The narratives for this November’s elections and November 2012 are now almost set. The “raise money for smear ads” Obama Dimocratic strategy is in play. Obama Dimocrats want every voter to forget that the issue this November is Barack Obama. The way to accomplish this is by fear and smear.
In Delaware the strategy is to call Christine O’Donnell a “witch” and forget that the Obama Dimocratic candidate is Harry Reid’s “pet”. Obama Dimocrats will try to use Christine O’Donnell as a can of paint to color all opposition candidates. The Republican establishment, desperate to hold on to power, is busy with their own tried and true methods as well.
Courtesy of the JournoListers at Politico we now know how the Republican establishment views Sarah Palin and how they will marginalize her. Tony Perkins, not the actor from the film Psycho, but Tony Perkins, the President of the Family Research Council clued everyone in this weekend. How the psychos plan to handle Sarah Palin:
“Palin’s poor finish in the presidential balloting but solid second in the vice-presidential contest appeared to reflect the view of some activists on the right who like her more as a rabble-rouser than a president, said Perkins.
“I think she’s a great spokesman,” Perkins said, adding that “she says what a lot of people think.”
“But you know a lot of people sometimes realize we shouldn’t say everything we think,” he continued. “Maybe it is that she is more of a cheerleader and one who rallies conservatives together as opposed maybe to being their top choice for president.”
Get it? Cheerleader! Get it? ‘The little woman talks too much without thinking and besides she’s not like the players on the field, she’s just there to cheer on the boys! That idiot George W. Bush was a cheerleader too and that did not work out so well.’ Get it now? Sarah Palin according to the psychos is not a player she’s just a cheerleader on the sidelines cheering on the big boys. Left or Right, Right or Left, the sexism and misogyny is the same.
Now we know how they will attack Sarah Palin – put some pom-poms on the preeetee little thing, a nice tight fitting sweater to highlight her curves, and the little woman is in her place. This is a smart strategy of diminishment because it acknowledges Palin’s physical attractiveness, and at the same time puts her obvious power to persuade into the much lower rank of cheerleader at the sidelines not player in the field. It’s a very clever strategy which seeks to counter Palin’s “Mama Grizzley” brand yet keep her making sandwiches and phone calls and stuffing envelopes and be the good little cheerleader she is.
[For another view of how Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin are targets of the same forces read this analysis HERE.]
But does this look like a sideline pretty girl willing to only cheer on the boys and not take the ball and run with it herself?”
The tactics they used (and by that we mean psychos like Tony Perkins) against Hillary Clinton for decades are the tactics the Obama psychos used against Hillary Clinton in 2007/2008. They’re (the psychos Obama and Perkins) still using the same tactics against Hillary and any woman who gets in their way. But Sarah Palin has the Hillary Clinton example to guide her and now Hillary Clinton has the Sarah Palin example to guide her as well.
The goal of the psychos is to keep Sarah Palin supporters and Hillary Clinton supporters from understanding their common goals. The enemy for both groups is the sexism and misogyny that will be deployed to attack both candidates.
Hillary Clinton must learn from Sarah Palin about the growing irrelevance of Big Media. Sarah Palin must learn from Hillary Clinton the subtle arts of warfare. Sarah Palin delights in mocking and slapping her opponents. Hillary Clinton has a much softer touch. A combination of the two approaches is desirable for both future candidates.
“I have seen a lot of people run for office and say a lot of things and then when they have the burden of holding office and the responsibility that goes with it, I’ve seen them become very sobered very quickly about the challenges we face domestically and internationally,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on ABC’s “This Week.”
Hillary Clinton is not talking about the Tea Party movement. Hillary Clinton is taking aim at Barack Obama.
Again, read our discussion of this Hillary Clinton interview and you will see, no matter how much Big Media and the Obama psychos try to market Hillary Clinton as a sidelined player, Hillary Clinton still gets her message out.
It’s amazing how much vetting there is of Christine O’Donnell. Barack Obama was never vetted thus.
We must reveal our bias here. We do not think much of Christine O’Donnell. We hold her at the same level of esteem as we hold Arriana Huffington. This is to say – very very low. There is something cloying and dishonest and opportunistic about her that reminds us not only of the Huff n’ Puffer but of Barack Obama as well. But we understand why Delaware Republicans and many Republicans/conservatives chose her over Mike Castle even though Castle was a supposed shoo-in as Senator and would have increased the already strong likelihood of a Republican takeover of the U.S. Senate. The people at HotAir explain why O’Donnell was a much better choice for them than Castle:
“I think many high-information voters see things this way: if we can retake the House and achieve a blocking minority in the Senate – both of which are increasingly probable, even if O’Donnell loses in Delaware – Congress can act as a check on Obama until January 2013.
On the other hand, a RINO-heavy Congressional majority would be likely to set Obama’s course in stone – e.g., with only marginal changes to Obamacare, with some version of amnesty and some version of cap-and-trade – and actually make the Obama agenda harder to decouple from down the road.
