Heels on, gloves off
“The heels are on, the gloves are off,” Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin declared over the weekend as she launched pointed attacks against Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. Palin, whose debate performance last week reinvigorated Republicans, seemed to embrace her new role as John McCain’s walking point as she levied criticism of Obama’s connections with Bill Ayers, one of the founders of the domestic terror group, Weather Underground:
“Our opponent is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country,” Palin told a rally of about 10,000 gathered at a tennis stadium in Carson, a suburb of Los Angeles.
That echoed comments she made earlier in the day to donors at a private airport in Englewood, Colo.: “Our opponent … is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.”
But according to the Christian Science Monitor, this new campaign strategy is leaving some conservatives uneasy, including New York Times columnist David Brooks, who doesn’t believe a negative campaign can be successful:
“They don’t understand how the same political tactics that they’ve used before, going after liberal, liberal, liberal, that’s not going to work now because something has overshadowed it,” Brooks [said on Face the Nation Sunday]. “And that overshadowing, that economic anxiety is just going to dominate the next five weeks. There’s no way around that. And if they’re not touching that, then they’re not touching the core issue. And John McCain has not done it. And he hasn’t done it over the weekend, where they’ve been attacking Obama for being too liberal or not loving America enough.”
What’s your take?




WORLD Magazine Library powered by Amazon
Term Life Insurance at Savings up to 75%!
Logos Bible Software for Bible Study
Learn it! Speak it! Live it!


















back to top268 Comments to “Heels on, gloves off”
Well, I’m glad Ms. Palin is willing to bring this information out into the open. What they fear most is that people might do a little internet search and come up with the information that Obama worked for the guy and took money from him.
Radicals do not endorse people who are not radical. It’s that simple. And they can blow smoke and downplay it all they want. Once people realize Ayers did fundraising for Obama, perhaps they’ll think twice about who they want in the White House — at least those in the middle will. The leftys are a lost cause.
Report comment as offensive
She’s repeating talking points, wearing someone else’s heels. Not gonna help.
Report comment as offensive
McCain’s conceding Obama wins on the issues. Character assassination is all he has left. What a sad end for a once-great man.
Report comment as offensive
When the highest elected office in America is at stake, judgement is an issue.
Report comment as offensive
It’s about time that the Big BO’s associations with Ayers are brought into the big arena. This is something that the MSM SHOULD have done….and we’re left wondering why they didn’t?!?!?
A part of Palin’s charm is her boldness and willingness to take on the “big dogs”. This is in perfect alignment with what she should be doing.
Sarah Palin came to kick butt and kill caribou. And she’s all out of caribou!
Report comment as offensive
So SteveG - you’ll be happy and optimistic/enthusiastic when McCain/Palin win the White House and turn a chapter 31 sad story into a happy ending?
Didn’t think so. But thanks for the fake concern.
Report comment as offensive
Is taking the gloves off the Christian approach?
Report comment as offensive
So show me some evidence that these “associations” were anything more than any Chicago politician has with Ayers, who became a strong force. Show me a shred of evidence that Obama endorses or excuses Ayers’ past violence.
Because if you can’t — and I think you can’t — you’re engaging in innuendo and guilt by association rather than substance. Which is, I think, all that McCain has left.
Even the AP article that Kristin linked to in the post says: The accusation, based on Obama’s relatively recent connections with Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers, is unsubstantiated.
You have smears and innuendoes, and you call yourselves Christians while bearing false witness against your neighbor. You don’t have facts.
Serious George on judgment: Look up McCain’s role in the Keating Five.
Yesterday, Obama said at a rally: Senator McCain and his operatives are gambling that he can distract you with smears rather than talk to you about substance. They’d rather try to tear our campaign down than lift this country up. It’s what you do when you’re out of touch, out of ideas and running out of time.
Report comment as offensive
If McCain really wants to go after Obama he should focus on his association with characters like The “Rev”. Wright and “Rev”. Pleger.
Bring up a 1960’s aging hippie like Ayers makes McCain sound desperate.
Report comment as offensive
NJL - “Well, I’m glad Ms. Palin is willing to bring this information out into the open.”
You mean this issue?
“In 1995, Obama, then a young lawyer with political ambitions but as yet no office, was recruited to chair the board of a school reform organization funded and established by the Annenberg Foundation — a group that distributes the wealth of the estate of Walter Annenberg, Richard Nixon’s ambassador to Britain. It was only then that Obama met Ayers, who already was a board member and a figure in Chicago’s education-policy elite. (Mayor Richard Daley, that known radical, told the Times that he had consulted Ayers on education issues for years.)
