It's the Hypocrisy, Not The Inexperience

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 15:54


In regards to Palin, progressive media has performed beautifully so far. So much has been dug up so much on Palin that she has practically become a national joke, and the McCain campaign is even blaming the progressive blogosphere for this result. From this point forward, the key for progressive media is to make sure that we keep attacking from virtually every angle except for the "lightweight" angle.

More in the extended entry.

Chris Bowers :: It's the Hypocrisy, Not The Inexperience
The reason for this is that one big danger we face with Palin's speech tonight is that expectations for Palin have dropped so low, that it will be almost impossible for her not to surpass them. If the focus on Palin is that she is inexperienced and incapable, then as long as she doesn't immediately deliver as many gaffes as Dan Quayle did in an entire year, she will look fine. As CJ said on the West Wing once, Palin will have to set the podium on fire in order to blow this one. Given that her speech was prepared for her, whole cloth, before she was even selected, it seems unlikely that will happen.

The focus on Palin should not be on her lack of experience, but on the hypocrisy of McCain picking her after attacking Obama's lack of experience. This goes for a whole host of other issues surrounding Palin, too. It isn't that she has secured a record number of earmarks for Alaska and her hometown, it is that she claims to oppose earmarks while acquiring them. It isn't that she has a pregnant, teenage daughter, but that she slashed funded for pregnant teenagers. It isn't that she favored the Bridge to Nowhere, but that she claimed to oppose it. It isn't that she is decrying sexist coverage and comparing it to the media coverage of Hillary Clinton, but that she called Hillary Clinton a whiner for doing the same thing. It isn't that the McCain team failed to vet her closely, but that McCain's lack of preparation on Palin blows a huge hole in his claim that he is "ready to lead." It isn't that she claims to be a reformer, but that she does so while under ethics investigation. Etc.

Everything about Palin's selection and candidacy is a gigantic, hypocritical, pandering lie.  It is, in that way, exactly like just about the entire Republican platform. We need to make sure that we keep focusing on the vast layers of hypocrisy and falsehoods that underlie the choice, and make sure to avoid attacking her experience directly. Generally speaking, I think that this is something that Democrats and progressives have done a decent job of so far, but there have been slip-ups. The moment that we move away from the hypocrisy and falsehoods and start focusing on inexperience is the moment when we give Palin an opening to surpass expectations.  


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
She CAN'T be a lightweight (0.00 / 0)
She's meant to be the next Vice President of the United States. Which means nothing can be dismissed- quite the opposite. Everything is now much more important.

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

Counterspin (0.00 / 0)

  When Sarah Palin delivers her Checkers speech tonight and the media predictably gushes over her like she's Susan B. Anthony and Hillary Clinton rolled into one, how can we (and the Obama campaign) work to prevent the "she's OK, really" narrative from taking hold?

  The media will give her permanent absolution from all of her scandals, and that'll make the Obama campaign's job that much harder. I hope they have a plan.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn


How about (0.00 / 0)
"Do you really trust McCain to get lucky every single time he makes a random decision without any evidence?"

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

[ Parent ]
Or (0.00 / 0)
"McCain has proven he's not taking this seriously. Why would we risk him in the White House?"

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

[ Parent ]
That won't cut it. (4.00 / 8)
The reality of the matter is that she's a crazy choice and one successfully delivered speech written by someone else doesn't really mean anything.

How about this:

"She proved that she can read from a teleprompter. Why is she avoiding press conferences?"

Dems need to start planting that seed before the speech to cut off at the pass any pundit nonsense about a well-delivered speech making her a genius.

miasmo.com


[ Parent ]
How about (4.00 / 3)
"That's great, but reading from a teleprompter isn't what a Vice President does all day."

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

[ Parent ]
How about ignoring the speech altogether (4.00 / 1)
And focusing on the hilariously long list of scandals she has under her belt?

[ Parent ]
One speech does not mean anything (4.00 / 1)
Seems to me that the whole idea that 1 single speech can demonstrate the "readiness" of any candidate has already been blown out of the water by the attacks on Obama during the primaries and the campaign.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Ethical problems (4.00 / 2)
We're hearing about a new one each day, so keep hammering away at the corruption and it will be enough to keep them on the defensive, which is all you really want.

