A Democratic Starter Guide to Showing the Voters that John McCain Has No Clothes

[McCamy Taylor]

Scary thought, I know.

I feel sorry for the DU posters who scrape the bottom of the barrel, looking for nasty things to say about our fine presidential candidates, anyone of whom would make a great executive for this country. We have it pretty good when we are being asked to pick between perfection and perfection-lite.

Look at the poor Republicans. Their candidate select was caught playing footsies with Roger Aisles, which made him unacceptable to the rest of the corporate media, so the GOP had to settle for that old party standby, John McCain, the man whom everyone had written off a year ago.

It isn’t as if the Republicans have to win this fall’s presidential election. But if they do not, Bush and Cheney could be tried for criminal activity they committed while in office (since Bush will have a hard time pardoning himself). Karl Rove will be remembered for losing two elections, this one and 2006, which is against the Geneva Convention, I think, as cruel an unusual punishment for those with inflated egos. The health insurance and pharmaceutical industries will suffer big blows as the nation finally gets comprehensive health reform (that they have managed to stall for 15 year, at the cost of who knows how many lives). The telecommunications industry will lose its lucrative blackmail racket, aka domestic spying. Big oil will no longer control foreign and domestic policy, and therefore the price of oil will no longer be artificially propped up to give Exxon outrageous profits. The FDA and other agencies will start doing their jobs again, forcing companies to obey federal laws. The list goes on and on.

There is a lot at stake. So, the usual corporate suspects are hard at work dressing John McCain up as a “winner” nine months before the general election, while the Democrats are still giddy with glee engaging in their ritual preconvention food fights.

I am going to suggest (humbly) that we divide our time between supporting our candidates and reminding the nation exactly why John McCain is a laughable choice for president—before they start believing that there is something behind the façade which the slick RNC pr people are crafting.

Luckily, there is a wealth of material to work with.

First, a few ground rules. John McCain is a war hero . Therefore, he should never he attacked on character issues. That means no John McCain is a Waffler even though he is. No John McCain is old though he is. Instead, refer to actions, statements, concrete facts, and use language which is as precise and as clinical as possible. Try to start out with John McCain is a respected war hero who did a great service for his country, but ….

Never ever suggest that he is shell shocked, suffering from PTSD or is in any other way impaired from being a Vietnam War Veteran and POW. Bush got a free ride from the press when he did it. Democrats will be crucified if they even mention this. Be aware that Karl Rove and Co. may go online at DU and other sites posing as Democrats trying to start threads in which they talk about these issues in an ugly way in order to get other Dems to do the same. Don’t go there! Instead, challenge these posters . Declare them to be the Republican agitators that they are. Remember that the protester who suggest breaking the law is always the undercover police officer.

Ok, now that the ground rules have been laid, here are some of McCain's most obvious weaknesses as a candidate in no particular order

I.His Own Party Hated Him (Before They Tolerated Him): This is going to provide endless opportunities for sound bites, YouTube Videos, campaign ads that can be tailored for certain parts of the country. For instance, if he is now endorsed by a Georgia state representative who called him “as liberal as Hillary Clinton” one year ago, that is going to be in the TV ad in Georgia.

Here is an example from Brave New Films . It is called Less Jobs. More War. It is just one of several YouTube videos created by Robert Greenwald. It quotes Joe Scarborough (Boy. Are his bosses at General Electric going to be mad at him now that they are under orders from the Pentagon to support McCain)

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/28359-what-is-this-iraq-war-charge-on-my-bill


II.Foot in Mouth Disease “100 years” of war in Iraq “It would be fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you.” ‘Nuff said.