Go join your city’s establishment, and see what it gets you.
As for “palling” around, McCain actually does pal around with enemies of the American economy:
But if the McCain people want to rummage through presidential candidates’ associations, real or imagined, to turn up figures who threaten to pull down this proud republic, they should begin in-house. Chief among those to whom responsibility attaches for the financial crisis that is plunging the nation into recession is former Texas senator Phil Gramm, McCain’s own economic guru.
Gramm was always Wall Street’s man in the Senate. As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee during the Clinton administration, he consistently underfunded the Securities and Exchange Commission and kept it from stopping accounting firms from auditing corporations with which they had conflicts of interest. Gramm’s piece de resistance came on Dec. 15, 2000, when he slipped into an omnibus spending bill a provision called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA), which prohibited any governmental regulation of credit default swaps, those insurance policies covering losses on securities in the event they went belly up. As the housing bubble ballooned, the face value of those swaps rose to a tidy $62 trillion. And as the housing bubble burst, those swaps became a massive pile of worthless paper, because no government agency had required the banks to set aside money to back them up.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/10/06/ST2008100600738.html
Report comment as offensive
I’ve been reading Obama’s Dreams of My Father and while I am, admittedly, only six chapters in, I’m a little uneasy with the lens of racism by which he sees the world.
I don’t know if this is because I’m a white woman reading a book about the reaction of a hapa young man trying to figure out his place in the world without a father, or if Obama is really off base. He makes comments about his white grandparents which I find disturbing.
He even admits that to complain about racism in Hawaii is absurd–which I found to be true when I lived there. It should have been a safer place to explore your racial make up than other parts of the world. For my children who attended the same school, Hawaii provided an opportunity to learn what it means to be a minority and that experience was healthy for us.
What little I’ve heard about Obama’s relationships with the Chicago pols, Ayers, and his church, coupled with what I’ve been reading make really wonder about this man. But it also makes me wonder if I’m looking at his experience through eyes that cannot see what he’s talking about. Very confusing.
People probably have plumbed the depths of this memoir already and I just haven’t paid attention. I’m still not thrilled with McCain either. I’m not sure either man is up to the problems this nation confronts; but who is?
Which man loves America the most? Which one really understands America the most? World had an interesting article several issues ago noting both men spent formative parts of their lives living in the far east and the Pacific. When you’ve lived away like that, you tend to see the mainland US from a different perspective. The questions is, how distorted is your vision as a result?
Report comment as offensive
i was at Bob Jones University for the republican primaries in 2000 when McCain took the gloves off and attacked George W. Bush for his radical associations with radical fundamentalists like like Bob Jones University students. I think those attacks said more about McCain than about Bush, and it ummm… didn’t help him a whole lot.
Report comment as offensive
Palin has been accused of adultery, faking a pregnancy,and ignoring her children, but questioning an association of Obama is character assassination. Talk about doble standards.
SteveG. Domestic terrorism is an issue.
Report comment as offensive
Obama has called his grandmother “a typical white person”.
Imagine if McCain called anyone a “typical black person”.
Obama also called his grandmother a racist.
Think about what kind of person Obama must be to publicly ridicule his own grandmother (even if the charge was true).
Report comment as offensive
It isn’t going to work this time. I think David Brooks is right. McCain needs to talk about the issues, but the problem is his own fundamental weakness on the economy.
Report comment as offensive
KBells: SteveG. Domestic terrorism is an issue. Sure. And when you have some evidence that Obama engages in it or approves of it, it’ll even be relevant here.
But so far you don’t.
Palin has been accused of adultery, faking a pregnancy,and ignoring her children, but questioning an association of Obama is character assassination. Talk about doble standards.
Some Obama supporters have made those accusations. The Obama campaign has not. The McCain campaign is doing this officially.
Report comment as offensive
Michelle
Is it is possible that viewing the US from Hawaii or Alaska or as an expat may help you see the country better, that is more objectively and love America for what it is, warts and all?
On race, growing up mixed race myself, I can say that it is a thing you think about, quite alot actually. And things happen that make you think more, like a friend of mine in 7th grade home room who when her parents learned of my heritage basically told her not to associate with me. That was the first time I ever had an experience like that and it was both jarring and a little eye opening. So this kid went from talking to me and eating lunch with me on a near daily basis to not even acknowledging my presence. That kind of thing does make you think.
