John McCain could not have won without her.  She energized the base and gave them the energy to show up despite all the predictions of a landslide.  She pulled in those honest Hillary voters who were angry over the sexism aimed at her.

Governor Palin’s appearances on SNL helped to humanize the ticket; they were in danger of becoming only a caricature of themselves.

Her attacks on Obama/Biden were the only real criticism that received any coverage in the MSM. 

Her personal warmth and touching story softened the image of conservatism without diminishing any of its ideals.

She has recreated the feminist ideal for a new generation of women by redefining it away from the culture of abortion as God.

How far in the tank is the media* for Obama?  We need to create a new standard. The system can be based on how much in the national interest a story is, and how far the media tanks for it.

An example: 

On scale of one-to-ten, the Governor Palin wardrobe story was a two (in the national interest) and it received a medium amount of coverage - in the six range.  (2/6)

On the other hand, the Senator Biden gaffe of stating Obama’s inexperience, and possibly slipping with national secrets, was clearly a ten, but received coverage of approximately one (relative to its importance).  (10/1)

Therefore, if the first number matches the second, or is close, than the press has been even-handed, otherwise the difference is the quantifiable press bias, hereby named the Shotgun Scale of Press Bias.  A perfectly balanced score of 5/5, 6/6 or 3/3 etc. is what we should demand of non-editorial reporting.

In this particular case the press bias is a huge factor of 2/6 (-4) negative for Palin and the inexperience/national calamity story was biased 10/1 (+9) in favor of Senator Biden. (We must compare apples to apples, so the stories compared should both be either possibly harmful or possibly helpful.)

It may take some tinkering; I am looking forward to input.

* http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1

Dear America,

Lowly citizens, we, the much smarter and wiser media, have been inundated with requests* to be more honest, and balanced, in our coverage of the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency. We pledge to continue to be impartial  ;-) .  And, we just wanted to remind you to vote; not for anyone in particular ;-) .  We’ve done all we can to inform you. 

Here’s the list to remember when you get in that booth:

ü     We turned Governor Palin into a caricature; we ignored her accomplishments and exaggerated her flubs.

ü     We’ve ignored the national embarrassment that is Joe Biden.  We’ve passed on Biden’s huge gaffes and have overstated his intellect.

ü     We convinced you that the Republicans are responsible for the economic crisis; Democrats had nothing to do with it.

ü     We did not fully investigate Obama’s radical views and his radical associates.

ü     We’ve let you believe that Republicans control congress.

ü     We’ve ignored the fact that Obama smokes.

ü     We ignored Obama’s very extreme views on abortion.

ü     We’ve obfuscated the tax issue enough to leave you confused (lowering taxes can’t possibly raise income).

ü     We’ve completely ignored any good news from Iraq or the ongoing war on terror

ü     We demonized Bush/Cheney as much as we could and linked McCain to him as tightly as possible.

ü     We’ve called you a racist (let’s face it, most of you outside of New York and San Francisco, are).

And last and most important…

ü     We’ve convinced you, despite Obama’s lack of any real experience, that he is qualified to be President of the United States, possibly the most demanding job in the world.

Yes, we’ve done our job America, now go out and vote, several times if you can, for the person whom we’ve worked very hard.  Oh, and, you’re welcome.

* http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

Bob Dole was a gentleman, too much of a gentleman to defeat Bill Clinton who showed him little respect.  John McCain is a gentleman too, the kind of gentleman who corrects his audience when they say silly things about his opponent.  McCain could be on the same path as Dole if he doesn’t wise up.

McCain is too much of a gentleman to allow people introducing Obama to use his middle name.  That is right, this is a divisive ploy.

McCain was too much of a gentleman to bring the hammer down on Barack and point out that Obama is in favor of infanticide during the debate.  This may be smart, the media would come to Obama’s defense, try to cover it up, portray it as a lie, and (somehow) call McCain a racist.

McCain is too much of a gentleman to bring up Reverend Wright.  This is wrong; Wright’s a legitimate issue that shows whose opinions Obama respects, and that either Obama believes that America is horribly flawed and racist too, or he is too much of a coward to challenge Wright.*

McCain should use every legitimate weapon at his disposal, it’s not as if the media, or his opponent, will ever give him credit for being a gentleman after they, working together, defeat him.

Obama is not a gentleman; he is a coward.

* http://moderatelyconservative.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/09/why_ayers_and_wright_matter.thtml

There are many in the media who are desperately trying to get you to give up hope.  It’s all over for McCain/Palin is implied in so many blogs and news stories.  It’s a tried and true strategy every four years.  This year it’s been taken to new and dizzying heights.

Take the headline, “Irish Bookie Pays Out Obama Bets Weeks Early” on NPR.*  This story was played in many circles on the blogoshpere and by at least one TV pundit as proof that it was over, but read more deeply in the article and you will see that they’ve paid out before and were wrong.

Maybe the false sense of security will work to McCain’s advantage. Tell all your liberal friends that you’ve given up and you will not bother to vote. Take them out after work for drinks to celebrate Obama’s victory and stay at the pub until the polls close.  (Just make sure that you voted before work.)

The McCain/Palin supporter should not despair, he will probably pull it out in the end in the only poll that really counts.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95829729

The continuing caricature of Republicans as losers continues unabated.  The “special” Thursday night episode of Saturday Night Live* continued to skewer John McCain, Sarah Palin (though, only very briefly) and it mocked McCain’s supporters.

McCain was painted as simple-minded, crotchety and stiff.  There was a send-up of a supporter (wearing a McCain/Palin t-shirt) who walked about rambling, was barely intelligible and spewed wacky statements.  Obama was played as calm, cool and reasoned.  Nearly the entire show was a political piece meant to portray Republicans as dumb and out of touch.

There may not be a way to counter such portrayals and there are many people who choose to accept this stereotype, which is an act on intellectual weakness.  Telling and retelling jokes that deride Republicans is becoming a cultural phenomenon. Once upon a time, in a more thoughtful America, comedy was effective as a mild reinforcer of political conceptions; today the parodies, comedians and late-night hosts** establish the points of view - and the GOP will suffer at the polls as a result.

These caricatures explain in large part why McCain’s popularity improves after debates and recedes in the following days, the comedic attacks combine with the vitriol of the left and a (distorted) picture is painted in the collective conscious of many Americans. The combing of MSM distortions, Democrat talking heads who repeat misinformation and a non-stop portrayal of Republicans/conservatives as buffoons add up and to reduce McCain’s overall standing.*** The media assault is immediate, incessant and one-sided.

*http://www.hulu.com/watch/39637/saturday-night-live-update-thursday-debate-open

**http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/16/late-night-comics-skewer-republicans-seven-study-finds/

***http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-souring-on-mccain

Numerous complaints of imagined racism are already starting to split the nation.  Obama must clear up these false claims or he risks beginning a new and horrible era in American race relations, especially if he should win the Presidency.

It is already inevitable that there will be numerous claims of racism by many people in the event of an Obama victory each time Obama is criticized.  The first amendment will come under considerable strain.  This is, and will continue to be, a relentless and organized attempt to stifle criticism of Obama and, more specifically, his agenda.

Are they actually saying that tying Obama to a WHITE terrorist is akin to the Willie Horton ads?*  Well, yes they are.  It’s silly, silly and shameless. (The arguments over racism in the Horton ad are also specious, but that’s for another day.)

The saddest of these pathetic and embarrassing accusations is the one by John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and veteran of the civil rights movement, he is well aware that what he is saying is not right; it’s a shameful exaggeration at the least, and can more appropriately be called an outright incitement of racial discord.

It’s odd that when the left calls Bush a murderer, accuse our troops of (disproved) atrocities, and attacks Sarah Palin in blatantly sexist ways, that’s all fair game, but if Republicans do everything possible to bring NOT to bring race into the campaign, they are racists.  This is a VERY dangerous game and it must be stopped.

What if McCain’s VP candidate had said, on camera, to an Indian man, that it was not possible to go into a Dunkin Donuts without having an Indian accent?  How is it that Joe Biden gets away with that?**

* http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/10/12/2008-10-12_shameless_john_mccain_plays_the_willie_h.html

http://www.heraldonline.com/109/story/877049.html

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081012/D93OQ2SO0.html

** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM19YOqs7hU

Check out some actual bigotry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQalRPQ8stI

Sarah Palin should call a press conference about the recent “troopergate” findings.  The speech should be made in prime time and it should take place in a location of significance in a swing state (the Constitution Center in Philadelphia would be good).

Governor Palin should then talk about the findings and mention how she has been essentially cleared.  This should be short, factual and truthful.  She should be serious, but maintain that positive demeanor that the public loves.

Then the governor should talk about the trooper, listing the various threats he made against her family. Then she should emphasize how he tazered a 10-year-old boy, after which she should say, “I would do anything ethical and legal to protect the your children from a man like this, just as I hoped to do for my family.”

It’s finished; the topic is changed.

Kirk Douglas kicked off the recent conversation of an American apology for slavery with comments he made in an interview.  I think John McCain should take up this issue and ask Democrats, the party directly responsible for slavery and institutionalized racism, to issue an apology.

Shouldn’t Republicans, the party that ended slavery, and never had (correct me if I am wrong) racist positions as part of its parties’ official positions, be thanked? In fact:

The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats were by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill (Civil Rights Act of 1964). In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes. *

Maybe, if John McCain demanded this apology from the Democrats, it would help change the recent argument that every Republican critique of Barack Obama is racially charged.  It is a tribute to the Democrat apparatchiks that they have been so successful at distorting their past so well, that the finger of blame for racism always seems to point at Republicans.  Wow!

This is obviously a tongue-in-cheek argument; slavery was clearly a horrible part of American history and reasonable people can argue that an apology is justified, but it seems obvious that some people were guilty of that crime and some were on the side of good.  How did history get so confused?

*http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/entertainment/2008180644_webkirkdouglas.html

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jSCVIw0tYG8GIpYdhbb2Ej17vUPgD93JCDG80

There’s an old expression, “Birds of a feather, flock together,” it means that people of a like mind will seek out, find each other and join together (Townhall is an example of that).  If Obama rejected the words, deeds and philosophies of these two vile persons (Ayers and Wright) he would not have associated with them, or, if he were brave, he would have challenged them before it was politically expedient.

There are really only two reasons that Obama would have continued his relationships with either of these America-hating liars; cowardice or agreement.  (The claims of ignorance by Obama are preposterous.)  So, he either agrees with them, or he is a coward, it really is that simple. This matters.

I wrote after the first debate: 

As I was watching the debate, I was struck by the contrast on stage. 

John McCain’s a hero who stood up for his country and comrades in the face of torture. John McCain demonstrably loves his country and truly puts it first by challenging his party when he thinks it’s wrong. John McCain is a man brave enough to boldly state the greatness of America, even in places that position is not popular.  Senator McCain stood up to the politics of division when he denounced a radio host for mocking Barack Obama’s (actual) middle name.

Barack Obama’s a coward, who does not even have the courage to stand up and leave when his country is attacked from a pulpit in the church that he voluntarily and regularly attends. Barack Obama, a man so unmistakably craven that hehas never challenges his party, in fact he does not he even have the courage to make many tough votes; instead he votes “present.” Barack Obama attacks the outgoing President so that he does not have to face the hero Senator. Barack Obama, a man who demeans his country to millions oversees just to get their adulation.  Barack Obama incited racial division by (falsely) associating Rush Limbaugh and Senator McCain in a commercial where Limbaugh’s statements were taken out of context and twisted so that they were filled with hate.

Barack Obama is not ready to lead.  He does not have the courage.

As I was watching the debate, I was struck by the contrast on stage. 

John McCain’s a hero who stood up for his country and comrades in the face of torture John McCain demonstrably loves his country and truly puts it first by challenging his party when he thinks it’s wrong. John McCain is a man brave enough to boldly state the greatness of America, even in places that position is not popular.  Senator McCain stood up to the politics of division when he denounced a radio host for the mocking of Barack Obama’s (actual) middle name.

Barack Obama’s a coward, who does not even have the courage to stand up and leave when his country is attacked from a pulpit in the church that he voluntarily and regularly attends. Barack Obama, a man so unmistakably craven that he never challenges his party, in fact he does not he even have the courage to make many tough votes; instead he votes “present.” Barack Obama attacks the outgoing President so that he does not have to face the hero Senator. Barack Obama, a man who demeans his country to millions oversees just to get their adulation.  Barack Obama incited racial division by (falsely) associating Rush Limbaugh and Senator McCain in a commercial where Limbaugh’s statements were taken out of context and twisted so that they were filled with hate.

Barack Obama is not ready to lead.  He does not have the courage.

Many have been wondering about the diminishing “Republican brand,” of late, and why polls show that the party is bleeding loyalists particularly among the youth. It is obvious that some of it has to do with President Bush’s inability to communicate his agenda clearly.  Many have posited other reasons, but I believe the answer is clear. 

Many of today’s young people get their “news” from a series of sources that are sarcastic, often misleading and patently anti-Republican. A study carried out by the Project for Excellence in Journalism states that 16% of Americans habitually watch Comedy Central's late-night “news shows,” The Daily Show, and The Colbert Report.  (Add these numbers to the millions more who get information from disreputable and slanted online sources and you have the recipe for a major problem for Republicans.)  These shows emphasize (and often exaggerate) any Republican foibles, present many false premises and, generally, belittle conservative ideology. 

Cultural mainstays such as the late night talk shows are also working against Republicans in a more obvious fashion than in the past.  The Late Show with David Letterman (averaging about 3.4 million viewers according to Nielsen Media Research data) does a regular feature “Great Moments in Presidential Speeches” which show the President making minor errors or tripping over his words after inspiring speeches by past (often Democrat) Presidents.  This feature was even followed, on at least one occasion, by a graphic that read: “George W. Bush – Boob.”  Jay Leno does regular mock interviews that present President Bush in the same unflattering light.

Due to the fact that the humor of these shows is snarkey and sarcastic it is particularly appealing to young people who see anything rebellious as “cool.”  When a party’s ideas and beliefs are disparaged with simplistic and biting humor and their image is portrayed as stodgy and angry, day-after-day, without a competent response, to millions of voters, that group can expect the diminution of its brand.

If McCain wins, he must surround himself with young competent professionals who can win back these voters with clear and positive explanations of his policies.  These people must engage the media, in all its formats, in an aggressive, but constructive manner every single day, otherwise the country will see an expanding Democrat base especially among those that are willing to look beyond facts and accept snotty jokes as reality.

I must add, however, that President Bush does not help himself, or his party, change the image that is being presented of them when he sits casually in Beijing watching the American basketball team shellac the Chinese while Russian tanks and jets attack an ally.

Next Up:  America Does Have a Racial Problem with Obama