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



III.Never Call It “Waffles” In 2000, McCain called Falwell and Robertson “agents of intolerance”. Instead of “waffles” which smacks of a Karl Rove dirty trick, I suggest using a nice nonjudgmental, clinical sounding phrase like McCain is inconsistent or McCain changes his views to reflect those of his audience . This will set up an excellent contrast with Hillary, if she is the nominee, since she can point to her 15 year quest for universal health care. Even the fact that she never apologized for her vote on Iraq (despite tremendous pressure from within her own party)becomes a positive here.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2000/02/29/bush.2.t_9.php

Senator John McCain, in a provocative and politically risky speech, sharply criticized leaders of the religious right on Monday as "agents of intolerance" allied to his rival, Governor George W. Bush, and denounced what he said were the tactics of "division and slander."
Specifically, Mr. McCain singled out the evangelists Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell as "corrupting influences on religion and politics" and said parts of the religious right were divisive and even un-American.

Now, here is McCain being interviewed by Tim Russert in 2006, declaring that Falwell is not an agent of intolerance with an insert clip of McCain back in 2000 saying the opposite. McCain’s justification for his view change? The religious right has a lot of clout within the Republican Party. Oh my! What a conciliatory kind of guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8KZpsp04XM

There are too many examples of McCain’s inconsistency for me to cite them all. He has “waffled” on abortion, tax cuts, campaign finance reform, torture. There is almost no principle that this man has not abandoned in his quest for a vote.

Here is an excellent compilation from Robert Greenwald and the folks who brought you “More War. Less Jobs” above. The DoubleTalk Express Catchy title. That might stick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI&feature=related


IV.Candidate in a Box: No, not that kind of box. I mean that John McCain’s handlers will attempt to keep him out of the public eye, because he is his own worst advertisement, especially if his opponent is Obama. MSNBC already uses this strategy, with one notable exception, the night KO was on and the network showed Obama speaking to 17000 adoring fans followed by McCain speaking to a handful of bored supporters, and it became clear that Obama makes McCain look like an agent of despair.

Just because the GOP will concentrate on patriotic ads that feature anything but their candidate, that does not mean that Democrats can not find video footage of McCain uttering some of his more memorable lines and playing them as part of Democratic television ads. This is where amateur filmmakers can come in. Remember how we got lucky in Virginia against one of the GOP’s rising stars and took him down thanks to his little “macaca” slip of the tongue?

Here is a famous piece of footage, McCain speaking in Michigan. This is the talk in which he utters the classic downer line about those jobs that “are not coming back.” Notice how the applause ceases. Also note McCain’s posture, which is slumped, the pressured way that he speaks, as if he is nervous about running out of time. He does not appear to be self confident, like either Obama or Hillary. He does not interact with the crowd. He struggles to keep himself on subject. His tone is almost panicked. This panic conveys itself to the audience, which does not hear a speech full of optimism about the future. Instead, they hear that the past was glorious but the future is uncertain. If McCain can not do any better than this, his handlers will have to keep him away from the public completely, or else do what they do with W., only let him speak before select audiences on certain topics for limited periods of time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAM5y2EsXnc&feature=related

V.Is His VP Presidential Material? Face it. When your candidate is over 70, and when he has been treated for a form of cancer which can kill years after it is diagnosed and treated, his Vice President becomes more than just window dressing.

That means that John McCain can not select Huckabee to be his running mate in order to gain the support of the Christian Coalition. If he does, the non-Christian Coalition will start asking the question What happens when President McCain becomes incapacitated and we have President Reverend Huckabee? . He will have to pick someone with firm conservative credentials but without too many ties to Bush and someone who will not scare the majority of Americans. Texas Governor Rick Perry would make conservatives happy, but he is just Bush-lite. Mitt Romney is still a Mormon. Assuming that either of these two would agree to run with someone who is likely to lose. In contrast, the Democratic nominee will have a wide number of VP candidates to choose from---Richardson, Clarke just to name two. He might be better off going with Huckabee, since Mike is great with crowds and inspires optimism. They could send him out on the trail to do all the actual campaigning and hope that no one notices that he is not qualified to be commander-in-chief.

