Key Task: Isolate and Divide the Right
Progressives and Antiwar Movement Must Weigh in Independently
September 13, 2008 - A principle reason for Progressives For Obama is so that we can say things that the Obama campaign cannot or will not say.
This is one of those times.
1.Sarah Palin is a mortal threat to the possibility of Obama winning. The reason is simple: if she can add a couple of points to McCain from defecting white women and the newly-energized right wing religious base without losing more independent votes, McCain pulls ahead in some key states.
The dangerous tendency of the Obama campaign and its Democratic surrogates is to not fight back, but treat Palin as a "distraction" from McCain, the economy, the issues they feel familiar with, etc.
If they assume that the Palin bubble will return to earth naturally, or that the mainstream media and Saturday Night Live will do the job for them, the Obama campaign is mistaken.
There needs to be a controlled message that treats Palin as an extension of McCain, not a bobble-head to be laughed at.
The message has to cut off independent and women's support for McCain-Palin and, if possible, divide some of the right-wingers. Not an easy task.
Perhaps the point is that we've already suffered eight years under a president Bush and vice-president Cheney who were, in Palin's words, so "wired in a way to be committed to the mission" that they could neither blink nor think.
An excellent editorial in Sunday's NY Times makes the connection from McCain to Palin in terms that will reach independent and moderate voters. It should be quoted and widely circulated. The choice of an unqualified candidate to be a heartbeat from the presidency of a 72 year old man with four melanomas "was shockingly irresponsible", the Times said.
I think we can see in McCain-Palin a kind of faith- based extremism that reminds us of Bush and, even more, the persona of Gen. Custer.
We have seen where righteous faith-based politics goes in the Supreme Court decisions, corruption scandals, the official lies, and the unnecessary wars of the past eight years, all carried out in the name of what both McCain and Palin now call "God's plan."
We should say, In the name of God, stop them!
2. The McCain-Palin foreign policy is a mortal threat from the same neoconservatives who brought us
This is apparently not the advice of the biggest Democratic heavyweights like Bill Clinton and James Carville who tend to revert to "it's the economy, stupid." But it's not 1992. It's the 9/11 era, the Iraq War era, the War on Terrorism era - and also the middle of the worse economic and energy crisis in memory. The issues are tied together. Not enough people will vote on "lunch bucket" issues if they think McCain-Palin will protect them from terrorists, but they might vote against McCain-Palin if they think they are being lied to again.
The war is not being won. That's why Petraeus wants to keep 140,000 troops in
Under McCain-Palin, the same neo-conservatives who fabricated the pretext for invading Iraq will only take us into more quagmires - Afghanistan, Pakistan, Georgia, maybe Iran - that will bleed our troops and our economy without an end in sight.
Palin's brazen neocon advisers repeated the original Iraq lie - that Saddam was behind 9/11 - in the scripted speech she gave to her son's troops as they departed for the war zone: "You'll be there to defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the deaths of thousands of Americans." [NYT, Sept. 14]
Bush-Cheney obviously are trying to scare enough voters into supporting McCain-Palin amidst a rising national security crisis. The Democrats and the media are helping them by accepting
So the clear promise of McCain-Palin is there will be blood. The fact that they scoff at Obama at the mere mention of diplomacy [despite their own talking to Russia, Iran, etc] presents an opening to describe them as what they are: extremists in the tradition of Bush- Cheney for whom war seems to be a first option. McCain was there on an aircraft carrier screaming "Next stop, Baghdad!" in 2002 as if it was Vietnam in 1967. Palin says she's wired to win the war without blinking. That's also why McCain on two occasions this year has spoken favorably of resuming the compulsory military draft. Independents and young first-time voters should pay attention to these issues.
The peace movement which provided the platform that made Obama's candidacy possible in 2002 cannot afford to let that advantage be squandered by Democrats this fall. The upcoming September 20 Million Doors for Peace campaign is a good way to begin spreading the word.



Caricatures
By Casten, J.D. at Sep 19, 2008 18:04 PM
To Tom Porch—I like your logical approach to weighing the factors, but comparing the difference between Democrats & Republicans with the chances of establishing a solid third party is like comparing apples and oranges. Although not a right-libertarian, I like the Libertarian party’s history of gaining offices at a local level. The Green Party has grown fast, and this year is not willing to compromise with targeted states—but why so much emphasis on the impossible presidency? This seems at odds with the grass-roots approach they seek. Maybe it’s for media expediency—a short-cut to growing the party?
Reply this comment
Insultingly stupid
By Tech, Matt at Sep 19, 2008 14:22 PM
What is this "peace movement" Hayden refers to? MoveOn? DailyKos? Please. Any "peace movement" backing Obama must be hopelessly delusional. Obama proposes shifting resources from one imperial slaughter (Iraq) to another (Afghanistan) while increasing the military budget.
Reply this comment
Re: Insultingly stupid
By Porch, Tom at Sep 19, 2008 15:56 PM
Reply this comment
By Donahue, Paul at Sep 19, 2008 10:02 AM
"A principle reason for Progressives for Obama is that we can say things that the Obama Campaign cannot or will not say"
Say what?
The bizarre logic behind this statement are breathtaking! What in the world could such a statement mean?
Reply this comment
Re: exactly, Donahue
By McGehee, Michael at Sep 19, 2008 12:10 PM
Reply this comment
Re:
By Beringer-Newlin, Gretchen at Sep 19, 2008 12:28 PM
Reply this comment
Strategy, Obama and Hayden
By Davidson, Carl at Sep 19, 2008 14:57 PM
Reply this comment
Re: Strategy, Obama and Hayden
By Porch, Tom at Sep 19, 2008 16:26 PM
Reply this comment