Report comment as offensive
To Coyoteblue
That is your rebuttal? A vague, anecdotal story that happened to you in the 7th grade?
Do you want any objective view of America? Hordes of non-white people are pouring into this country.
Their actions speak far, far louder than anything you could possibly say about how “racist” America is.
Report comment as offensive
I am confused CB and please excuse me if I am wrong, but didn’t you recently complain of your parents being racist and now you say that you are of mixed heritage?
The pain of having another child and their parents reject you and no longer be able to associate with you can be experienced from a lot more than race…mine was alcoholism. Beginning in 7th grade no parents would let their daughters spend the night or come to my house and I was therefore not invited to theirs.
Report comment as offensive
steveg #3 - Exactly how does one perform a character assassination on someone who lacks character? Or, one who covers up his true character? The most liberal = the most out of touch with mainstream America. How can he in good conscience distance himself from Rev. Wright after sitting in the pews of his church for 20 years, listening to him spout off his radicalism? If Palin is a right-winger, Obama is most definitely a left-winger.
Report comment as offensive
17. CB, So what, on my first job in a discount department store, I made friends with a black girl in my department. That ended when a couple of the other black employees told her to stop associating with “white trash”. Some individuals of all races are going to be stupid. My son hadn’t encountered any racism aimed personally at him yet, but I intend to teach him not to let idiots define his self image.
Report comment as offensive
Obama’s close personal and political association with a cop-killing America-hating terrorist (and his anti-American Marxist-Leninist background and statements) should have precluded Obama from being elected dog-catcher, much less becoming a serious candidate for President.
The problem is that the media are largely controlled by like-minded enemies of America as well - and they have spear-headed the massive cover-up of the bizarre and disturbing past and ideology of Barack Obama; probably the largest coverup in the history of modern media. The media are aided and abetted in this by the usual servile types on the blogosphere and in other forums who have given up all ability to think for themselves and who are willing and witless slaves of the system.
It is alarming enough that a man who has expressed contempt and hatred of America, American values, and his fellow Americans should even be remotely close to achieving the Presidency of the US.
However, it is absolutely unbelievable that this same man also has well-documented - but largely unremarked - close associations (political, social, and economic) with known terrorists and murderers, has been intensively involved with and mentored for twenty years in an anti-American racist organization that makes the Phelps ‘church’ or the KKK look mild in comparison, and has organized groups of thugs to close down by intimidation and threats anyone who dares to criticize him, or who dares to proclaim the truth about his past.
But most reprehensible of all is the fawning servility of the media - and the bloggers and operatives in other forums - to their masters on the Left in covering this travesty up - the era of ethical and responsible journalism - or citizen integrity - is almost utterly dead.
Report comment as offensive
How many here know that Barack Obama has pledged to do away with the secret ballot if elected, the foundation of a free society, in labor votes, so that his thug supporters can intimidate and rig the vote?
And how long will it be until this will be enacted for civic ‘elections’ as well? - the Left and the media are becoming monolithic in this country in terms of censoring and shutting down dissent and information. It will not be long until you and I can expect to be personally muzzled - or silenced - or eliminated.
The Left has always been good about making their enemies fall silent through intimidation and oppression - or - if that fails - to disappear. Are those days almost upon the United States of America?
And this man, Barack Obama, is about to be ‘entrusted’ with the defense of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Report comment as offensive
For a good summary article on Obama’s real ties to Ayer’s: see
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_591517.html
Report comment as offensive
PaulR: If Palin is a right-winger, Obama is most definitely a left-winger.
He’s pretty mainstream liberal, despite the desperate attempts to paint him as “extreme,” and I think you’re gonna be surprised to find out how few voters see that as the liability you think it is.
As for Wright, it’s just like Ayers: She me some evidence that Obama holds the objectionable views or supports the bad behavior. Because otherwise, all you’ve got is “Obama knows this person who said or did those things.” Guilt by association. Yawn.
Report comment as offensive
Would people forget about Ayers?
He is now a harmless college professor. Obama was a child during Ayers’ heyday in the 1960’s.
Obama personal pastor of 20 years was the charlatan “Rev”. Wright. Yet Obama claims he didn’t knew about Wright’s racist rants. I find that far more disturbing.
Report comment as offensive
Earth to SteveG
Based on voting records Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate. That is not my opinion, that is the opinion of people who monitor voting patterns. But according to you he is “pretty mainstream”.
If McCain were friends with David Duke would you consider that noteworthy? Or would you just consider that “guilt by association” (your words).
