McCain’s Rovian Lipstick Diversion

I rarely agree with journalist Andrew Sullivan, but this time he nailed it. Here’s an excerpt from his blogpost on John McCain’s Rovian diversionary tactical ruse to get the media’s scrutiny off of the McCain/Palin ticket and the important issues facing the country. Sullivan is unequivocal in his condemnation of McCain.

So it’s come to this. The full context of Barack Obama’s quote is as follows:

“John McCain says he’s about change, too — except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics. That’s just calling the same thing something different.”

With a laugh, he added: “You can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change; it’s still going to stink after eight years.”

INTENTIONING

Sex, Power, Pandemics, and How Women
Will Take The Lead for (Everyone’s) Good

The new book from Gloria Feldt about the future, taking the leadership lessons learned from this disruption and creating a better world for all through the power of intention.

We are being asked to believe that he called Sarah Palin a pig. If the people making that accusation have half a brain they know it’s not        true.   This is not a question of interpretation. It is a fact. So we now find out again that John McCain is prepared to tell an absolute lie – in  public, verifiable, uncontestable.

He does not have the minimal public integrity to be president of the United States.

Let this be a wake up call to the American voters. Batten the hatches and fasten your seat belts. Between now and November 4, we will be subjected to endless such swinish ploys.

But we can’t allow ourselves get diverted into the swill and away from the reasons so many people have become activated this election cycle. We know another four years of right wing domination will be disastrous to all the values and civil liberties we hold dear, and because we believe there is a better way.

It will of course be up to Obama and his campaign to stay their course, fight back swiftly and powerfully against the inevitable lies, while all the time continuing to call us to our higher selves. His is a more difficult task than McCain’s. Will he be able to accomplish it?

8 Comments

  1. Stacy on August 11, 2008 at 9:35 pm

    Gloria- I am trying to not get cynical to the point of becoming totally disinterested and disillusioned with the political process. But when I saw the right wing blogs claim that Gibson’s ‘grilling’ during the interview, was too harsh and biased when in fact, Gibson asked VERY reasonable, predictable questions that most people who follow politics closely would be able to answer. Can you imagine if Joe Biden couldn’t articulate the doctrine justifying the Iraq War or put military action against Russia on the table with little justification other than neo-hawk talking points? Gibson would have been justifiably harsh but instead, he seemed to step back and allow her to eventually not answer the question.

    Now her next interview will be with Sean Hannity, which is a disgrace and when the media point that out they will be charged with ‘liberal bias.’

    Did you see Palin’s verbal gymnastics with the abortion question? Any journalist worth his or her salt should have confronted her with her answers to an Eagle Forum questionire where she described herself as “as pro-life a politician as any” and adamently denied there was any right to reproductive choice whatsoever- and yet the media have allowed her to appear less fanatical than she really is. Does anyone really believe that she will attract more women and moderates/independents (let alone Hillary supporters) by claiming that women and girls who are victims of incest and rape should not be given access to emergency contraception?

    I just can’t believe what is happening- but I guess the sad thing is I actually can believe it but I am feeling more and more powerless when confronted with such an apathetic electorate. Maybe I just need some more coffee.

  2. Stacy on September 12, 2008 at 9:31 pm

    Yeah, and never mind that McCain used the ‘lipstick on a pig’ reference when asked about Hillary Clinton’s health care policy. But no, the media aren’t really focusing on that, are they?

    I find it so interesting how the GOP is crying ‘sexism’ at the most inappropriate of times- yes, sexism is present in the media, in politics and in our culture- unfortunately, it only seems to bother them when an anti-feminist Republican is the target, which is unfortunate.

    Has Palin been subjected to some sexist commentary since her candidacy? Yep. But interestingly, McCain and the right wing of the GOP aren’t focusing on many of those incidents (some of which are issuing from the right wing blogosphere)- instead they are playing the victim card by depicting Palin as an unfair target of the mean left and the elite liberal media in a thinly-veiled attempt to shield her from having to answer hard questions- McCain advisers have kept her speaking to friendly audiences giving her sarcastic stump-speeches –delivering the same one-liners over and over, refusing (until last night) to allow her to be interviewed by the media until they treat her with ‘deference’. Deference? Why? Is she special? I doubt that if she were a man they would be so protective or demand ‘deference’. I find it all a bit condescending.

    So now they are throwing out the ‘lipstick on a pig’ smokescreen with all their faux outrage to divert attention from that horrific interview with Charlie Gibson where it became fully apparent that despite being prepped 24/7 since being selected for the ticket, she couldn’t hide the fact that her social views are to the right of Bush and Cheney and she knows nothing about foreign policy, the doctrine underlying our illegal invasion of Iraq, the complex issues taking place in Pakistan, the implications of an Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran, energy policy, etc. etc. All this from the Party running on a platform of “Keeping America Safe” and ‘Vote For Us, We Love America More Than You Do”. Pathetic.

    When the GOP starts giving a damn about violence against women, equal pay, access to birth control, economic justice, civil rights etc. then I’ll perhaps start taking them seriously when they claim sexism.

  3. Stacy on September 12, 2008 at 9:32 pm

    The brilliant Glen Greenwald calls out the right for it’s disingenuous sexism claims:

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/12/raum/index.html

  4. Gloria Feldt on September 12, 2008 at 9:33 pm

    Speaking of McCain’s sexism, Stacy, I have to quote your latest post at CafePolitico:

    “If McCain is afraid to let Palin stand on her own two feet (which smacks of sexism to me- do you honestly think he would keep Colin Powell or Joe Lieberman on such a short leash?) and answer justifiably hard questions off-the-cuff from an at-times hostile media, why should Americans believe she can step into the role of President of the United States in an emergency and deal with hard questions and serious threats from at-times hostile nations?”

    That observation just knocked me over. Now why didn’t Obama think of that?

  5. Gloria Feldt on September 13, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    You gotta remember: The Republicans understand the political process as being about gaining power. The Democrats understand the political process as being about ideas, issues, and doing good for the people.

    Occasionally there is a Democrat like Lyndon Johnson who knows how wield power as ruthlessly as the Republicans, but in the overall picture, he wielded the power to do good for the people. Obama would do well to read up on ol’ LBJ.

    And maybe it’s the electorate that needs more of your coffee.

  6. Lucia Howard on September 13, 2008 at 9:37 pm

    The “White Woman Variable” in the 2008 Presidential Election
    As seen by Lucia Fakonas Howard

    The latest polls and political pundits are telling us that “white women” will decide the outcome of this Presidential election. DAAHHH!! What a surprise!! Less than 60 days before the election, and both campaigns are discovering that women voters are really important. Even though women represent more than 50% of the vote, most candidates still haven’t figured out how to target and address women. Why does this lesson need to be re-taught in every campaign cycle, usually when it’s already too late?

    Strategists and analysts (usually white men) need to stop lumping “white women” (or women in general) into one homogenous group. In this Presidential election, I think women fall into at least 4 very different constituencies, and the Obama campaign needs a separate strategy, message, and messenger for each.

    1. Anti-choice, religious right, conservative women. Obama never had these women and will never get them. The goal here is not to convert them, but to contain them. Stop attacking Palin on character, thus making her the patron saint of conservative women, which only angers them into action. The message of Obama’s character and values is best delivered to these women by Michelle Obama and her daughters. (Yes, I’m advocating that the Obamas drag their daughters front and center for the next 55 days.)

    2. Women who feel/know we need change, but what? This is the group that I think represents the biggest shift in the polls over the last week. These women were leaning toward Obama because he represented change and hope, while McCain represented the status quo. These women were not truly committed to Obama, but they liked him more than McCain, because Obama promised a new direction and an understanding and voice for the needs of their families. Enter Palin, who is assuring them that McCain is the real reformer and agent of change – just look at who he picked as his VP. A number of women in this group are shifting to McCain, but they are not strong McCain supporters or anti-Obama voters. They can be won back with the right message. Obama needs to convince these women that he is a man of character who can be trusted to move the country in a better direction, and that his “hope message” is not hollow, overly intellectual or wimpy. These women vote their gut. They need to know who Obama, Biden, McCain and Palin are as people: the values they stand for, who they really represent, and the “culture” they will bring to Washington. Fear and uncertainty are powerful with this group, so Obama needs to convince them that he can best protect their families, their pocket books, and their country.

    3. Women who vote the issues. They want to know the candidates’ positions on the issues, and will vote accordingly. Obama is getting pulled into the classic Republican defensive strategy, which is taking him off message. Obama and Biden can reach these women in the debates and their appearances by sticking to the issues. We can win a majority of these women on the issues, if we can remember what the issues are.

    4. Angry Hillary supporters. There were a number of women angered over Hillary’s loss to Obama, and even more who believe he made a huge mistake in not making her his VP (assuming she would have even taken it). They’re not finished saying “We told you so”, but in the end, I think very few of them will actually vote for McCain. The McCain/Palin ticket may not be “putting lipstick on a pig”, but it is the embodiment of failed Bush administration values and policies in a skirt. Hillary supporters need to be courted—by Hillary Clinton.

    My take on the “white women” variable is not based on polls or data, so I may be off base. But, based on watching years of failed Democratic campaigns, I don’t think I’m off by much.

  7. Disenfranchised on September 20, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    I think it is a sad time for women and you are part of the reason. You attack Sarah Palin on her very personal views. So she does not wear the universal banner we as women are supposed to wear according to every feminist out there. She is prolife.

    I made the mistake of having an abortion in my twenties. Why not, all my sisters were telling me it was the right thing to do. Why having a child is some sort of punishment that gets in the way of then school and future career. Well twenty some odd years later not a day goes by where I regret that decision, for many reasons which I will spare you. I am not blaming other women for my decision. I take full responsibility for it. I just think that women like you attack women like Sarah because she has the courage to do it all. Career, Family, Success.

    You are going to argue here that you are trying to protect victims of rape and incest. Obama did not vote against a bill protecting infants born out of partial birth abortion. He claimed it was challenging Roe vs Wade. Every other democrat voted for the bill. I looked up the federal bill and the state bill he refernce on his decisiona and gues what. The language is the same. Does an infant’s life have less value than a victim of rape and incest. He should be looking out for those who can not help themselves isn’t that the platform of every democrat.

    Abortion is not the issue here, but you and my other sisters, as you once wanted us all to call you, want to bring it to the forefront to cause confusion. If you look at Sarah’s record you will see that she does not impose her personal views on government work. She has done nothing to overturn legislation against women. Or Gay rights for that matter.

    If you want to speak on the issues, I live in illinois and have examined Barack Obama’s record. He has no legislative experience to run on. He makes Sarah Palin’s resume seem robust.

    You can continue to belittle and undermine Sarah Palin. The risk here is that you are doing to other women like me a disservice.

    It makes us uncomfortable when people think differently than us, and rather than to embrace diversity we want to bring them down. Fortunately for me most of democratic friends are not as intolerant as you. They tolerate my differences. After all isn’t that what America is suppose to be. Isn’t that what drove my mother to cross the border in search for a better life and education for her five children. I tell my mother each day that she made the right decision in bringing us here. That our going to bed without a meal at times surely paid off.

    I stand by my statement that it is a sad time for women right now. Women will not break the glass ceiling in the political arena until we stop being intolerant of our differences. It is sad that the sisters we are suppose to depend on are the one’s waiting to pounce on our successes unless we have the same agenda as the feminist of a later generation my generation. Let’s move on. We don’t need men to take down a good woman we just need women.

  8. Gloria Feldt on September 20, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    I am reminded of the scene in “Fiddler on the Roof” when Tevye is trying to convince himself that he can accept his daughter’s break from his value system. He goes through a long litany of “on the one hand” and “on the other hand” arguments pro and con. Finally he reaches a point where he has to admit, “On the other hand, there is no other hand.”

    Similarly, for me, though my first instinct is to support a woman when possible, supporting Palin is impossible. While there are a number of issues I disagree with her about, there is clearly no “other hand” when it comes to electing someone whose value system (which is actually anything but “pro-life” for women or for children once they are born) is so disrespectful of women’s moral autonomy and legal capacity to make their own childbearing and reproductive health decisions without government intrusion. Regardless of gender, I would not support such a person.

    You have every right to believe differently. Disagreement isn’t intolerance, it is democracy at work.

    But, my dear, you have said something very important here. Each one of us must bear the responsibility for our own life choices, not lay them off on girlfriends or anyone else. Choice is sacrifice as well as freedom. Every choice we make means we have relinquished that which we didn’t choose. Nobody ever said it was easy. It’s just that having the freedom to determine the course of our own lives is vastly better than not having it.

    Having addressed your points about Palin, I call your attention to the subject of my blogpost, which is John McCain’s lack of honesty in his advertising and his apparent adoption of the very Rovian tactics that George Bush used to defeat McCain in 2000. There’s no other hand about dishonesty either. It’s just plain wrong.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.