MUST. . .FRAME. . .THE ISSUE. . .
SOOOO many possible applications to this title that it makes one wonder exactly what I'm talking about.
Well, today I'm applying it to Michelle Obama. I'm sure I'll use it again at some other point in the campaign--we have a long one ahead of us, that's for sure--but for today, I'm writing about the lovely Missus.
The Tennessee GOP has aired an ad bringing to light Mrs. Obama's "I haven't truly been proud of my country" comments.
In the aftermath, conversation has focused on one thing: is it fair to attack Michelle Obama?
And I am yelling and screaming EVERY TIME I see a "conservative" engaged in a tit-for-tat exchange with a liberal that falls into the trap.
Listen, this isn't about Michelle Obama.
This is about AN agent of the Obama campaign--ANY agent--saying these things.
Would we care what Michelle thinks if she wasn't the presumptive nominee's wife? Absolutely not. I get that.
But DO NOT let this even remotely appear as a personal attack on the Missus.
When asked "is it all right to attack the candidate's wife", respond "this isn't about the exact person who said this, this is about ANY key speaker in the Obama camp feeling a lack of pride in the country, and saying that they will ONLY feel pride if we elect Obama to the White House". Heck, there's even a great chance there to play into the identity politics game, by substituting "Obama" for "a black", "a man", or --dare I say it-- "a black man".
Obama is doing one thing very well right now (well, until yesterday with the whole appeasement issue): he's letting his assets in the campaign, which include the mainstream media, do a lot of the dirty work so he himself can stay above the fray.
How that strategy must be attacked is by attaching all these ridiculous words that are coming from his camp back TO THE CANDIDATE HIMSELF. So don't let MICHELLE be the one associated with the Proud comments--make it "an agent of the Obama campaign" and try our best to force the candidate to endorse or distance himself from those remarks. Don't let Dr. Susan Rice be the one who EVEN DISCUSSES what a "precondition" means--just keep DIRECT QUOTING what Obama himself has said on numerous times, keep those words in the media, and force the man to eventually address the issue.
Listen, Sen. Obama is going to get a "free pass" out of scrutiny from a lot of groups from now until November. But we conservatives do not have to be one of those givers of the free pass.
SO, in sum: when asked "is it all right to attack the candidate's wife" by a moderator, I am hopeful that some of the apparent conservatives that appear on these programs respond by saying that "we absolutely think that every word spoken in public gatherings ABOUT AMERICA by a representative of the Obama camp is worthy of dissection and wider dissemination."
Make the issue about accountability and not about "attacks". PLEASE!!!!
Well, today I'm applying it to Michelle Obama. I'm sure I'll use it again at some other point in the campaign--we have a long one ahead of us, that's for sure--but for today, I'm writing about the lovely Missus.
The Tennessee GOP has aired an ad bringing to light Mrs. Obama's "I haven't truly been proud of my country" comments.
In the aftermath, conversation has focused on one thing: is it fair to attack Michelle Obama?
And I am yelling and screaming EVERY TIME I see a "conservative" engaged in a tit-for-tat exchange with a liberal that falls into the trap.
Listen, this isn't about Michelle Obama.
This is about AN agent of the Obama campaign--ANY agent--saying these things.
Would we care what Michelle thinks if she wasn't the presumptive nominee's wife? Absolutely not. I get that.
But DO NOT let this even remotely appear as a personal attack on the Missus.
When asked "is it all right to attack the candidate's wife", respond "this isn't about the exact person who said this, this is about ANY key speaker in the Obama camp feeling a lack of pride in the country, and saying that they will ONLY feel pride if we elect Obama to the White House". Heck, there's even a great chance there to play into the identity politics game, by substituting "Obama" for "a black", "a man", or --dare I say it-- "a black man".
Obama is doing one thing very well right now (well, until yesterday with the whole appeasement issue): he's letting his assets in the campaign, which include the mainstream media, do a lot of the dirty work so he himself can stay above the fray.
How that strategy must be attacked is by attaching all these ridiculous words that are coming from his camp back TO THE CANDIDATE HIMSELF. So don't let MICHELLE be the one associated with the Proud comments--make it "an agent of the Obama campaign" and try our best to force the candidate to endorse or distance himself from those remarks. Don't let Dr. Susan Rice be the one who EVEN DISCUSSES what a "precondition" means--just keep DIRECT QUOTING what Obama himself has said on numerous times, keep those words in the media, and force the man to eventually address the issue.
Listen, Sen. Obama is going to get a "free pass" out of scrutiny from a lot of groups from now until November. But we conservatives do not have to be one of those givers of the free pass.
SO, in sum: when asked "is it all right to attack the candidate's wife" by a moderator, I am hopeful that some of the apparent conservatives that appear on these programs respond by saying that "we absolutely think that every word spoken in public gatherings ABOUT AMERICA by a representative of the Obama camp is worthy of dissection and wider dissemination."
Make the issue about accountability and not about "attacks". PLEASE!!!!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home