Report comment as offensive
Based on voting records Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate. That is not my opinion, that is the opinion of people who monitor voting patterns. But according to you he is “pretty mainstream”.
I’ll go ahead here and feed the troll.
All that proves, is that the U.S. Senate is a pretty mainstream legislatve body, since even it’s most liberal member is hardly a “radical leftist.” I would also bet that even it’s most conservitive member isn’t a “radical rightwinger” either.
The true radicals, left and right, just don’t get elected. Though, it would be kind of nice if a few of them did, just to spice things up once in a while!
Report comment as offensive
NJLawyer:
re #1, will you also be glad when Mr. Obama is willing to bring out into the open McCain’s association with Charles Keating?
Let’s assume for a moment that Obama is being truthful when he says the Ayers association is minimal. The MSM supports this version of events so far, and no evidence of a deep association (beyond working on the same charity and Ayers hosting a campaign event) has yet come out. If this remains the case, the aggressive guilt-by-association is a disastrous strategy for McCain. In a time of economic crisis largely blamed on corporate greed and enabling politicians, America is about to be reminded of McCain’s involvement in the Keating Five scandal.
If, on the other hand, Obama is outright lying or even being less than fully truthful about his relationship with Ayers, this will be damaging, but I still don’t think damaging enough to evaporate Obama’s solid lead this close to the election. At least, to change things at this point it would have to be a real doozy (they have a radical Muslim lovechild together, “Death to America” scrawled in Obama’s hand on one of Ayer’s pipebombs).
So again, as with Palin, McCain is gambling. As with Palin, I don’t think it’s going to pay off.
Report comment as offensive
What’s all this praise for “getting the issue out there”? It all came out in the primary and so far no one has added any new information to the story. I can’t remember who said it, but it was noted that in the primary the story was driven by the media and that gave coverage to the Clinton campaign. Palin is going out of her way to attack on a story that didn’t have legs. The shaky Republican’s are likely right.
Can everyone agree that this line of attack is not likely to move the national tracking numbers? And can everyone agree that if McCain doesn’t preform better in the debate tomorrow than he did in the last one, both the news cycle and the polls will continue to benefit Obama? I don’t think Bill Ayers is going to be the answer to any of the questions asked on Tuesday.
So what’s the point?
Report comment as offensive
steveg #25 - financial support for Rev. Wright’s church in 2007 was $26,270 or just over $500/week. While that may have been a small % of BHO’s 2007 AGI, it’s alot for the vast majority of us and most likely one of that church’s largest contributors.
Also, wasn’t he married by Rev. Wright? Or, at least, didn’t Rev. Wright baptize his daughters. Guilt by association? Hardly. He sat in the pew for 20 yrs. Disavowing his views was nothing more than political expediency.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/16/obama_releases_2007_tax_return.html
Report comment as offensive
Nick
I was not trying to rebut anything but to add perspective and conversation. The hordes of non-whites coming in, yeah I know some of those folks, they work hard and seek to improve their lives in ways that would not be possible where they are from. I can see why you get hysterical about it.
Kim
Yes, I did write about that. But I didn’t write about my own background in that post. My parents are Caucasian and 1/2 Indian and 1/2 Caucasian. When I was 16 my Mom told me that if she had known my Dad was American Indian when she married him, that she would not have done so. Great thing to tell your own kid.
KBells
I always wind up shaking my head when I hear stories like yours. You would think that people who have dealt with discrimination would know better than to perpetrate it. But they don’t. It’s sad and wrong whenever it happens.
Report comment as offensive
P.S.
I want to add (because someone should) that Bill Ayers is a principled man, a tireless advocate for better education and a better America, and a genuinely admirable person.
Who has also, never killed a cop! I’m not sure where that one is coming from. Ayers wasn’t involved in the Brinks robbery. Ayers and Dohrn had already turned themselves in by 1981. The only involvement they had to that event was becoming the legal guardians of David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin son after they were sent to prison.
Report comment as offensive
I keep hearing the “Obama is the most liberal senator” line from the right, with nary a link to support it.
Anyone got one? Because govtrack.us has Obama at center-left, and McCain smack in the middle.
Besides, I thought John Kerry was the most liberal member of the senate. I do not doubt that if Hillary Clinton won the nomination, she would be “the most liberal member of the senate.”
In short, I have a strong suspicion that you guys are making up this statistic.
Report comment as offensive
Silly SteveG - Instead of yawning…you should focus your tired mind on fact finding.
In 1995, Ayers hosted a brunch for Obama, who was running for the Illinois Senate. A launching of Obama’s political career is far from “casual”, SteveG.
