhaps provoking further, actual responses which confirm the article's point.

[ Parent ]
Oh my g'ness! by moonvine (2.00 / 0) #7 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:11:59 AM EST
I thought about that as well. You may be right. Still, has Obama gotten beyond that? I hope he has. I watched Letterman the other night with Obama, but it didn't seem like he has, even though he seemed to be responding to this whole Palin phenomena in a jesting manner. I think the less Sarah's name is mentioned the better off he will be.  She was a nobody before September 3, and hopefully the furor will die down and they can begin to focus on the weakest aspect of the Republican nomination- Mccain, and Sarah can happily go back to being a nobody.

Personally, Rowe, that somewhat rhymes with rogue, has gotten under my skin off late because I just finished watching "Bush's Brain." An much of an oxymoron as that sounds, the film was pretty incisive but the inner workings of Rowe and his tactical manipulations of Bush and his administration. As a republican, what do you think of Mccain's chances of winning the election are?


[ Parent ]
I'm not a Republican. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #8 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:21:52 AM EST
There are few Republicans at any level of government that I could vote for. I'm not a political conservative in any meaningful sense.

[ Parent ]
Oh! by moonvine (2.00 / 0) #10 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:36:05 AM EST
I'm so sorry to have wrongly assumed that. My apologies. I guess I just didn't pick up the sarcasm in another comment you posted. I can't rememer where I read that you were, but now, I understand completely.


[ Parent ]
yeah, it's an inside joke by gzt (2.00 / 0) #11 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:41:43 AM EST
Clipper Ship had presumed I was a Republican in an earlier conversation because I knew of the connections between eugenics movements and liberal politics in the early 20th century and I ran with the idea.

[ Parent ]
Oh!!! by moonvine (2.00 / 0) #12 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:48:13 AM EST
hahaha!! I had always presumed, until I read that thread, that you were liberally inclined when you knew of the connections between Goethe and Kalidasa
The world is a funny place!


[ Parent ]
of course! by gzt (2.00 / 0) #14 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 08:33:24 AM EST
I was thinking of saying, in my response, "I friggin' speak Sanskrit! I can't be a Republican." But I decided against it.

[ Parent ]
but you talk about Church by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #13 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:53:08 AM EST
and the right wing blogosphere has assured me only Republicans go to Church, well, a Church that believes in God and America.


[ Parent ]
Ah, I don't believe in America. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #15 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 08:34:32 AM EST
It was founded on Enlightenment ideals. I am actually not very fond of the Enlightenment.

[ Parent ]
That's the point by R343L (4.00 / 1) #6 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:06:27 AM EST
This isn't an honest and forthright piece of political analysis. It is Rove saying what he needs in order to continue or start a "story" that worsens Obama's chances of winning and increases McCain's. It may or may not be factually accurate or a good analysis (I think not) and it's certainly not what he really thinks about how the campaign is really going. It is there to push a message and nothing more. Why would he give away McCain's campaign strategy in a public article when he's one of his advisors? Why would he be trying to "help" Obama by (ostensibly) telling him to not do something stupid?

And Obama isn't giving Palin that much attention. The media is. If Obama gets asked about her, he must, by the rules of our political culture, give some kind of answer. The rest of it is definitely not him paying much attention to her (as I explained). The message Rove is pushing is that Obama is afraid of / concerned with / etc. the choice of Palin. Likely he isn't -- polls show that Palin is pushing those "disaffected Hilary voters" back towards Obama -- but it's a good message for the Republicans to push. All the charges of sexism, anti-family bias, etc. are all ways to emotionally appeal to the lesser-informed voters. Rove in this article is just pushing one part of that appeal (and continuing some faux controversies as part of it.)

Rachael

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
Of course he isn't giving away the strategy! by moonvine (4.00 / 1) #9 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 07:34:03 AM EST
I mean if he were, there'd be no way a plebe such as myself could grasp that- it'd be too easy. Obama should be leery of Mccain's choice as Palin and not take it lightly! And Rowe, whether knowingly helpful to the Democrat or not, gives good reason to Obama and his campaign to stop the focus on Palin.  What he doesn't mention though, is the strategy employed over the eight years to get Bush elected and re-elected, i.e., the one of elitism and resentment. There is a good op-ed piece from the New York Times about working class income poor white voters who find to difficult to vote for those who are highly educated and cultured. They seem to relate more to people like Bush and Palin who come across as "average" and under the radar. A half black man that seems smarter than them is beyond  threatening. Palin fits the bill of the working class resentment against the educated elite perfectly;  which is the only reason imho that she seems like such a threat to Obama's campaign. Rowe knows this and uses this to their advantage- I think though, he slipped and made a mistake with that op-ed piece. It was a brilliant piece that I think will ultimately help Obama win.

I just think it is an interesting tactic to use what the opponent rallies to one's benefit, and this was a fitting example. But only time will tell.

And the polls? They are actually narrowing. It doesn't look too hot for Obama right now. Respecting and acknowledging the power of the opponent, however weak or strong, seems crucial in any battle. voices.kansascity.com/node/2047. I concede that is only one pollster. But there are many more reported that either show him lagging or Mccain catching up uncomfortably fast.


[ Parent ]
I hope you're aware that by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #19 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 01:23:41 PM EST
people are also blaming Rove for encouraging liberals to attack Palin instead of supporting Obama....

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/are-the-netroot.html#more



Thought for the day: Some people are like slinkies - Not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
[ Parent ]
Huh? by R343L (2.00 / 0) #20 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 05:26:31 PM EST
No, and that would be silly of people to do. Though I can imagine Rove wanting that -- it's probably not helpful towards Obama winning ... not that he would say that publicly for obvious reasons.

Truthfully I'm getting sick of the Palin-all-the-time that all the liberal blogs (and some of the conservative ones) have turned into. Actually have gotten sick of. Like two days after the announcement. Possibly less.

Blergh. Can't we talk about health care? Or economics? Or the proper use and role of the military?!

Rachael

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
I didn't read the article but I have to agree with by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 2) #16 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 08:36:41 AM EST
the headline. Short form: by making ridiculous and insane charges against Palin within the first few hours of the campaign, the photoshoppers and the Daily Kos crowd created an instant martyr for the Republicans. The fact that the MSM repeated the rumors - and showed the photoshops - just made things worse.

At this point, Biden could hold a press conference providing eye-witness testimony and financial records showing that Palin is a member of the Gambino crime family and people will assume it's just another smear.

Their best bet is to ignore her, focus on McCain and wait for her to screw up.


Thought for the day: Some people are like slinkies - Not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
This photo by muchagecko (2.00 / 0) #17 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 11:22:52 AM EST

makes me laugh every time I see it.



"It's the abstract I deal in; software, and donuts." MohammedNiyalSayeed
[ Parent ]
It is teh funny. by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 1) #18 Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 11:28:47 AM EST
What's sad though, is that as a 44 year old, that photo is really hot. When you see the original 20-something you think "she's a little on a chunky side".


Thought for the day: Some people are like slinkies - Not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
[ Parent ]
not for regular folks. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #21 Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 11:24:19 AM EST


[ Parent ]
Lipstick | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback