RickJay, GHWB uses both initials, and thus, we should as well.
That said, the hair’s all wrong on that guy in the photo.
I thought Josh Marshall raised a pretty good point here:
Josh walks that back a little in an update regarding Nixon’s sleaze. But I think its a fairly good point in general.
True. OTOH, the things the McCain campaign has done in its own name have inspired grassroots radical hatred that has passed beyond the campaign’s control. From The Nation:
There’s something weird going on here. From the standpoint of the McCain campaign’s actions, I don’t really know if there’s as much overt nastiness. But there’s something really messed up going on here.
I grew up in the South and know all about racism and prejudice. I know these people like the back of my hand. My family was a family that considered racism to be wrong, and we were raised in such a way. However, in mixed company, people would become really racist. There isn’t so much open racism anymore, but you get people in a room where they are sure their feelings will fly then the racism comes pouring out.
This is sort of what I feel is happening on a national scale. These people have identified with other racists and bigots on a national scale and are feeling free to come out of the racist closet.
This is why I feel this campaign is the nastiest one I’ve ever seen. They aren’t calling Obama a traitor like they did Kerry. These things come from the bottom up. And honestly, what is McCain supposed to do? Is he supposed to sit around all day and talk about how the lies about Obama aren’t true? McCain knows that these people would be his base regardless. He has to have them. The campaign is using code words and such to slightly bring it up at times, but I think a great deal is done through the right-wing echo chamber.
These racist smears about Obama had been around forever. It has only gained steam since it became clear that Obama will win. It is indeed a shame, but I don’t know what else he could do. In a way it is somehow helpful to have this part of our national psyche rear it’s ugly head, so the majority of people can see it for what it is and reject it. Then we’ll be better for it.
I don’t think this Presidential campaign is especially nasty. I think people perceive it to be nasty because of the echo effects of the web-based media. These allow more people to express their opinions and then those opinions can be endlessly recycled, replayed, and amplified. So it’s not nastier, but every little piece of nastiness is heard.
Here is why I think so. I follow the election by listening to NPR, watching ABC News, and reading the BBC and Economist websites. I also look at the state-by-state polls at electoral-vote.com, but don’t read the editorials there. California only gets a minimal presidential TV commercials. These are all relatively unbiased sources. I haven’t really seen much nastiest myself.
But then I read the SDMB and hear about some of the nastier stuff going on. If I didn’t know better, I’d think most of it is made up or exaggerated. After all, complaining that the other side is maligning you is a common accusation. But what I think is happening is that, both sides are aggressively seeking anything negative about their opponents, including negative things said by them about their side. These little tidbits of nastiness are then continuously harped on until the next shocker comes along.
To borrow an analogy from medicine, it’s not an increase in nastiness, it’s an increase in diagnosis, because of the new microscopic lenses people in the political bubble now use.
Country First. I’d rather lose an election than fan the flames of hate and ignorance to win it. (and unlike old Johnny I don’t have a rich wife and multiple houses) But thats just me. I guess I can go to sleep knowing i’m a better man than McCain.
In the past three election cycles, I think the candidates and their talking heads have gotten more extreme and more nasty. It finally hit me over the weekend: they’re not excoriating their opponents, they’re excoriating ME. When Whatever-blonde-hate-filled-right-winger writes books that say that Democrats are traitors, she’s not dumping on Barney Frank or Nancy Pelosi, she’s dumping on me. I am a traitor because I don’t believe in the Laffer Curve, or because I’m pro-choice.
When they drop into the mud and paint anyone who thinks progressive taxation is a socialist/marxist/communist, they’re painting me with that same broad brush. And you know what? Social welfare programs are great. I, along with my soon-to-be President, got through part of my childhood because of welfare and AFDC. I hate it when they build a bridge to nowhere or find some welfare mother driving a Cadillac, but I accept some imperfections in our implementation. I’d rather support five or six welfare cheats along with another fifty non-cheats who have somehow slipped through the cracks and can only make it from week to week with those food coupons.
And Who Is Obama? WTF? Why are they going to such great lengths to paint anyone who’s not John McCain as “different” and scary and obviously beholden to his terrorist leaders? I’m kind of different, too. In the America I see the Republican advertisements striving for, I don’t know if I’ll have a place. I don’t feel safe as long as Republican leaders and the unruly mobs they incite are wandering the streets.
When they whip up a crowd into a frenzy of hatred by their lies, I don’t know what good can come of it. The only time I’ve been able to hear anything about policy is when Barack gets asked a stupid question and forces a few comments in about the actual details of his policies. McCain, when he gets a mike, makes statements like, “I know how to get Bin Laden. I know how to solve our economic crisis. I know how to make miracles happen, but I’m not going to tell you any details. Meanwhile, How about the gall of Obama talking with people about possible cabinet positions?” Here’s what McCain said to me today, through the miracle of radio: “He’s already measuring out the drapes!” It’s like he’s saying, “The nerve of him, being so presumptuous as to think he might be elected.”
I don’t know what happened to the Republican party in the last fifteen years. Of the people I know who’ve called themselves Republicans in the past, nearly all of them feel alienated from their party. All they offer is hatred and xenophobia, and they don’t seem to want to leave any middle ground open where people might find some compromise.
There are several things going on in this campaign.
First, it appears that the Republican candidate is going to lose. Not a done deal by any means, either man could still be President, but various ev trackers have Obama leading by well over 300 ev’s right now. This has caused a certain perfectly natural desperation in the apparently losing side, as it does in any game. Add to this the fact that the loony vitriol in America is pretty one sided. Yes, I’m sure it exists on the left, but it’s nothing like the mountains of screaming batshit craziness that emanates from the right, in the form of top rated radio shows and best selling books. Then take the fact that McCain, who wasn’t particularly liked by the crazies, picked Sarah Palin rather than Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman. Palin’s only demonstrated skill so far is whipping up crowds using talk radio tactics and divisive “Us v. Them” rhetoric. Finally the Democratic candidate is a black man with a foreign arab/muslim sounding name. If Obama wins, the secret service is going to have a busy 4 or 8 years.
Is the Republican party trying to lose the votes of non-whites for an entire generation? I would love for McCain to say at his rallies, “If you’re a racist, I don’t want your vote or your money. The Republican party is not the place for you.” Would he lose the crazy-ass racist fringe and with them this election? Very possibly. But it would send a more important signal to moderate Republicans and independents that the Republican party will not tolerate that kind of shit.
And, yes, I’d love it if Obama would say the same thing at his rallies.
You know what’s so weird about this election? I think it is actually clearly more brutal than the previous elections. I take back my previous post. Just think back to the way Bush ran his campaigns? There were a lot of code-words and “I’m one of you guys” rhetoric, but it was never so explicitly divisive. And I think this divisiveness is clearly expressed through Palin. Can you imagine Bush having said, “The Pro-America parts of this country?” That just seems so beneath, even him! Bush would have mentioned something along the lines of how great people are, blah blah blah. But never suggest that there are anti-American parts of the nation. Sure his surrogates questioned Kerry’s patriotism, which was a shame, but McCain is calling Obama a terrorist by association. This would have us dropping our jaws in 2004.
They are using the super-right paranoia of Obama to fuel the fire. Kerry didn’t really get them going. Their mistake is that they appealed to them too much. But in a way they had to, because McCain never had the support of the base, so they had to swing too far to the right. Now they’re stuck there, with nowhere else to go. They can’t swing back to the middle.
But just compare Bush to McCain. Bush had the right-wing smear machine to do his work. I don’t think Bush ever mentioned anything about John Kerry’s service other than to praise it. What we’re seeing would be akin to Bush openly questioning Kerry’s service the same way that McCain doesn’t deny Obama’s Ayers connection.
Bush was (I realize it’s hard to say) clever enough to not have his name on this stuff. He never said how Kerry looked French, etc. Bush talked about himself and the country. That’s how you win an election.
It makes me wonder if Karl Rove is really in charge of the McCain campaign. I doubt it. I think he’d be more intelligent to attach the candidate to this dirty business. Palin is awash in it. I think this is the work of a wannabe Rovian hack who thinks the key to win is to attack as strongly and as often as possible.
McCain has screwed up this one so badly by almost every single measure. He went with Sarah Palin and decided to ride the wave of right-wing hatred all the way to the office. He just doesn’t realize that it won’t happen that way though.
Attribution bias is a dangerous thing. It leads you to all kinds of mistakes.
If Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers were on the right, they would considered some of the batshit crazies. But they’re not, so they are discounted.
Regards,
Shodan
They were both extremely minor figures before the election. While left wing moonbats certainly do exist in arguably large numbers, they are not exactly major social or political figures. Before this election, Jeremiah Wright was a nobody and Ayers was an extremely distant memory.
Perhaps now you appreciate why I think the United States is in decline and becoming dangerously unstable.
No. I don’t. I see some handwaving, but that’s about it.
Whereas the RW wingnuts have TV shows and radio shows and syndicated columns and book contracts. And in some cases, elected offices.
OP aside (I don’t like to try to make objective comparisons of inherently subjective perceptions, so I won’t comment on the relative nastiness of the current season), I agree strongly with the quoted sentiment. Sunlight, disinfectant, etc.
Sometimes sunlight makes things grow, and disinfectant might be fertilizer, instead.
I think there is a real danger in the Palinmaniacs, to be honest. I watched a few stomach-churning minutes of a rally where the crowd was chanting “USA” and it gave me the creeps. Real creeps, not message-board-exaggerated creeps.
What needs to happen, after the election, is a frank and open discussion of this by the GOP, in public, to make it clear to the American people that this is NOT where the GOP wants to be and it is going to change course. I believe they must repudiate Mrs. Palin in strong terms, and attempt to move to the centre. If the nutbars want to break off and form their own party, then so be it. But surely the Grand Old Party cannot imagine that this is the course that will lead them back to power?
About Wright, you are sort of close - the person who Obama referred to as his mentor, and to whom he dedicated a book, was a minor public figure. It was not until Obama ran for President that Wright’s influence on his protege became a matter of public interest.
And you are free to refer to someone as prominent in the Weather Underground as Ayers, with its bombings and other acts of terror, as a “minor” figure. You’d be rather flagrantly wrong, but you can do it. And, of course, Obama had no significant connection with Ayers at all. Apart from launching his political campaign from Ayers’ living room, that is. And working together.
Apart from that, they were practically strangers.
Regards,
Shodan
It’s the Weather Underground itself that’s minor. It got a lot of attention at the time because an avowedly violent LW organization had been a thing unknown in America at least since the 1930s. But most of their bombings were of inanimate objects or empty buildings. Only three people were ever killed by WUO bombs, and they were WUO members.
No, I don’t, because your belief in its decline is based in racist, white-supremacist claptrap. I would point out that almost everyone responsible for this Presidential race being nasty is a white guy.
Prior to Obama’s candidacy, Ayers was a forgotten person. To most people 365 days ago, the Weather Underground was a web site with weather predictions. I’d wager 90% of Americans, perhaps more, would not have been able to tell you who William Ayers was in 2006.
It’s a testament to the lasting impression of his participation in terrorism that until this election NOBODY HAD CARED ABOUT IT FOR TWO DECADES. Where were the anti-Ayers comments from the right? Where were the protests outside his office? There were none, because he was forgotten, a former radical who’d sobered up and reeentered polite society.