Home › Blogs › Josh Kahn's blog ›

How McCain Can Use Obama’s Broken Promise

by Josh Kahn | June 20, 2008 at 5:59 PM
in

The thing that annoys me most about Barack Obama’s blatantly broken promise this week is that it’s very difficult to use against him.  The mainstream media doesn’t seem to care much (shocker, I know), it’s far too abstract and complicated an issue to use effectively in paid media and frankly, the public has a long record of ignoring process issues short of real corruption.  But, there’s one forum the McCain campaign can deploy it in – a debate.   

John McCain should directly confront Obama with his broken promise during one of their debates.  Forget the heavily structured format Obama’s staff will insist on, McCain gets to break the format once or twice and address Obama directly.  One caveat.  A little righteous indignation is fine, but he can’t sound too angry because it plays into a preexisting negative meme. 

Why does this work?  Because McCain is highlighting his core strengths and creates the opportunity for an Obama gaffe.  McCain’s narrative is about honor, service and sacrifice.  He is everything Obama claims to be and he’s extremely comfortable in an unstructured town hall style format.  The issue simultaneously reinforces his narrative and undercuts Obama’s strengths.

More important is the psy-ops aspect.  Obama has run his campaign from a cocoon and his isolation makes him vulnerable.  He has a history of poor debate performances in unstructured, high pressure situations and although he’ll have likely have prepped for the issue, he has the potential to make a major gaffe. 

McCain is capable of pulling this off, and he’s ballsy enough to go for it.  At worst Obama won’t screw up and no harm done but at best, it’s a great potential “You’re no Jack Kennedy” moment.

3
Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

Comments

It does look like Obama and staff are feeling the threat

Submitted by lagomorph on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 19:11.

based on Jonathan Martin's blog in Politico today describing how the Obama camp tried to muscle in on the McCain finance conf call:

Hoping to dilute McCain's aggressive push against Obama for reversing his position on public financing, the Democrat's campaign has taken the unusual step of trying to get in on conference call that McCain aides set up for 5:30 tonight between reporters and counsel Trevor Potter.

In an email to McCain communications director Jill Hazelbaker that was blind copied to their entire press list, Obama spokesman Bill Burton wrote  the below. 

Jill – hope you’re well. We’d like to add our campaign counsel, Bob Bauer to your conference call with Trevor Potter so that we can arbitrate some of the disagreements that the two of them have over the meeting they recently had. If you can please shoot me the dial-in, Bob is available to join for the first bit, go over his notes from the meeting with Mr. Potter and would be happy to take questions from him, the press corps or whomever. Sorry for the late notice.  We’re of course willing to split the cost of the call.

Hazelbaker declined Burton's offer -- and returned fire.

"We'd actually prefer to set up a meeting with the two candidates at 10 town hall meetings of Obama's choosing now through the convention, so we can fully discuss Barack Obama's abandonment of his pledge to take public financing," she said. 

The last time Bauer sought to get in on an opponent's conference call, he didn't ask. 

In March, Bauer dialed into a Clinton call and engaged in an unexpected (and enjoyable) dialouge with Howard Wolfson.

UPDATE: Hazelbaker writes in to add an even tougher shot at Burton's gambit, raising the gender card.

"This type of boys club bullying embodies an arrogance better suited for a frat house than a serious campaign about serious issues," she says.

Actually, it's up for grabs whether Bauer and Burton would survive the evening intact in a GOP frat house, at least that of our own beloved and almost house-broken Ace of Spades.  It looks like the Village Voice is feeling the threat as well.   You can read the Village Voice's Roy Edroso, aka Alicublog, wax romantic about Ace and company in the Fratboytarian-flavored excerpt from his Official Election-Season Guide to the Right-Wing Blogosphere.  Next Right didn't make the cut this year, but there's always 2009, where the goal should probably be a stupid-to-evil ratio of 1/99 (only Glenn Reynolds and Powerline scored higher on the Axis of Evil than on the Axis of Stupid according to Edroso).

"If the U.S. monopoly capitalist groups persist in pushing their policies of aggression and war, the day is bound to come when they will be hanged by the people of the whole world. The same fate awaits the accomplices of the Right Wing Blogosphere."  - Kommissar Bunny-Bun

 

Go Get Em John!

Submitted by texicali on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 20:54.

Each time this opportunity comes up John should jump all over this.....the response by Jill Hazelbaker was great....even better if she hit reply all....what a bunch of pretentious, pompous, overbearing staffers....they need to attend a GOP Frat House night....they might learn some tact or manners.....it would be a very educational experience for them that's for sure

Mr. Obama's Broken Promises to Mr. McCain

Submitted by amr on Sat, 06/21/2008 - 08:44.

This week Mr. Obama reneged on his campaign promise to use public monies during his presidential campaign and to meet with Mr. McCain if he changed his mind. This is not the first time that he has broken a promise to Mr. McCain.

 
The following is Sen. John McCain's not so gentle letter to Senator Obama regarding ongoing Congressional efforts towards bipartisan lobbying reform:
February 6, 2006

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
SH-713
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again.

As you know, the Majority Leader has asked Chairman Collins to hold hearings and mark up a bill for floor consideration in early March. I fully support such timely action and I am confident that, together with Senator Lieberman, the Committee on Governmental Affairs will report out a meaningful, bipartisan bill.

You commented in your letter about my “interest in creating a task force to further study” this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The timely findings of a bipartisan working group could be very helpful to the committee in formulating legislation that will be reported to the full Senate. Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues. In fact, I urged Senator Collins to schedule a hearing upon the Senate’s return in January.

Furthermore, I have consistently maintained that any lobbying reform proposal be bipartisan. The bill Senators Joe Lieberman and Bill Nelson and I have introduced is evidence of that commitment as is my insistence that members of both parties be included in meetings to develop the legislation that will ultimately be considered on the Senate floor. As I explained in a recent letter to Senator Reid, and have publicly said many times, the American people do not see this as just a Republican problem or just a Democratic problem. They see it as yet another run-of-the-mill Washington scandal, and they expect it will generate just another round of partisan gamesmanship and posturing. Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public’s low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.

As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.

Sincerely,

John McCain
United States Senate 
 

Being an old fuddy duddy, like Senator McCain, I judge a person by their adherence to their promises, or as I say, their word. One’s adherence to their word is all one usually has to demonstrate their character when little else is known. Mr. Obama continues to fail my test of having a strong character; one that also continues to be at odds with his public words.
 
 

 

There's just one thing

Submitted by Repack Rider on Sat, 06/21/2008 - 09:47.

John McCain accepted public financing for the primary campaign, borrowed money against his anticipated funding, and then after winning his primary, reversed himself and took donations for the general election.  He got a letter from the FEC chairman (David Mason, a Republican) telling him that he can't opt out of public financing without FEC permision, which had not been granted.  Since the FEC does not have a quorum, it is powerless to act, so there is no legal fallout beyond the FEC saying that he had broken their rules and lawyers exchanging letters of disagreement.

If anything, McCain is more vulnerable on this issue than Obama, and it probably serves McCain best to leave this one alone.