This is a good point. (0.00 / 0)
Off balance they do more damage to themselves than we ever could.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Plus (0.00 / 0)
Every moment spent defending Sarah Palin is a moment not attacking Barack Obama. And to have any hope of winning, McCain has to tear down Obama. The Palin pick interferes with his ability to do that for several reasons.

[ Parent ]
McCain is not fit to lead. (4.00 / 3)
This is the first big decision of the McCain campaign and he blew it. We can't risk having a President who can't even handle the task of vetting his VP choice. Everyone of these Palin mini-scandals can be made to do double duty:

1.) It makes Palin look bad.

2.) It makes McCain look like a clueless lightweight not ready for prime time.

Senator McCain, were you aware that Governor Palin featured prominently in your list of pork and earmark offenders?

Senator McCain, were you aware of Governor Palin's association with a separatist movement?

Senator McCain, were you aware of Governor Palin's support for the bridge to nowhere?

On down the list, every single Palin issue is two issues - her suckiness and his crazy level of incompetence.

miasmo.com


Suckiness and incompetence? (4.00 / 5)
Are you saying ... Unstable/Unable 2008!

[ Parent ]
That would be an interesting approach (4.00 / 2)
I like your suggestion of trying to get McCain on the record as to exactly which of the Palin issues he was aware of before selecting her. If the question can even be asked it makes McCain look bad either way-- if he says yes it indicates he apparently doesn't care that much about earmarks or "country first" or whatever, if he says no it demonstrates how much he didn't know about this person before he picked her. Too bad McCain's avoiding reporters now.

[ Parent ]
Mavericks don't do homework. (4.00 / 1)


Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I wish we could flip the inexperience (4.00 / 2)
argument. Make this about judgment not experience. And McCain, not Palin.

The fact is, her foreign police judgement's better than McCain's.

McCain said we'd be greeted as liberators. Palin didn't.
McCain sang about bombing Iran. Palin didn't.
McCain wants 100 years in Iraq. Palin wanted an exit plan in 2006.
McCain shot his mouth off about the situation in Georgie. Palin remained wisely silent.
Etc., etc.

The fact is, from the evidence we've seen, her foreign policy judgment truly is better than McCain's. She's more qualified to be C-in-C. That's not just snark, that's true. A completely blank slate--with the exception of a little crusader-type action re. God's warriors--is better than McCain.

Now that, more even than hypocrisy, is what I'd like to see.


She will soon be McCain's neocon mini-me. (4.00 / 1)
She is now studying "at the foot of the master." All common sense will be scrubbed out of her.

miasmo.com

[ Parent ]
But isn't that a good way to attack (0.00 / 0)
him through her? If I were Biden, say, I'd be trumpeting just how much more sensible she is on foreign policy--having said nothing--than McCain is, given his unstable temperment and all.

Of course, um, there's a reason Obama didn't tap me for VP ...


[ Parent ]
my prediction of the convention speech (4.00 / 2)
Palin will come out swinging and surprise everybody with her aggressiveness and energy. She'll spit out a string of anti-Obama, anti-Democrat lies and smears that will make Karl Rove get jiggy with joy. She'll play the victim who is bravely holding her head high when the sexist elitist media is trying to destroy her and her family.

I don't think that's going to work (4.00 / 1)
I don't think that she can use this speech to do all the things you mentioned.  She's been put in an unfortunate circumstance, she has to coddle Hillary supporters, appear composed and intelligent, and lay down themes that will dominate the press coverage of her for the next two months.

I doubt this will include much policy -- why start now?

I don't see how she can be aggressive and energetic and simultaneously the victim in the same night.  Trying to do both of these things will just muddy the message, whatever that may be.

I'm going to watch.


[ Parent ]
same here (4.00 / 1)
Everyone from the Obama campaign down to the "progressive media" has been pushing the "inexperienced", "laughable", "lightweight", "desperate" line. Then Maureen Dowd today summed up the viciously sexist storyline coming out of the media. If Palin can give as good as she's been getting people will see her as a far more formidable figure.

Palin's policies are atrocious, our side walked right into the trap of attacking the woman instead of her positions.


