29 posts tagged “republican party”

I am being fair and balanced here by airing one video that attempts to paint Republican supporters in a poor light after the previous video that did the same to Democrats. This was from al-Jazeera English and the network itself critiqued it on Listening Post after there were complaints and accusations of bias. Please note that the n word is used.

I’ve been having a think about the hatchet-job that Gov. Palin is getting, surprisingly, from the Murdoch Press, specifically its Fox News Channel arm. Considering that she was championed by this network after her selection by the party (over Sen. McCain’s own choice of Sen. Joe Lieberman, who even my Democratic friends felt would have been a better choice to win moderate voters), the about-face shows a level of deceit either now, or before, by the media company.
   While there may have been some gentlemen’s agreement over concealing this information till after the election, I don’t think I have seen the Murdoch Press go after a political figure in quite this fashion since Hard Copy did its exposés on Sen. Ted Kennedy in the 1980s.
   To be fair, even Newsweek, on the left, has kept mum about matters till now, and I imagine other media outlets have done the same in order to maintain their access to the candidates.
   We are hearing some things about the Democrats and we now know that Sen. Obama isn’t above swearing, but overall the post-mortem, even in the conservative press, has been relatively muted about the winning side.
   But not against Gov. Sarah Palin.
   It also shows a disloyalty within the Republican Party that is not becoming of it, if it wishes to be seen as a party that was unjustly cheated out of the election this week.
   In 2000, Democrats could point to the recount process in Florida and the alliance between the state’s Attorney-General Katherine Harris and the Republican Party as having taken the presidency from Al Gore.
   This time, the divide that has occurred might leave Republicans thinking that the disunity in the party cost them the election, and they were beaten by Democrats who hid their divisions better. They may fairly and rightly point to the media as being complicit in giving Sen. Obama a free ride, just as Conservatives in Britain could in 1997, but the reality may be that there was something rotten within the GOP.
   I can’t believe campaign aides and workers coming out and breaching a level of trust by revealing such details as Gov. Palin coming to greet them in a towel, and having this make the news pages.
   Even the supposed hatred by Sen. Clinton’s campaigners for Sen. Obama stayed relatively under the radar, either by a cooperative liberal media or by a sense of loyalty to the Democratic Party.
   We’re hearing news of the Governor’s tantrums and that the $150,000 shopping spree may have been more expensive than first thought.
   This is a personal attack on her that shows party workers who can’t maintain any sense of dignity and trust.
   Importantly, you do not see someone of the standing and decency of Sen. John McCain rubbish his running-mate.
   If this division has been inspired by higher-ups in the Republican Party, then Americans might be fortunate that this version of the GOP did not get into power on November 4.
   One may argue that it is our right to know, and maybe it is. But the pace of this so-called knowledge being disseminated points to a party that is acting out sour grapes and playing the blame game a little too soon, and I find it troubling.
   Every party says it will regroup after a loss. It is fair to note that the loss that the Republicans suffered was in fact very small, given how they were outspent by the Democrats to such a degree. At this stage, I do not think there will be much re-evaluation of where it will lead, because I am not sure if the Party itself realizes where it wishes to head. It may need to rebrand much later, but for now, it hasn’t been able to protect its own from this onslaught—and may well have caused it.

The Fox News folks have now joined in the Sarah Palin-bashing, which is a surprise. Some cynics who smell a rat say that the Murdoch-owned network is merely ensuring that Gov. Palin does not have a chance at another run because she alienated too many moderate Republicans. But having Republicans as friends, I know that many supported the Governor because they shared her value system, and some even said they only voted for Sen. McCain because Gov. Palin was on the ticket.
   The GOP might well be a divided party and we have seen these divisions before, with George Bush (the 41st president) who appealed too much to the moderates, and with the primaries this time around that saw former Govs. Huckabee and Romney only managing to get partial support from the party.
   Before some say that the Murdoch Press has covered this up till after the election, there does seem to have been some agreement internally to not reveal a lot of the behind-the-scenes stuff till the day after on both sides. Even Newsweek is now revealing a lot and I am told its video has then-Sen. Obama swearing.
   Whatever the case, I’m not sure if it’s wise for the Murdoch Press, if it is a GOP instrument as its critics say (its boss has always denied this) to be doing something that might divide the party.
   Or, was K. R. M. always right and that it’s being ‘fair and balanced’?
   I am always concerned when one politician is vilified to this extent. I have seen it in other countries, against people on the left and on the right. It’s dangerous stuff, and contributes to revisionism.
   I might not agree with the Governor on some of her positions, her lack of humility, or even her campaigning technique, but if some things sound too much like a tall tale, then they probably are. I don’t think we have seen the last of Gov. Palin; we might indeed see, and I know there is a lot of Bush fatigue out there, John Ellis Bush or even George Prescott Bush make runs somewhere down the line.
   Democrats might hope not—or they might hope so, if this will help ensure them a victory.
   Less likely things have happened. Remember, Marvin Bush once said of his eldest brother, ‘George is the family clown,’ and that he was unlikely to run for office.
   You just never know.