This may sound like overkill, but do not underestimate the greed or the resources of those who will combine their efforts to catapult poor John McCain into the White House. They have at their disposal:

1. The Pentagon which is already beginning to portray the War in Iraq as “winnable” and the surge as a “success” and interrogation as “kinder and gentler” and Gitmo as “a great place to visit for the weekend”. Although the military has been adamant so far about resisting Bush-Cheney efforts to draw us into conflict with Iran, if the generals can be persuaded that it will improve John McCain’s chances of getting elected, they might even agree to some (limited) military engagement with that country.
2. NBC/General Electric which will do the bidding of its biggest customer the Pentagon. Viacom/CBS, NewsCorp/Fox, The Tribune Co, all of which need a Republican FCC to keep their illegal media empires together. The Washington Post and a faction at the NYT which are NeoCon. These will be stumping for McCain.
3. Grover Norquist, Karl Rove and all the usual RNC dirty tricks experts like Swiftboat Vets for Lies.
4. Big money from people like Big Oil, Big Insurance, Big Pharm. (Dems should ignore efforts to get them to accept public financing. McCain could accept public financing and then have his campaign run solely on the free advertising he will get from the corporate media plus Swiftboat type groups).
5. The White House will attempt to suppress Democratic voters and help tamper with election results. They will also artificially “improve” economic indicators to deceive the public about how bad things are. They will also indict Democrats all across the country, to make Dems look corrupt.

So, never make the mistake of feeling sorry for McCain. The “straight talker” is going to be using all of these illegal, immoral resources to subvert the democratic process, because, as Hunter S. Thompson put it so eloquently, once a sane politician gets a whiff of the White House, he turns into a bull elk in rut.

And that is a scary thought when the bull elk in rut is John McCain.

[Mojambo]

1. What a great post. BIG recommend. n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

2. Sorry

people here are too interested in destroying our own candidates at the moment.

Freepers hate McCain, though - this would probably get 1000 replies there!

k&r

[zabet]

3. K and R

We need more posts like this!!

:thumbsup:

[caseycoon]

4. YUCK! What an awful visual that subject line creates

:puke:

K&R for the content, though!
:D

[NastyRiffraff]

5. Beautiful!

I'd add:

Address the stupid maverick and Straight Talk crap, whenever the pundits use them (and they will, and are already). Remember the media just luvs McCain. They did in 2000; they still do today. He feeds them donuts and jokes with them. To this day, many of them refer to him as a "maverick," even though he waf...er...has been inconsistent about many issues.

[McCamy Taylor]

6. Good point. Target a candidate's "strength" if it is a lie. If McCain is being

sold to America as a "straight talker" so proving that he speaks with a forker tongue hurts him a lot more than it does some other candidate. McCain is being sold as a "maverick" so demonstrating his willingness to compromise his principles to court a vote will also hurt him.

Just do it by citing actual example--preferably by showing film clips of him doing it--and you avoid reducing the Democratic Party to the level of the Republican Party which made up smears out of nothing. The public has gotten so used to media lies that they will not believe most of what they are told this year unless they are supplied with proof.

[annabanana]

7. An excellent post! I have bookmarked it, and will refer to it regularly!. . n/t

[ladym55]

8. And here are a few more

That memorable tune "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb-Bomb Iran" ...

The vision of being in Iraq for 100 years ....

His recent switch to support torture when he had been one of its most vehement opponents ...

His ardent support of making the Bush tax cuts permanent as the country heads into recession.

Lots of good points in your post. I think we need to focus on the big picture and keep thinking, "No old crazy guy in the White House." (The young crazy guy has done enough damage, thank you.)

[McCamy Taylor]

10. Good examples but avoid "crazy old", Try "war hero who is now out of touch"

with the needs of America, that has a much more respectful ring. Remember, Obama is the upbeat candidate and Hillary must always avoid sounding bitchy.