[ Parent ]
Really? (0.00 / 0)
Everyone from the Obama campaign down

The only comments I've heard from the Obama campaign are along the lines of "McCain caved to the extreme right wing." A perfect response in my opinion. Nothing sexist or "attacking the woman instead of her positions."

miasmo.com


[ Parent ]
Right. (4.00 / 1)
The inexperience angle is definitely not the winner.

As has been pointed out on various blogs, the single biggest problem with the Palin pick is that it obviously show a horrendous lack of judgment and poor decision-making skills on the part of John McCain.  The facts that 1) she was a champion of obtaining federal earmarks, 2) doesn't believe global warming is attributable to man-made causes, 3) supported windfall profits taxes on oil companies, 4) capriciously fired a librarian who wouldn't ban books, etc. are all very damning.  None of this lines up with McCain's image.

The story should be ALL ABOUT MCCAIN.  He's proven himself unfit to make critical decisions on behalf of the entire country.  That's the story.


Lest we forget (4.00 / 1)
Sarah Palin has more executive experience than John McCain, too. Besides his campaigns, what else has he run?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


Yes! (0.00 / 0)
I have seen an endless parade of McCain surrogates touting her "executive experience" implying inherent superiority of executive experience over legislative experience. Not one single pundit has managed to stumble across the obvious response: "Ummm... doesn't that mean Palin's experience tops McCain's too?"

miasmo.com

[ Parent ]
Not Hypocricy, Incompetence: McCain = Brownie (4.00 / 2)
Heckuva job Brownie McCain!

Look, a key component of America's hatred of Bush and the GOP is that they're incompetent at actual governing. They hate it. Don't like it. Aren't any good at it. This is a point Kos has made many times over. Set aside differences about size of government, people want want the government functions they approve of to, you know, actually work. Bush/GOP = Epic Fail in that regard.

Now, look at the McCain campaign. In and out of bankruptcy last fall. Six months to choose a VP and they settle on Palin. Vetting? Hell, Brownie did a better job of getting Katrina victims water. Message to America, 'Experience Matters,' oops, never mind. McCain is just as incompetent as Bush -- maybe more so.

It's the Incompetence, Stupid! The gang that can't shoot straight wants to replace that gang that shoots America in the face. If he can't run a campaign, how can he run America? It's just more of the same...

"Heckuva job, McCain!"  That's what I want to hear tonight from our surrogates on TV. They nominated Brownie...

"Don't take much, does it, elected Democrats, to get your balls tucked up." Cf.


She'll do just fine (4.00 / 1)
By all accounts, Palin is a smart and capable (and corrupt) politician.  She started out as a sportscaster, and is probably a better public speaker than McCain.  Granted, that hurdle is pretty low at this point.  If she's likable tonight, then there's a chance the American people will forgive her for her sins, so to speak.  The damage to Palin will probably be fixed.  After all, aside from Troopergate (the gift that keeps on giving), much of the "scandals" are the result of sharp edges that she hasn't had time to file down.  If this were 2016, Palin would be a much more formidable opponent.  We're lucky on that account.

But that's hardly the point. Time is the ultimate zero-sum resource, and the more time spent defending Palin, the less time McCain and crew can make their case to the American people.  The RNC had four days to explain why they should remain in charge - two of those days have already been wasted.  By the look of things, today won't be much of a highlight either.

Additionally, Palin is now Obama's shield on every vein of attack because McCain is presenting her as being presidential.  So when McCain attacks Obama's experience, Obama can counter by saying that he has more experience than Palin.  Obama has Wright, Palin has her nut-case preacher.  Michelle Obama said something that wasn't 1000% patriotic, well, Palin's husband belonged to an anti-American group.  And so on.  Palin defuses every attack.


Is it time for a search engine optimization project? (0.00 / 0)
focused on Palin?  Searches for her are off the charts right now.


Its the recklessness (0.00 / 0)
People don't care enough about hypocrisy -- it won't stick long -- since they expect it of politicians, and he certainly is one.  (And the right wing has always been hypocritical -- their standards are only for the left to be pilloried on.)

It is the lack of vetting, etc.  because it shows recklessness.

This is an impulsive, reckless and irresponsible decision.  This is not presidential material.  This attacks McCain's core perceived strength of being a "maverick" by turning it into a liability (see K Rove rulebook).


Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search