Hittiing McCain on Energy and Claims to Moderation

By The Seminal

In a panel in The Big Tent in Denver moderated by The Washington Note’s Steve Clemons, pollster Geoff Garin opined that the Obama campaign really hasn’t taken on John McCain the way they should.  One example he gave was over the compromise energy plan that Obama made some positive remarks about.  Garin said that here we have a bipartisan plan, Five Democrats and Five Republicans came up with moderate, maverick plan. Obama has said that he appreciates the plan because it illustrates the kind bipartisan, outside the box thinking that he would want to occur when he is President.  How can McCain take up the Maverick, Bipartisan label if he opposes this agreement?  Obama should hit him over the head with it by saying that John cCain is so tied to the oil industry he can’t even support bipartisanship on teh energyissue.

Another item Geoff Garin came up with is the national security issue.  As he said, “John McCain’s answer to international problems is always to send in troops.” Garin pointed out that when the Clinton Administration started bombing Serbia from the air, McCain denounced this tactic destined for failure and said that the only way to solve the issue was to send in massive ground forces.  Well since he was drastically wrong, as the air campaign led to Serbia’s surrender and withdrawal from Kosovo, this example paints a frightening picture of what a McCain foreign policy would be like. It also questions McCain’ judgement.

Garin’s examples show that if used intelligently, McCain’s own record can be used to counter the maverick, wise, bipartisan identity that he is trying to carve out for himself.

Comments

(13)

Hey, not fair!

Jukebox Johnny McFlameout knows where there's more oil! "Offshore!"

Hmm. Iraq is offshore, isn't it?

Go, Johnny, go!

If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith

well said!

BUt I always thought it should read:

Go, Johnny, go...AWAY!

give me lever, and a place to stand...

Same as the old boss...

Obama tightens grip on podium speeches
By Betsy Rothstein
Posted: 08/26/08 08:15 PM [ET]

By Betsy Rothstein
Posted: 08/26/08 08:15 PM [ET]
DENVER — Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is tightening the reins on campaign speeches and stressing that speakers emphasize a rags-to-riches theme.

Members of Congress and others who have been asked to address the convention must have their speeches approved by the Obama campaign. In many cases, the speeches are drastically changed — to the point where the original speech is completely scrapped, Democratic sources say.

Obama has long expressed his desire to run a positive campaign, but that approach has attracted criticism from some Democrats, who say the Illinois senator must hit Republicans harder.
Still, the practice of making wholesale changes to speeches has some Democrats miffed. “This is politics through and through,” said a Democratic source who has seen firsthand the degree to which the Obama camp has changed some of the speeches of members of Congress. “Everyone gets vetted.”

Obama has made one exception, however. He recently said he will not edit the speech of former President Bill Clinton.

The Democratic source expressed dismay as to why nearly everyone delivering speeches on behalf of Obama has to have a rags-to-riches story, dredging him- or herself up out of poverty and into prosperity. The source conceded, though, that it is Obama’s convention and he has a right to do as he pleases.

Yet not every speech has been completely overhauled. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), who was asked by Obama to speak about the economy, was scheduled to deliver his speech Tuesday afternoon. The Obama campaign struck just one line from his speech, which slammed the Republicans and the Bush administration, according to a Democratic source.

That line, addressing Republicans, read: “They’re asking for another four years — in a just world, they’d get 10 to 20.”

Democratic strategist James Carville believes the Obama campaign is pulling its punches.

Speaking on CNN, Carville said his party was too soft on Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Monday night. “But I guarantee on the first night of the Republican convention, you’re going to hear talk about Barack Obama, commander in chief, tax cuts, et cetera, et cetera.”

...

While I wouldn't want Carville running Obama's campaign, I think he is right. However there is the other side of it. When the democratic politicians do go offensive they tend to hold back even then. If you go on the offensive on a particular issue, you should know the material well and don't hold back.

First rule:

Choose your battles wisely.

I am sort of getting the feeling that I am something of an oddity among democrats. I ALWAYS take the fight to the repugnicans. I am starting to get more than a tad ill and disgusted over the complete lack of initiative, fighting spirit, and the apparent endemic levels of auto-fractiousness, as seen in our democratic leaders.

What does it take to get the democrats energized, organized, and successful?

If McCain wins, would there even be a point in voting?

give me lever, and a place to stand...

By wrenchboyAugust 27, 2008 - 7:42pm

I think the problem is not Obama's alone. I think the advisors for democratic campaigns are just out of touch. Frankly i wouldn't be surprised if they are in touch and double dealing with republicans to give bad advice. Some anyway.

Rolling Stone ran an article a while back

Seems like a large number of the campaign managers are pretty much piss poor advice to the democrats. The democratic candidate loses, and the campaign manager moves on to the next target.

So help me, if McCain wins, I'm shredding and burning my lab notes. If this country is too blasted dumb to get it right, after 8 years of peace and properity, followed by Snorty McChimp...

Then it doesn't get any help from me.
I'll stick around and help my friends with existing solutions.
McCain wins: I'll blame the P.U.M.A's, and I stop building things.

That, and I rag on the Pathetic Underloved Mangey A*&holes for at least the length of Crash McCain's term.

give me lever, and a place to stand...

Love ya fubu but

THEY"LL LIKE US WHEN WE WIN!! (sorry old line from West Wing)
We need to win first!
We don't have a majority in the Senate. We don't have a decent majority in the House.
I love math!

By justintymeAugust 27, 2008 - 10:13pm

Well I do want the dems to get a stronger majority in the senate and for Obama to win. But I still think the democratic party in congress has been very weak. I don't subscribe to the theory that they were helpless or without voice. There were actions they could have taken and certainly they could have been more vocal.

That said, I am not advocating abandoning the democratic party just yet. I want to see us work with the best the party has to offer to change the rest of the party. I'll give it a few years before I think about giving up on them.

God love ya fubu

That may be all we need.
I heard someone (goddess) earlier talking @ the possibility of HRC on the supreme court. And 2 other choices as well.

"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fail. Think of it -- always!!!"
Mahatma Gandhi

the neo cons had better get used to losing

Us Democrats have a great candidate.
Us Democrats seem to have a good chance at a veto-proof legislature.
Us democrats have record votter sign ups and turn outs.

Neo-cons, your days are numbered.

give me lever, and a place to stand...

ROFLMFAO.......Put down the

ROFLMFAO.......Put down the crack pipe and back away slowly. Then get in touch with liberalbluegum and see if he can recommend a good psychologist.

Translation

baby cracker spewed "I've got nothing."

If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith

I've learned to expect

nothing but drivel from bebe the wonder-troll.

give me lever, and a place to stand...

Comments

(13)