In 1997, they were on a juvenile justice panel sponsored by the University of Chicago. They were on a 2002 panel on intellectualism that was co-sponsored by the Chicago Public Library. They’re both so interested in the same things, that they just keep “bumping” into each other. Casually, of course.
In 1997, the Chicago Tribune published a blurb from Obama about books he was reading. Obama said he was reading Ayers’ A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court. The Big BO found Ayers so “YAWN” boring that he read a book written by the unrepentant terrorist.
From 1999-2002, both men were on the board of the Woods Fund, a Chicago foundation that makes grants to arts and civic groups. Obama left the board in 2002; Ayers remains on it. I’m sure they only shared a Coke from the vending machine. You go ahead and believe it SteveG.
Ayers gave $200 to Obama’s 2001 state Senate campaign. I don’t know about you, but I’m always kickin’ out a couple hundred bucks to people who mean absolutely nothing to me.
None of these above items are in dispute by either the Big BO or his campaign. And there is no constestation of Ayers being an unrepentant terrorist.
But you just hang, however tentatively, on to your BO; SteveG. Maybe when he coughs up a hairball in the election, you can console him with a nice Risati.
Report comment as offensive
jjf#34
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/16/obama_releases_2007_tax_return.html
but you’ll probably disagree since it doesn’t agree with your view of the world
Report comment as offensive
Re 33 - Luke called Ayers a “principled man”. However - he failed to define or dictate what those principles might be….
How about this?
In a New York Times story published by coincidence on Sept. 11, 2001, about his memoirs, Fugitive Days, he said, “I don’t regret setting bombs. … I feel we didn’t do enough.”
‘Nuff said.
Report comment as offensive
SUSA has Obama up by 10 in Virginia as of today. I guess McCain/Palin are so desperate they have to resort to character attacks, it’s all they’ve got.
Report comment as offensive
#37. Ayers isn’t the story. McCain’s sad little campaign is.
Report comment as offensive
Somebody brilliant and maybe even a little bit prescient said this:
Oh, snap.
And McCain responds disastrously. He completely undermines the penitent-politico image that bought him back into the public’s graces as a hard-core reformer of a dirty system, a man who had been burned once so was now beyond corruption. That thing he was really sorry about getting too close to and he’ll never do it again and in fact he’s back to clean up the act now?
It was all a hit job in the first place.
What? A hit job? So that thing you were sorry for, that thing you came back to reform and make sure it never happened again, it was a completely bogus trumped-up charge in the first place?
Report comment as offensive
PaulR:
The link you sent was a story about Obama (admirably) releasing his tax returns immediately. What has that to do with anything?
Report comment as offensive
Mickel: All of which means that in Obama’s political career, he and Ayers had some shared political goals and Ayers supported Obama’s efforts, and they served on some of the same boards.
None of which is any secret. Obama has not ever, to my knowledge, expressed any approval of Ayers’ radical past. You can deal with a person today without endorsing something they did 30 or 40 years ago.
But yeah, let’s talk about Bill Ayers/Obama and Charles Keating/McCain and see which one voters are more troubled by.
Report comment as offensive
Nice non-rebuttal Luke - Palin bringing up the Big BO’s association with your “principled man” IS the story.
That swirling sensation you’re sensing is the Big BO’s campaign settling to the bottom of the bowl on a journey down the big pipe.
Coyote - hang on to that poll. You can use it after the election while using your bidet.
Report comment as offensive
Mickel
Suffolk is even higher. I think Obama will take Va. And Warner will win easily in the state. NC is tougher to call, but my partner’s relatives, who live there and are life long republicans think NC will go blue this year. McCain has a tough upward climb at this point in the election.
Report comment as offensive
In the last week Obama called McCain “erratic”. Imagine calling a 72 year old man erratic. Do you think that was a slip of the tongue?
But according to some people on this blog it is McCain and Palin who have launched personal attacks.
Report comment as offensive
Nick Peters: If McCain were friends with David Duke would you consider that noteworthy? Or would you just consider that “guilt by association” (your words).
If McCain and Duke were personal friends and McCain showed no evidence of agreeing with Duke’s racism, yes, I would not consider that a reflection on McCain. On the other hand, if McCain was running for office and his platform included some of those ideas, then it would be a problem.
It’s all about the nature of the relationship.
Report comment as offensive
As for the “most liberal” line, see #28 and #34. I agree with them.
Report comment as offensive
jjf #41 - sorry, wrong link (that was the one p