While You Were at CPAC

First, the stories about Palin didn't come out before she was nominated as VP; the same way(or even later than) stories about Obama came out when he became a serious contender for the Democratic nomination.

It was ABC (IIRC) that broke the Wright story, and George Stephanapoulos allowed/asked questions on Obama's patriotism - "why don't you wear a flag pin?"  So to say that the MSM isn't doing the dirty work/investigative journalism is... false.  I won't even start on Fox/Hannity/Rush.

As for McCain not using the Ayers/Wright stories - (a) I'd call that honor, not cowardice; (b) Palin did use them, in the traditional role of attack dog.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, the election didn't break one way or another till the economy went off the cliff.  So a better solution - come up with better ideas (or don't let another W-type run riot, screwing up his/her successors.)

1. I'll bet if I spent an hour or two researching the Jindal issue I'd find that both TPM/Politico and Jindal's defenders have left a thing or two out of their accounts (I'm not going to bother). As I understand it, Carlson was suggesting getting your facts straight, not being intellectually dishonest partisan hacks. Emulating Dem hackery might be good for the GOP, but it's not good for the U.S.

2. A related problem is a lack of integrity and brainpower on the part of the leaders of the GOP. For instance, they're afraid of telling the truth about this issue, or they've been so programmed by the MSM that they would reflexively dismiss my reporting, lumping my fact-based coverage in with those who only engage in speculation. And, that's despite the fact that telling the truth about that issue in the right way could help discredit dozens of MSM reporters. If any GOP leaders ever discussed that topic, they'd do it in a stupid food fight way rather than simply stating the truth.

3. And, many people just don't know how to do things the right way. Here are three examples of blog posts that could have been more effective. Here's another one. The idiotic "tea parties" are a more recent example.

Look,I love (especially) politcal blogs  I have been reading them since before rathergate. Some have real,and real time info,some are just aggregators,and some are just echo chambers. I do not consider myself concise or articulate,nor do I have sources to new info,so mostly I read. Probably way too many hours. But...

The info was out there. i can remember reading about Wright,Annenberg,Ayers,Resko,etc well before the 0 won the Dem nomination.Probably as far back on some of it in Mar of 08.

Consider that there was at least two blogs,and a radio reporter in Chicago that were seriously investigating the Annenberg Challenge. Very little of that info made the MSM,and what did was discounted heavily

So the question becomes -

1 - How do the conservatives,or Republicans a) find the goods on opponents, and b) do we want to use info the same way as Kos?

I don't know that this is such a good plan anyway,especially in the case of the 0,as the MSM wasn't going to listen ,and did their best to mitigate any argument,or info they didn't like.Such as in the case of J Wright. Even after he made it clear what he was preaching was NOT Christianity,no one especially in the MSM questioned if the 0 was what he professed to be. It was important,not from a religious stand point,but from the fact that the country could have seen from the contrast that he was not the candidate he was saying he was. Of course,there aren't many religious scholars out there that are either into politics,or haven't been discredited in the same manner as Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal are being attacked. And nobody important stands up for them, even when they know that they were correct.

I am getting a little OT here,but the question becomes how do you limit frivolious attacks,apparently we can't, as no one is able to counter all the attacks,and the candidates just can't seem to find it in themselves to stick together when someone is being falsely attacked, Even then most of the MSM will ignore any common front put out by the R side. 

So we are left with finding an end-run around them.

First I think candidates themselves(unfortunately) are going to have to be quicker on the draw to counter frivolous attacks on themselves and other R candidates.This is starting to happen. Faster please!

They are also going to have to come up with a much clearer statement of what being a conservative is. They need a concise statement,we haven't gotten one from the R side They then have to clearly be able to counter the D's misrepresentation of what conservatism is. (Maybe that is the first thing) This coming together also,but once again, Faster Please!

Only then can conservative journalists have a clear direction to take.

Only a few blogs are capable of first person research,and the R side is not getting  fed info like the Ds. So if conservative journalists want help from conservative blogs,they are going to have to use them more for research. Look for the ones that do good reseach,and they are there,and use them.

ps Don't knock the Tea Parties,just think what the blogs looked like in 2001. Pretty amaterish by todays standards. But the good ones grew up didn't they. There were thousands of regular people at these events,most probably don't even know what a blog is

If we can get even a tenth of these teapartyers to grow into solid,articulate speakers for the conservative side, the teaparties will have accomplished what the R party and the R blogs have only a small foothold on. We need normal every day people to take a bigger part in politics,their government,and how the conservative side operates, to counter what the D side makes up about us.We need a bigger voice.

Once again the right decries how the MSM and the voting public won't play along with their Atwater/Rove games. Poor victims.

1. Unless the person in question is a paid advisor/staff to the campaign/administration, it is by definition guilt by association. Many candidates and presidents have had siblings and inlaws with nefarious connections and unwise actions in their past, and we have always viewed that as no reflection on the person themselves, Democrat or Republican.  If your own brother can be a major f*ckup, then so can your friends. The MSM, by and large, have always had too much class to give such associations very much attention. I pray they never do.

2. Even if every voter was fully aware of the connection between Obama and Ayers (as I was) they are free to dismiss that information, or incorporate it into their decision in a manner consistent with their politics, and not how you, as a conservative, would wish to have them view the world. Millions thought the Vietnam War was evil and wrong, and admire the efforts of anti-war protest groups like the Weather Underground. I know you don't. That's real sweet and all. But the rest of us are entitled to view history from our own perspective, and not yours.

That brings up another semi-related point about divergent views of history that I hope the mods will consider. On another thread a poster recently recalled how when President Reagan was shot, he, then a teenager, was quite cheerful at the prospect that Reagan might have been assasinated. The mods felt he was calling for violence against elected officials. I agree that should not be tolerated. But my view was the poster was doing no such thing. He was in fact reporting his youthful reaction to an historical event, and doing so in a very honest manner. I'm sure his view was a minority opinion. But, I am also sure he was far from alone in his sentiments.

I think the jury is still out on Sarah Palin. She's obviously a very complex character, so I won't make my judgement yet. She has a loving family around here, tha isn't 'perfect', and I think that will hold her in good stead with the public. lightweight rucksack