Sen. Joe Biden and the Obama campaign have cancelled all interviews with this Florida TV station after getting fired a few tough questions that Sen. Barack Obama would have dealt with very easily. He dealt with them sufficiently but cancelling further interviews with the channel?
   I never understood, and still do not understand, why this man is Sen. Obama’s running-mate. I have always had my doubts about Sen. Biden, long before his nomination, and the pettiness of the Obama campaign staffers that I have written about has shown itself once again.
   Come on, even Gov. Sarah Palin isn’t above returning to unfriendly networks and channels for the McCain campaign.

[Cross-posted] I was reading Karl Rove’s commentary on Sarah Palin today and he hit upon a few things I agree with (you read that correctly).

McCain–Palin must deepen those doubts by pounding away on questions about Obama’s character, judgment and values. Drawing on Obama’s own record and statements, they need to paint him as a big spender, class warrior and cultural elitist; they need to say he’s never worked across party lines or gotten his hands dirty solving big issues. But the duo must also give voters reasons to support them. They must crystallize a positive, forward-looking vision so people who see Obama as unqualified have something to hang on to. It can’t be a laundry list of positions. McCain–Palin must offer a narrative about what they will do to help America see better days, especially on kitchen-table concerns.

   This is a lesson that comes up in branding, a lot.
   One of the necessary things we branding consultants always talk about is story-telling. There have to be legends in the company, things that become company folklore. The Murdoch Press has plenty of stories to tell, for example, about how one of its newspapers ran a piece about Elvis, coincidentally on the story of the King’s death. I still talk about the way the Lucire name came up, which probably paints to the way serendipity works inside an organization. TV3 probably has one on John Campbell’s tie.
   Stories unite people, and Rove’s belief that the McCain campaign must give a ‘forward-looking vision’ and a ‘narrative’ come straight out of a branding book. Maybe one of mine.
   Vision is important, and there have been other posts on that. But an easily grasped narrative goes beyond slogans. While the stories I refer to above come from the past, in an election campaign, candidates need to paint one about the future. We know the McCain legend of being a POW; we know Palin paints herself as a hockey mom. These form the background, but people need to buy into the sequel.
   Especially when one campaign is less well off than another. The Republicans are being outspent by the Democrats, so a consistent, continuous story about how the McCain–Palin principles will, in short soundbites, rescue America can have a great effect against their opponents.
   Big spending allows for promotions around the cult of personality; small spending needs cleverer ideas and stories are one of the better techniques open to supporting a brand.