The Republicans who would take over as a majority in 2011 just aren’t convincing to a lot of voters. The voters aren’t stupid; they’re using their votes for their own purposes. It’s not a knock on Karl Rove that his electoral advice has been overruled. It’s a signal that something much bigger is going on, and the rules have gone out the window. Expertise with running campaigns is secondary right now. In first place is a candidate’s message – and the people are listening with a very critical ear. They’ve left their party’s, and nation’s, direction on autopilot for a long time now, but they’re no longer willing to. Their vote is the one thing they have direct, personal control over, and they’re using it to do what they want to do.”
This is a very logical position. Obama Dimocrats deride the Joe Lieberman’s and the Ben Nelson’s in their caucus when it comes to legislative votes. But these Obama Dimocrats love it when Lieberman and Nelson vote with them in the first vote of a congress which gives them control of the institution and all those lovely big offices and all those lovely big budgets and lovely big perks. What O’Donnell supporters understood was that O’Donnell was a sure vote for them on the policy issues that matter to them. Who gets the big offices and control of the Senate was less important to these O’Donnell voters and supporters. It’s an entirely logical position especially considering the likelihood of Republican control of the House of Representatives which would provide the subpoena power to conduct investigations.
Even putting aside our distaste for Christine O’Donnell it still cannot be denied that in the last century O’Donnell did and/or said some very stupid things. Her excuses are not entirely convincing but they do have some currency with those who make excuses for youthful indiscretions.
“How many of you didn’t hang out with questionable folks in high school?” she asked fellow Republicans at a GOP picnic in southern Delaware on Sunday. “There’s been no witchcraft since. If there was, Karl Rove would be a supporter now,” O’Donnell jokingly assured the crowd.”
O’Donnell provided the opening and now from the Left and the Right the “she’s a witch” narrative is used to attack her. All powerful women and even not so powerful women who display ambition are attacked as witches. A powerful woman who does not use potions and charms to work her wicked ways is something that cannot be understood nor allowed.
That in the last century O’Donnell went on TV shows to exhibit her foolishness cannot be denied. That her playmates on these sad shows included Arriana Huffington, Bill Maher and (Huffington enabler) Al Franken makes her even more foolish and even more of an exhibitionist than we can tolerate. Now O’Donnell’s youthful foolishness and indiscretions are catching up with her via Maher’s threats to release more video of his insipid TV show when she was a guest. These distractions will hurt O’Donnell and her supporters because they confuse the voters and confound a discussion of the issues.
But these distractions and confusions will not be as hurtful as they appear to be now. The issue in the elections of 2010 are not Christine O’Donnell and her dubious qualifications to be a United States Senator. The issue is, was and will be – Barack Obama.
We applaud the vetting of Christine O’Donnell. What matters in any election is the voter, not the candidate. Screw the candidate. Screw Hillary Clinton, screw Bill Clinton, screw Barack Obama, screw George W. Bush, screw Ronald Reagan, screw Abe Lincoln, screw Frankie Roosevelt – it the voters that matter and the voters deserve all the information they need about a candidate to make an informed vote.
In fact the reason why Christine O’Donnell might get elected despite all the flaws the vetting will reveal about her is that voters are increasingly aware that they don’t know who Barack Obama is, was, or will be. Christine O’Donnell as a reliable Republican vote might be the way for voters to get some of those answers about Barack Obama. The results of the vetting of Christine O’Donnell might not mean much because what the voters now crave, in this moment of uncertainty about who exactly Barack Obama is, is a vetting of Barack Obama.
Recall when Harry Reid said: “I’m going to be very honest with you — Chris Coons, everybody knows him in the Democratic caucus. He’s my pet. He’s my favorite candidate.” “I’ve always thought Chris Coons is going to win. I told him that and I tried to get him to run. I’m glad he’s running. I just think the world of him. He’s my pet.”
We can only recall another Reid pet – Barack Obama. Barack Obama was petted, not vetted. Harry Reid pretended to be a neutral in 2008 but he was out to help his pet. Now the unvetted pet is making a mess on the Oval Office floor and all over the nation.
Harry Reid has all sorts of plots (especially on immigration) going to try to keep his job. Like Lisa Murkowski Harry just can’t let go of his job even though jobless voters in Nevada plan to throw him out. Americans are exhausted. Americans are exhausted of Harry Reid and Lisa Murkowski and Barack Obama. Middle class Americans are exhausted of Barack Obama (even this middle class African-American woman):
“I’m one of your middle class Americans. And quite frankly, I’m exhausted. Exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for,” a woman told President Obama at a town hall.
“My husband and I have joked for years that we thought we were well beyond the hot dogs and beans era of our lives, but, quite frankly, it’s starting to knock on our door and ring true that that might be where we’re headed again, and, quite frankly, Mr. President, I need you to answer this honestly. Is this my new reality?,” she added.”
The entire country is exhausted of the unvetted pet and in fear that the American Dream is dead at the hands of the unqualified and untested and unvetted pet.