Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Sep 11, 2008 in Guest Contributor, Politics | 12 comments

Obama Implodes (Guest Voice)

Has the campaign of Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama been caught momentarily flat-footed due to the nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as GOP Presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s running mate? Or is it going from stumble to stumble and ineffective response to ineffective response as it starts to implode? Conservative talk show host Michael Reagan, son of former President Ronald Reagan, argues that Obama’s campaign is now on the wane in this guest voice. Guest Voice posts do not necessarily reflect the opinion of TMV or its writers.

Obama Implodes

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

Once upon a time it was inevitable that Hillary Clinton would be the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee. It didn’t work out that way.

A few weeks ago, it seemed inevitable that Barack Obama would win the presidency handily. It isn’t working out that way.

A few weeks ago, it seemed inevitable that John McCain was in for a drubbing. It hasn’t worked out that way.

In political campaigns things can always change, of course, but as of now it appears that John McCain is headed for the White House. That’s not inevitable, but at the moment it looks as if he’s headed for the winner’s circle, thanks largely to his choice of a running mate who has electrified most of the electorate.

The Obama campaign’s stunned reaction to this totally unexpected development has been at first to ridicule McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin, then to underestimate the effect she was having on the McCain campaign, and now to go all-out in attacking her.

Obama’s reaction to this sudden turn in his fortunes has been nothing less that sheer and visible disorientation. It’s obvious that he simply doesn’t know which way to turn, and his confusion has led him to launch a sleazy campaign to destroy Gov. Palin’s reputation — no matter what it takes — before she destroys his presidential hopes.

A prime symptom of his disorientation was the ill-advised comment about putting lipstick on a pig. The old self-confident, sure-footed Barack Obama, safe in the cocoon woven about him by a worshipful media, would have understood the consequences of making such a remark and the almost certain probability that it would be a boomerang that would smite him on its return trip, and would have thus avoided it.

This disaster, however, is nothing compared to the catastrophe that is waiting in the wings as a result of his scorched-earth attack on Sarah Palin. Unable to grasp the obvious fact that the media’s ongoing effort to slander Palin is backfiring, he has allowed his campaign to dispatch an army of lawyers and private investigators to Alaska to dig for dirt in Palin’s backyard.

Obama must understand that Gov. Palin, with a favorability rating in excess of 80 percent, is unpopular among the old-boy’s network she has uprooted, and has easily fended off their attempts to damage her reputation.

Turning to these malcontents for ammunition, when their arsenal of anti-Palin weapons has proved worthless, is a massive waste of effort that is certain to backfire again. They haven’t made a dent in her popularity.

Nor will Obama’s scandal mongers. Try as they may to make a mountain over the so-called “troopergate” molehill, for example, they will have a hard time explaining why it would be wrong to want to see a four-times married and divorced law enforcement officer kept on the job when he had tasered his 11-year-old stepson, illegally shot a moose, drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion, and told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.

According to the Anchorage Daily News: “Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, ‘The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession.’”

She warned that if he messed up again, he’d be fired.

“This discipline is meant to be a last chance to take corrective action,” Grimes wrote. “You are hereby given notice that any further occurrences of these types of behaviors or incidents will not be tolerated and will result in your termination.”

This is the man the media and the Obama gumshoes want to pillory Sarah Palin for wanting to have stripped of his badge and gun, and portray him as a victim of heartless Sarah.

Talk about panic.

©2008 Mike Reagan. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc.

  • Silhouette

    God, it would’ve been really smart if democrats figured out Obama wasn’t up to the task of facing off with the GOP BEFORE we had our convention and nominated him…

    Oh, wait a minute…

    I forgot about the constant and never-ending “nagging” that Clinton voters were engaged in from June through August saying exactly just that. That’s the trouble with women…they’re so naggy, but almost always right. Maybe the nagging comes from knowing that and knowing they will be ignored anyway?

    Enjoy the decline folks. I hear things are going to get a little steeper in the coming weeks…

    If I were Obama, I would pick the one main issue facing the voters that the GOP is helpless to defend, and run with it like a racehorse. It’s all he’s got left.

  • jchem

    Certainly off topic, but Sil, perhaps Joe Biden is beginning to agree with you:

    As to this post, I don’t see the Obama campaign “imploding”, but they appear to have been caught off guard with the Palin pick. They (like all of us) can only wait for her to start answering questions. Who knows what will happen then?

  • Wow…is there anything true in this entire post? Obama “ridiculed”, “underestimated” and then “attacked” Palin? When did this happen? In fact, all I’ve heard Obama say about Palin up until now is that we shouldn’t disparage her children for their choices, and that her policies are extreme right-wing Christianist. Which they are. Where is the ridicule? Where is the attack? What has he done that can be even marginally considered “sleezy”? “Scandal Mongers”? Palin “uprooted the old boy’s network”?? You mean the gun-toting, social conservatives that now have her on their shoulders? I hadn’t heard all the details of the troopergate thing that you give, but with all the rest of these totally rediculous remarks, I’ve got to assume that it’s just as likely to be made up as anything else here…

  • jwest

    As the Saddleback experience showed us, Obama is a muddled mess of umms and ahhs when he isn’t in front of a teleprompter.

    Biden is a walking, talking gaffe machine.

    McCain has honed his impromptu skills in countless town hall meetings.

    Palin’s performance in her Alaska debate was impressive.

    I can’t wait for the debates.

  • Silhouette

    “a muddled mess of umms and ahhs..”

    BBBbbbbabbby you jjjust ain’t ssseen nuthin’ yet….

  • Oh, and the DNC is vehemently denying that they’ve sent a bunch of lawyers to Alaska to “dig in [Palin’s] backyard”.

    “Michael Gehrke, research director of the Democratic National Committee, scoffed at all of this: “Sadly, I don’t have 30 lawyers, researchers, investigators or even wolves at my disposal. We have sent a grand total of zero people to Alaska to research Governor Palin. We’ve got all these McCain houses to keep track of. “

  • Silhouette

    I believe the DNC.

    Their bid was to defeat our chance this November and they’re consistently doing everything they can to get that job done…including doing nothing when they should.

    Which begs the question: who is the DNC really taking orders from? (Hint: rhymes with “We Go Pee”.) Ever wonder what avid pro-lifers are doing in the democratic party in high places? Wonder no more…

  • kritt11

    Maybe Michael Reagan isn’t the most impartial source on Obama. He certainly has perked up since the GOP picked Palin, who he believes is like his late dad. But even Reagan has the ability to listen to an entire conversation- not just the sound bite and make a fair assessment. He should also ask himself why Obama would be classy enough to declare families off-limit, then attack Ms. Palin in a sexist way.

    I guess Michael can’t tell the difference between “making sense” and participating in a political smear campaign.

  • DLS

    I wouldn’t write off Obama yet. There are nearly two months to go. But he’s continued to make blunders lately while the McCain team has made some good moves (Palin being the best of all). Obama’s Pig-Gate fiasco was just the latest blunder. (Fortunately Biden is not in the news that much at all. Will he tell another person in a wheelchair to stand up? Will he say that perhaps Clinton was a better VP choice than he, again?) What will Obama do to recover before the debates, and what will he do in the debates? And Biden? (We know the attacks will not cease, but get worse and uglier, on Palin by the other side, which includes the media.)

    • ConcernedModerate

      The Republicans are playing same old tired game of divert and smear politics. Republicans have held the White House for 28 out the last 40 years. They have controlled either the White House or congress for the last twenty-eighty years. The GOP controlled the both the White House and congress for six years. Yet, Republicans want to blame the state in which we find ourselves on the Democrats.

      The GOP has done nothing to reduce the size of government. What they have accomplished is to create a prince class in McLean, Potomac, and Loudoun County. They have also managed to privatize profits while socializing risk.

  • kritt11

    Concerned- they’ll keep doing it because it works.

    The GOP has actually increased the size of the federal government far more than the Democrats EVER did—so what principles are they running on? I guess they can point to blocking an increase in CAFE standards,opposing a raise in the minimum wage, , as well as vetoing S-CHIP.

  • djshay

    Attacked Palin? Surely you’re not talking about the fake outrage over the lipstick comment. Palin wears glasses, so I guess any reference to spectacles would be sexist too. For a party that claims they are so tough, they have awfully thin skin and absolutely LOVE playing the victim. What whiners. The only thing Obama has attacked Palin with are facts. She lies like a rug about EVERYTHING and yes, that’s fair game for attacks. Republicans need to grow a pair.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :