HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Nov. 15, 2008 Third of four parts: Karl Christian Rove served as Deputy Chief of Staff to George W. Bush, a position he resigned in 2007. He was the architect behind the George Bush victories in 2000 and 2004. He is a political strategist with a reputation for dirty tricks and “kitchen sink” strategies intended to discredit the opposition. He guided Bush to victory in 2004 despite John Kerry receiving the second highest number of popular votes in U.S. History. Rove is a Fox News mainstay, making frequent appearances on the highly-rated Fox news program The O’Reilly Factor. While McCain was labeling Obama a celebrity and running ads comparing the Illinois Senator to Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan, Rove was moving to portray the Democratic standard bearer as arrogant. “I do think Barack Obama is arrogant," Rove said on Fox News. A day earlier on ABC News, Rove described Obama in this way: “Even if you never met him, you know this guy," he said. "He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone." When the Obama campaign turned the tables on the GOP and cited Palin’s inexperience, Karl Rove went on Fox News and defended McCain’s choice of Palin. “Let's have a battle if need be between the Democrats saying she's inexperienced, when she says I've been governor for two years and I'm the only person who's got executive experience. And oh incidentally, the guy who's at the top of your ticket has been in the United States Senate for three and a half years, and he spent most of that time out running for president. I mean, that's a battle I'm not sure the Democrats really want to have.” (Karl Rove Analyzes Sarah Palin Pick And Obama Acceptance Speech, www.Foxnews.com, Sept. 1, 2008). Republicans wanted to keep the focus on trivialities rather than facts. McCain was weak on the issues and despite Palin drawing large crowds, she was no help at all. According to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll conducted between September 19-22, by Democratic and Republican pollsters Peter D. Hart and Nell Newhouse, “64 percent of respondents say that Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, is qualified to be president if the need arises, just 40 percent would say the same about Palin…Her favorability numbers also have decreased. After Palin’s selection, 47 percent viewed her positively versus 27 percent who saw her in a negative light. Now…she has a 42 to 36 percent positive/negative rating. Hart, the Democratic pollster, cites one factor behind her deflating numbers. ‘She is seen as not qualified. That is what has happened to her.’” (Source: Mark Murray, NBC/WSJ Poll: Economy Tops Concerns, msnbc/msn.com, Sept. 24, 2008). OBAMA BROADENS HIS BASE Obama continued to build bridges among Latino voters, Jewish voters and white Catholics—a group many thought would flock to McCain. Obama had expanded his base beyond whites making more than $60,000 s year and the starry-eyed college students. There was the growing fear among the GOP that Obama would challenge McCain in states that had traditionally voted Republican. This included Virginia , North Carolina , Missouri and Colorado . . The South, a Republican bastion of support, where Democrats rarely polled more than 25%, was now in play for Obama to make a significant showing. The influx of blacks and Latinos and mass voter registration drives allowed Obama to do what no Democratic candidate was able to do since 1964, and that is run a national campaign. The environment for a massive change over, meaning not only a Democratic win, but the potential to add to the Democrats’ number of seats in the House of Representatives, gain a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, garner an additional governorship and win the majority of statehouses across the country, was a possibly. The perfect storm of disasters—an unpopular war, the most unpopular President perhaps in U.S. history, and the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression—were winds that blew favorably for Obama. Palin’s popularity was slipping in the polls and she failed to make matters any better during her disastrous interviews with ABC news anchor Charlie Gibson and CBS news anchor Katie Couric. In the former, Palin was criticized for not knowing what the Bush doctrine was, which was to a degree understandable. But she showed that at times, she could get lost in her own attempts at answering questions she had no real answers for. GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan , from Afghanistan , with or without the approval of the Pakistani government? PALIN: As for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world, where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be and military strike a last option. GIBSON: But governor, I am asking you, do we have the right, in your mind, to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government? PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America , and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie. In making those tough decisions of where we go, and even who we target. GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes, that you think we have the right to go across the border, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government? To go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area? PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying America , and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table… Again Herbert stepped up to the plate: “How is it that this woman could have been selected to be the vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket? How is it that so much of the mainstream media has dropped all pretense of seriousness to hop aboard the bandwagon and go along for the giddy ride?...You can’t imagine that John McCain or Barack Obama or Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton or Joe Lieberman would not know what the Bush doctrine is. But Sarah Palin? Absolutely clueless. Ms. Palin’s problem is not that she was mayor of a small town or has only been in the Alaska governor’s office a short while. Her problem (and now ours) is that she is not well versed on the critical matters confronting the country at one of the most crucial turning points in its history.” Herbert continued. “I feel for Ms. Palin’s son who has been shipped off to the war in Iraq . But at his deployment ceremony, which was on the same day as the Charlie Gibson interview, Sept. 11, she told the audience of soldiers that they would be fighting ‘the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.’ Was she deliberately falsifying history, or does she still not know that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 attacks?” (Source: “ Bob Herbert, She’s Not Ready, New York Times Op-Ed Column, Sept. 12, 2008). The CBS debacle was by far worse and in some circles, funnier. When Couric asked about the $700 billion government bailout and whether she supports it, Palin offered the following circumlocutory response: “I’m all about the position that America is in and that we have to look at a $700 billion bailout. And as Sen. McCain has said unless this nearly trillion dollar bailout is what it may end up to be, unless there are amendments in Paulson’s proposal, really I don’t believe that Americans are going to support this and we will not support this. The interesting thing in the last couple of days that I have seen is that Americans are waiting to see what John McCain will do on this proposal. They’re not waiting to see what Barack Obama is going to do. Is he going to do this and see what way the political wind’s blowing? They’re waiting to see if John McCain will be able to see these amendments implemented in Paulson’s proposal.” Couric: You’ve said, quote, “John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business.” Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight? Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie--that, that’s paramount. That’s more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us. Couric: But he’s been in Congress for 26 years. He’s been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more. Palin: He’s also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he’s been talking about, the need to reform government. Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you’ve said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this? Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today. Couric: I’m just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation. Palin: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you Palin was obviously unprepared and subsequently was lampooned unmercifully on late night talk shows and other comedic venues. One such show was Saturday Night Live, where Palin’s dismal performance was skewered by Tina Fey. For the better part of a week clips of that skit would appear on various news programs. During subsequent interviews, Palin would appear on-camera with McCain. This includes a hand-holding session with Sean Hannity on Fox News that was more embarrassing than enlightening. No one was buying the idea of Palin as “fiscal conservative.” Eugene Robinson wrote, “She represents herself as a fiscal conservative who abhors pork-barrel projects and said no thanks to the “Bridge to Nowhere” — a $398 million span that would have linked Ketchikan, Alaska , to its airport across the Tongass Narrows . But as mayor of Wasilla (pop. 9,780), she hired a Washington lobbyist to bring home the bacon. And as a candidate for governor just two years ago, she supported both the Ketchikan bridge and the congressional earmark that would have paid most of its cost.” (Source: Eugene Robinson, The Cynicism Express, The Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sept. 2, 2008). The GOP attempted to effect damage control. Palin supporters dismissed the attacks as sexist bantering from the elitist, liberal media. They argued that Sarah was a reflection of “small town America ,” and that the only things voters cared about was whether or not she could assume the duties of the President in the event of McCain’s incapacitation or death. They ignored the fact that most in their party felt she couldn’t. McCain had additional problems. For starters, he admitted that he’d sided with the President “90% of the time,” which the Obama campaign repeated ad naseum. They also pointed out that McCain first denounced Bush’s tax cuts and now talked of continuing them. In the first debate, Obama also made a point of McCain’s support for the war In Iraq and that the Arizona Senator had declared that the war was not only the right thing, but would be over quickly and America would be greeted in that country as liberators. None of those things happened, as America remained in Iraq some three years after President Bush declared “mission accomplished.” Obama asserted, “John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong. You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong. And so my question is...of judgment…” THE BEAT GOES ON… When Obama took an overseas trip to Iraq , Germany and Great Britain , the GOP labeled his actions “presumptuous.” MSNBC reported, “Republican John McCain's campaign on Saturday sharply criticized Democratic rival Barack Obama for canceling a visit to wounded troops in Germany, contending Obama chose foreign leaders and cheering Europeans over ‘injured American heroes.’ Obama's campaign called the accusation ‘wildly inappropriate.’ His spokesman has claimed that the visit to a military hospital in Germany was scrapped after the Pentagon raised concerns about political activity on a military base. Earlier, though, the campaign had said Obama decided the visit might be seen as inappropriate politicking. However, the Pentagon said the senator was never told not to visit.” (Douglass K. Daniel, McCain, Obama Spar Over Canceled Troop Visit, msnbc.msn.com, July 26, 2008). McCain called Obama’s comment about Pennsylvanians relying too heavily on “God and guns,” as “elitist.” When he spoke of lowering taxes for 95% of the country, he was found to be “too liberal” and the idea itself labeled “another government handout.” When he talked of “redistributing the wealth” (that is, taxing those who earned more than $250,000 and giving tax breaks to those under that threshold) he was called “a socialist.” When he vowed to bring our soldiers home from Iraq within sixteen months, his strategy was decried as “cut and run,” a “surrender” and Obama was said to want to “lose a war in order to win an election.” Palin added, “"This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word 'victory' except when he's talking about his own campaign." Such vitriol, no matter how incessant its airing, did not resonate with voters. Americans were concerned with “kitchen table issues”: The high price of gasoline, the teetering economy, the steady loss of jobs, the stock market downturn and the ever-increasing cost of food. Obama continued to contrast his tax plan with that of Senator McCain. He was outspending McCain by more than 3-to-1 in battleground states and using McCain’s own words against him, in particular the admission that he’d voted with George Bush 90% of the time, and that he believed “the fundamentals of our economy are strong.” The comment came amidst the backdrop of the failure of several large financial institutions and a precipitous drop in the stock market. As Congress began debating a $700 billion bailout package for the ailing finance industry, McCain campaign operatives continued to shoot themselves in the foot. Former Texas Senator Phil Gramm, McCain’s top economic adviser and co-chair of the campaign, said in an interview with the Associated Press, “"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," he said. “We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet. We have sort of become a nation of whiners…You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline." Gramms comments were widely condemned. McCain denounced the remarks and nine days later, Gramm stepped down. McCain seemed unable to gain any traction, even after the first debate. It was supposed to be a debate that would be advantageous for him, one that centered on foreign policy—his storing suit, and where he claimed Obama was weak and lacked leadership. The debate took place several days after McCain announced the suspension of his campaign to focus on Wall Street’s mortgage crisis. When NcCain arrived in Washington , he had several photo ops, including one at the White House, where he and Senator Obama, along with several other members of the Congress had convened at the request of President George W. Bush. A day later a vote was taken and the bailout package failed. Democrats voted for it, but several Republican Senators were miffed by ill-advised comments of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who blamed the GOP for the fiscal mess. McCain was seen as someone who could not rally the troops, and amidst criticism flew to Oxford , Mississippi for the debate. The consensus was that all Obama had to do was hold his own. He remained poised throughout the debate, and expressed his view that Iraq was an unnecessary war and the resources sent to fight that battle would have been put to better use in Afghanistan McCain came off as irritable and throughout the debate reiterated in a condescending tone, “I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand…”. McCain stuck to his message that the mission was not yet complete and to pull out of the war would be disastrous. Note the following exchanges: br> MCCAIN: Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama's plan is dangerous for America . OBAMA: That's not the case. MCCAIN: That's what ... OBAMA: What he said was a precipitous... MCCAIN: That's what Admiral Mullen said. OBAMA: ... withdrawal would be dangerous. He did not say that. That's not true. MCCAIN: And also General Petraeus said the same thing. Osama bin Laden and General Petraeus have one thing in common that I know of, they both said that Iraq is the central battleground… The subject then switched to Afghanistan : OBAMA: …We cannot separate Afghanistan from Iraq , because what our commanders have said is we don't have the troops right now to deal with Afghanistan . So I would send two to three additional brigades to Afghanistan . Now, keep in mind that we have four times the number of troops in Iraq , where nobody had anything to do with 9/11 before we went in, where, in fact, there was no al Qaeda before we went in, but we have four times more troops there than we do in Afghanistan . And that is a strategic mistake, because every intelligence agency will acknowledge that al Qaeda is the greatest threat against the United States and that Secretary of Defense Gates acknowledged the central front--that the place where we have to deal with these folks is going to be in Afghanistan and in Pakistan … MCCAIN: We've got to get the support of the people of Pakistan . He [Obama] said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan . Now, you don't do that. You don't say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government…And, yes, Senator Obama calls for more troops, but what he doesn't understand, it's got to be a new strategy, the same strategy that he condemned in Iraq . It's going to have to be employed in Afghanistan …So it's not just the addition of troops that matters. It's a strategy that will succeed. And Pakistan is a very important element in this. And I know how to work with him. And I guarantee you I would not publicly state that I'm going to attack them. OBAMA: Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan . Here's what I said. And if John wants to disagree with this, he can let me know, that, if the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out. Now, I think that's the right strategy; I think that's the right policy. And, John, I--you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But, you know, coming from you, who, you know, in the past has threatened extinction for North Korea and, you know, sung songs about bombing Iran, I don't know, you know, how credible that is... MCCAIN: I -- I don't think that Senator Obama understands that there was a failed state in Pakistan when Musharraf came to power…I have a record. I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm's way… OBAMA: …The question is for the next president, are we making good judgments about how to keep America safe precisely because sending our military into battle is such an enormous step. (NOTE: Debate remarks were edited for brevity). With their differences spelled out, the post-debate polling by ABC indicated that more than half of those queried said Obama won. About one-third called McCain the winner. CBS saw it Obama 39%, McCain 24% and 37% thought it was a draw. McCain was also known to “fudge” a few facts. In one speech, he declared, “"We're going to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much." Robert Dreyfuss rebutted in an op-ed piece, “Umm, $700 billion? According to official US government figures, the United States in 2006 delivered a total of $23.3 billion in foreign aid to the entire world. More than one-third of that total, by the way, went to Iraq ($8.8 billion). Another big chunk went to Afghanistan ($3.6 billion). In other words, nearly half went to support the faltering US efforts at nation-building in those two war-torn countries.” (Source: Robert Dreyfuss, McCain Gaffe On Foreign Aid, The Nation, Sept. 5, 2008) Despite McCain’s gaffes, critics of Obama wondered why he could not close the deal; that is, get his percentage of the polling above 50%. People wondered if race were a factor, if “The Bradley effect” were in play. Would whites who said they were voting for Obama enter the voting booths and then change their vote to McCain? The results would be surprising. ------------ About the author: Timothy N. Stelly, Sr. is a writer who resides in Northern California. His latest work, under consideration for publication, is a poetry book titled "Stories From The Black Side Of The Rainbow." website: http://stellbreadO@tripod.com Email: stellbread@yahoo.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