[ladym55]

12. Right

I'm thinking to myself and getting MOTIVATED to campaign using the terms "crazy old" in my head. (ie, I will canvass and phone bank to make sure this crazy old man goes back home). Then I politely use the terms "war hero who is now out of touch" WHILE speaking to all those nice people next fall.

[McCamy Taylor]

14. Yep. And avoid the bumper stickers and buttons that are impolite.

I have seen a few at cafe press and other places that imply mental illness. Those are not good strategy and denigrate people with mental illness.

Maybe cafe press and the others could think of some better slogans? See my post below.

[tripitaka]

9. so much for the change agent, the guy who's different

Much of what you say involves attacking the *perception* of John McCain. I think that's risky, as Hillary is finding out. On some level, you're telling people that the feeling they have is just *wrong*, that they were deficient in some way.

Anyway I'm an indy, and I like McCain. A lot. For many reasons. I'm still undecided because I'm appalled at even the notion of voting for a Republican. But if Obama attacks McCain on stuff like this -- that he can't be trusted because he once called Falwell an agent of intolerance and then took it back -- I'll be putting a McCain08 sticker on my car. I mean give me a freakin break, go after the guy who takes risky positions when it's smarter not to and ends up having to eat his words later? Once again punish people for being honest and at least trying to not be a party hack and not succeeding all the time? What would be the lesson of that? That pols have to not rock the boat. That we need to have more of the same old usual politics.

That's what all this flip flop talk is, McCain tried to make his party less batshit insane and he failed, and he now has to eat his words. It's no different than opposing the war but voting for war funding, as Obama has done, you do what you can, and you accept political reality when you have to. What would have been Obama's and your preference, that McCain have refrained from saying the things he did?

Obama's supposed to be the different guy, the change agent, the guy who throws away the old playbook. It's only on that basis he'll get my vote. He certainly doesn't have the record or substance to earn it that way. So if he goes the usual campaign tactics like you suggest, there would be no reason for me to vote for him.

I really hope I'm not the only guy who feels this way. I really hope if Obama takes cheap shots at Mac, that Obama will be buried and humiliated by like 47 states to 3.

[McCamy Taylor]

11. Obama will not say any of this. He will be talking Hope and Opportunity 24-7.

McCain will be saying it all himself in videos, in his own words. Did I mention that the contrast between McCain in 2000 and McCain now will remind people why they used to like him so much but point out the sad but sorry truth that the years have not been kind to him health wise? Something that no one wants to say but that the voters can easily judge for themselves when they are presented comparison videos.

The Republicans would have been better off drafting Rick Perry from Texas. Maybe it isn't too late.

John McCain just doesn't have a fan base large enough to generate a backlash. The GOP will attempt to create the illusion of a backlash. As I said, they will create bogus Swiftboat style attacks--maybe even fund some nasty attack ads---that will go too far in an attempt to "steal some of Obama's victimhood." However, the risks of such a game are high. If a GOPer is caught putting out something like that, McCain is through. So, they will have to recruit a Democrat to do it. Obama or Hillary needs to have a team ready to issue swift biting denunciations of any such ads--along with accusations that they are being put out by Republicans to smear Democrats. If Hillary is the nominee, this kind of campaign politics will end up hurting McCain much more than her, since she already has high negatives, and he is the one who will be tarred as being "Just another politician after all." If Obama is the nominee it will be easier for him to convince his legion of supporters that he is the victim of a plot, since they are already easily persuaded that he is the victim of organized conspiracies.

[McCamy Taylor]

13. This crazy GOP "brokered Dem Convention" strategy provides a great opportunity to target McCain

while the Democratic candidates are still untouchable.

I do not know who came up with the "Brokered Democratic Convention" idea. I am going to guess Karl Rove, for the simple reason that the RNC is unwilling to let it go, even though it is now counter productive. Karl Rove has several failings as a political strategist. One of them is his ego. He loves his own schemes, and he holds on to them as if they are precious children, even when it is time to flush them.

While the corporate media is busy buffing the two Dems, keeping them neck and neck and holy in the eyes of all Americans, except for little defects here and there to keep the delegate counts equal, this is a great opportunity for Democrats to create spontaneous satiric messages about McCain, voice their feelings about McCain, begin equating McCain's politics with those of Bush. The beauty of this is that neither Hillary nor Obama will be associated with this public display of antipathy towards John McCain. It will be the voice of the Democratic Party---which represents over half of the American people.

The first person who makes a button with McCain's head saying 100 Years of War would be fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you, too will have a best seller on their hands.

And the sad thing is that the current McCain deserves it. He is not a quarter of the man he used to be.

[jackson_dem]

15. Great job!

[robbedvoter]

16. It would have happened even for Ron Paul (if by a miracle he'd gotten it)

The one thing GOP does well - is fall in line. With it's numerous clients you describe so well. Anyone doubting it - remember who they propped in the WH until now.
All this bunch of clowns - mental patients as they are - still each of them is a bit better than W (less coward, less alcoholic, less tongue tied, less drug addicted, less psychopatic - whichever)

[nikto]

17. 1 Statement stands out as something I suspect has been going on for a few years now.

"The White House will attempt to...artificially 'improve' economic indicators to deceive the public"



I swear, they have been doing this since the early years of Bush/Cheney.
But lately, the manipulation/distortion of stats/figures has been getting more extreme,
due to the fact that the Truth (i.e.the set of economic facts) they must obscure is
getting more extreme.

Make your choice, America:

Konservatism OR Survival


We cannot have both.

[McCamy Taylor]

18. The first Big Lie of 2009 from the corporate media will be "Obama (or Hillary)

plunged us into a recession !"

Same as the current administration lies and says that Clinton started a recession near the end of his term when what Greenspan really said in 2001 was that the country was in the middle of a retrenchment which I have always believed stemmed from lack of investor confidence in Bush and his policies.

[nikto]

19. I think you're right on the money with your prediction...

Judging from past patterns, the GOP will do it again.

WE are gonna' have to be creative to find new ways to fight and
ridicule their lies, slander and smears.

[McCamy Taylor]

20. When the corporate media is caught doing it, bring up Gore, Kerry, Edwards and Iraq.

That will remind the public of the eight years they have suffered with Bush-Cheney and the Iraq War and how much they hate and despise the corporate media. The press is already skating on thin ice right now, with a few exceptions such as KO, Dan Rather.

If Al Gore calls the corporate media a liar, the public is going to believe Al Gore. Same with John Kerry. That goes double for St. John Edwards.

If we show clips of NBC choreographing the lead up to the Iraq War with special music and slogans provided by General Electric's client the Pentagon, NBC loses all credibility. Tom Brokaw becomes a mass murderer whose helpful tips to Republicans about how they can promote John McCain are just more bloody war mongering.

There is no reason for us to fear the corporate media. They can fear us for a change. The individual journalists who work for them have reputations to think about. Legacies. This is a Watergate moment. They have the choice of joining the American effort to end the war and the dismantling of the Constitution and the corruption of elections---or they can be labeled co-conspirators.

When Watergate came, part of what fueled public anger was knowing that the dirty tricks played by Nixon, CREEP and Buchanan had worked and that a good man McGovern was defeated. With Karl Rove's dirty tricks machine behind McCain this year and with McCain's ties to Bush, it will be Bush corruption that is on the ballot---and this time the public will remember two good men, Al Gore and John Kerry who were viciously maligned and cheated.

Americans believe in justice. They do not like seeing villains profit from dirty tricks. They believe in just desserts. McCain, if he was serious, should never have accepted the endorsement and support of W., Rove, Perry and the whole corrupt King George II regime. He should have run as a maverick.

The corporate media types who stick out their necks to support W. and McCain and who abuse their position to do dirty tricks of the "Gore is a liar" type will find that the public is unforgiving this year---I almost hesitate to write this, for fear that some of them may read this, and I know that the ones who participated in "Gore is a liar" and "Edwards is a phony" will be the same ones who do it again, and I am so looking forward to seeing them get what it coming to them.

[Time for change]

21. I agree with most of this

One thing I disagree with is number I. I don't think it will help to talk about how much his own ultra-conservative party hated him, as that will help to paint McCain as liberal. I believe that will do more to move independents and even some Dems to vote for him.

McCain has gone to great lengths to emphasize his conservatism in the past few months, in an attempt to shore up the base of the Republican Party. That's what allowed him to win the nomination. I think it reasonable to assume that he will govern the way he campaigned, in order to keep his promises to his radical conservative base. That's what should be emphasized IMO.

There are a lot of very useful ideas here, thanks.

[McCamy Taylor]

22. I agree not to use Coulter, Limbaugh etc. However, Scarborough, certain religious leaders,

some other popular TV and news personalities and some Republican politicians carry a lot of clout nationally or with certain focus groups or regionally. For instance, Obama could easily tap into some Christian voting groups that might be swayed by the criticism of certain less extreme Christian leaders who have criticized McCain. In some states, local focused ads using the words of local politicians might remind voters that recent GOP support has been very short lived--raising the issue of GOP integrity (not McCain integrity) and increasing the tendency of Independents to steer away from the GOP. And when people like Scarborough, widely perceived as independent conservatives can be quoted as saying mocking things about McCain, it does the Democrats a world of good, because a lot of Independents and GOPers really like Joe Scarborough and he will be under orders from GE to support McCain--so he will look two faced. Ouchies! So much for independent Scarborough.

Quotes from independent conservative think tanks, the National Review, George Will---that is what you are looking for. I think I will go looking for some later today.

But yes, I would flat out ignore the raving right wing loonies. Who cares about them?

[McCamy Taylor]

24. For example, here is George Will having his own case of Foot in Mouth disease

George Will on “McCain-Feingold” the campaign reform law. (If the sight of McCain’s name next to Feingold’s in ads selectively targeting conservative audiences does not rouse some ire, I don’t know what will)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112101859.html

It was in 2002, when Congress was putting the final blemishes on the McCain-Feingold law that regulates and rations political speech by controlling the financing of it. The law's ostensible purpose is to combat corruption or the appearance thereof. But by restricting the quantity and regulating the content and timing of political speech, the law serves incumbents, who are better known than most challengers, more able to raise money and uniquely able to use aspects of their offices -- franked mail, legislative initiatives, C-SPAN, news conferences -- for self-promotion.

Note that Will does not accuse McCain of being too liberal. He accuses him of being self serving—of giving himself an advantage against other opponents. He accuses McCain of being just another DC politician. Ouch.

Or how about this sound bite:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/George_Will_Ron_Pauls_serious_maverickism_1029.html

Will added, however, that "if hurts any candidate, it would be McCain. McCain's yesterday's maverick. This is serious maverickism."

That would look good on a bumper sticker. “McCain is Yesterday’s Maverick”/Obama is Today’s Leader

[McCamy Taylor]

23. Newsweek, part of GE, is exlpoiting Coulter and Co. with this weeks free McCain Ad front cover.

They show McCain looking feisty in the direction of some nasty looking talking heads of Coulter and a few other easily identifiable and unlikable RWers who have made a point of disavowing McCain recently so create the impression that they consider him a maverick (thereby tricking KO at GE's MSNBC into giving McCain 10 full minutes of "maverick" coverage on Countdown ---KO, you were outFox by Fox!)

[L0oniX]

25. Yes...just wait for November and see how the price of gas takes a dive.

"artificially “improve” economic indicators"

[McCamy Taylor]

26. Another link with some links

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2894783&mesg_id=2894783