Just after I commented on another blog that Republicans were generally more civilized when arguing for their candidate, I hear that some have chanted death threats against Sen. Obama. Way to go. (I am being sarcastic.)
   And now, there’s news from The Times—from the same owner as Fox News—that indicates a philosophical split inside the campaign.
   Paikea, who is a Vox friend of mine here and who is a Democratic supporter, blogged a reference to an article that painted Gov. Palin as narcissistic. And that, I have to concur, summarizes some of the more disturbing elements about her that I could not identify.
   It appears, according to The Times, that John McCain is merely an inconvenience in the presidential run of Sarah Palin.
   Rallies now have gone from something resembling a tiny senatorial race for Sen. McCain to mass crowds after Gov. Palin’s arrival. And she knows that that’s her contribution, using it to her advantage. She knows that there were many holding back from supporting Sen. McCain because of his RINO image.
   Even when there are divisions among the Democrats, as there is today between Sens. Obama and the Clinton family, they aren’t stupid enough to air their dirty laundry in front of the world.
   I have expressed my doubts about Sen. Joe Biden, believing that he is a typical Beltway type who is not going to listen to a black senator. Sen. Obama might be labelled a visionary by his allies—so does that mean that Sen. Biden is going to be the details man, in which case it’s going to be more of the same politicking? His record indicates yes, and I think there’s going to be a power-play if the Democrats get in.
   But the Democrats successfully hid their rifts in 2004, with their whole party behind Sen. John Kerry, never mind what was there behind the scenes.
   I know the Governor’s words excite a group of Republicans, but for all the criticisms of militant Democrats, the parties are looking more and more similar in the behaviours these candidates are eliciting among their audiences.
   I am not sure if this could be called inspirational.
   While there is nothing technically wrong with a vice-presidential nominee overshadowing a presidential one, the presidency, if the Republicans took the White House, is John McCain’s, not Sarah Palin’s—and as a former navy captain I am sure he would not desire insubordination.
   In the Republicans’ defence, one could argue that Gov. Palin had to get tough in opposing the Democrats for the easy ride Sen. Obama has been getting in the media.
   While another Democratic friend of mine says the ACORN furore is a horrid smear campaign, I cannot imagine a Republican candidate getting off fairly scot free on issues like that of the Tony Retzko connection or Sen. Obama’s nationality whilst in Indonesia. (The media were, as I have once said, quick to endorse the Killian memoranda against President George W. Bush, even if it was remarkably easy for a professional like me to pinpoint the cut of the Times typeface and what laser printer they came off.)
   I don’t believe that Sen. Obama is not American, that his middle name is Mohammed, or that possible dual nationality prevents his run under Art. II, s. 1 of the US Constitution. However, the secrecy surrounding a possible Indonesian nationality (still not answered, from what I can tell) and his 1961 birth certificate (versus a certification) should concern the fourth estate as well as US voters.
   Since Sen. McCain was unwilling to conduct a dishonourable campaign, or so he claims (does he truly ‘approve this message’?), he might be unwilling to throw accusations that are not fully checked. Gov. Palin may well have taken the initiative with attacks, using less evidence than the Senator would find comfortable.
   And since the Republicans themselves have had their share of attacks without much of a defence in the media, the Governor may well think she needs to get headlines if she’s going to get the GOP POV in the news.
   Conclusion: both sides are split, one more openly than the other.
   As a foreign observer, the campaign has arrived at a new low, not because of any one side, but because no matter who Americans vote I am not certain there will be much real change. (I feel the same, incidentally, about Labour–National in New Zealand, hence my third-party run.)
   Attitudes on both sides do not set a presidential example for Americans internally, or inspire confidence in allies and observers externally.
   It’s hardly up to McCain and Obama. I think their number twos are calling the shots in a very unwarranted way—one after the election if the Democrats get in; the other before the election, acting as though it were her campaign and John McCain is her vice-presidential running-mate. Neither is ideal, and both are worrisome.

The trouble with the Obama surname from a humour point-of-view is that the senator from Illinois and his wife are the two most famous people bearing it. There are no others who are comparable.
   For example, antipodeans can keep using ‘Ah, McCain, you’ve done it again!’ to tie in with a food company in Australia.
   With Sarah Palin, there are countless Monty Python references through Michael Palin, e.g. Michael Palin in Pole to Pole, Sarah Palin in Poll to Poll.
   On the other side, Joe Biden is way tougher name-wise to get gags going. There are already 43,000-plus Google references to the most obvious, ‘Biden time’.
   I heard, ‘Once Biden, twice shy,’ but you have to change a word to fit.
   Similarly, I know we have Obamanomics and words like that but they are not that punny.
   Even last time the Democrats gave us Teresa Heinz Kerry, the wife of the Massachusetts senator, so we could say Beantown meanz Heinz. Not very funny but tolerable.
   And ask David Letterman for any jokes relating to Clinton.
   The Dems have taken out so much of the potential humour in the names in ’08. (Republican headline: ‘Democrats rob US of humor: national laugh index would drop under Obama’.)

Hey, the Governor is right: the Washington Memorial looks nothing like him!
   I am not sure who the actor is, but he does a good impersonation of Gov. Schwarzenegger. The lines are excellent.

[Cross-posted] I now think Biden, McCain, Obama and Palin have had me direct a joke at them. I am an equal opportunity critic.

It’s been a while (a year?) since I gave a TV interview—the al-Jazeera spots don’t count because the question is prepared long beforehand and I have had a day (or days) to get ready.
   Yesterday, Nick Wang fired a few good questions my way, not just on the Republic of China’s anniversary but about my political candidacy, for both Sky TV and state television over in Taiwan.
   Folks, I must have done a few Sarah Palins: providing a single answer without taking intermediate breaths.
   It’s funny what happens when the camera goes on. And you feel compelled to give an answer because you have been taught that it’s courteous.
   I have to say that was the first time I was interviewed with my political hat on, and it was a bit weird.
   I think the last time I talked politics on TV I was making fun of Sen. John McCain in 2006.
   I can talk all I like about publishing, branding and typography (with or without breathing) but these were new waters for me. I know my patch, I know most of my party’s policies, I know what some voters are thinking in wanting a change from the one party called Labour–National, but I can’t tell you who the top 25 of each party’s list are.
   Eeriely, I am campaigning on being an outsider, a reformer, and not part of the Wellington establishment.
   And you know, I actually do have a record of being a maverick.