Michael Eric Dyson On Obama Dress Garb

I love that he points out that the Obama campaign engages people on the assumption that they have a higher education level than the fourth grade. Professor Dyson also handles the lack of experience question well, and points out why the accusations don't hold any water.

More Smearage

A pretty good example of Step 4 in my last post: Subtlety is key. Subtlely attack your opponent. Watch and learn:

How to Smear a Campaign

Step 1: Pick a Stereotype/Know Your Material

Stereotypes are often easy to find and stand out in the most obvious of places. But before you get your stereotype, you need to choose your material. The first thing you want to do is to pick something like the color of your opponents skin, their gender, sexual preference, or their age. Sometimes their personal religion provides ample material viable enough for a smear, but it is less safe than other options. Their lack of religion could also provide material, but it is often hard to find anyone in politics who openly professes to be unreligious. Once you pick your material, base the stereotype you want to expose off of that material. For example:

This Dude is Black.

If your opponent is black, there are numerous stereotypes one could exploit. For instance, many black men are in gangs. All you really need is another black guy with your opponent and you already have your stereotype ready. For example:

Two Black Dudes = Gang Leaders

Your opponent is pictured here with one of his black friends from the inner-city who happens to have a cousin who runs a nightclub that was the site of a shooting which involved an inner-city gang. With this, your opponent has connections to the inner-city gangs. You now have what we call, "The Juice."

Step 2: Spread "The Juice."
The idea is to get the Juice spread around as quickly as possible. Circulate a memo, forward an email, publish a newsletter, etc. It won't take long; the more controvertial the better. It will immediately enter the spotlight of a campaign. If you're lucky, your opponent will have to keep denouncing the accusations long into the campaign. Important: Never underestimate the intellectual sluggishness of the general public; the more closely it sticks to a stereotype, the easier it is for them to drink up the Juice. People will see that your opponent is in a murderous negro gang and will be frightened.

Step 3: Deal With the Media
The first thing you want to do is downplay the circulation of the memo or the email; make it seem like it was a random staffer sending an email out to his parents. The next thing you want to do is talk to the media about the Juice. Tell the media that they have focused too much on this particular story and that they are not sticking to the real issues. Say this to every newspaper, television show, radio show, Disc Jockey, and Milkman that you see/come in contact with. A press conference is a MUST. The press will drink it up.

Step 4: Subtlety is Key (Subtle-key).
After the Juice has been spread around, it is best to downplay the accusations, but always make sure you talk about them. For example: you could have a campaign staffer go on a Talk Show and talk about the accusations. A good thing for the staffer to say would be: "We don't want to get into these kind of politics. No one is accusing our opponent of being a gang leader. No one in our campaign could really know whether or not our opponent led a gang into the streets and murdered old Christian white women. What's important is not worrying about whether or not our opponent is a vicious gang leader, but worrying about the issues. We want to rise up over these kind of politics and it is sad that our opponent, the one who is trying to say we accused him of being a gang leader, sinks into these kind of politics over and over again."

Step 5: Take the High Ground
Basically accuse your opponent of being childish and silly for even getting offended at the accusations. You could even turn the whole accusation around on your opponent, for example: "What's so bad about being a gang leader? Some gangs offer comrodority and friendship. Some provide marijuana to young adults which could help prevent cancer development. And is our opponent suggesting that gangs are something he would run from? Our candidate would do something about the gangs and learn how to comfort these young men who have been led astray by society instead of leaving them to fend for themselves, as our opponent is doing."


All in all, smearing is a complex art but once you get the hang of it, it becomes more simple. Just remember to always deny it whilst repeating it, and always take the highest rode possible: convince the public that you don't care about the issue more than your opponent. That is how you smear a campaign.


Now what you did, Mrs. Clinton, is most certainly Rovian.

The iPhone Band

As an iPhoner and a DS addict, this is most definitely cool:

A Move.

Updates have become sparse on this blog as of late. It's partly because work has gotten very busy, but it's also because the blog will be saying adiós to blogger (it's been fun) and hello to a new server and website. DavidCPodhaskie.com is currently in development. So while updates will not cease on this site until the new one is up and ready, they will not be frequent. So enjoy and stay healthy.

Teh Internetz Mak3s Us 5t00p!d

Is YouTube destroying America? Peter Suderman has a neat post about how excessive technology use by teens is dumbing them down. He actually doesn't believe this is true, but he does see-saw with the idea of technology making us all fat, lazy, and simple a la the Eloi. It's all interesting to me because I am doing research for a book I am writing on the subject. There could very possibly be a new temperment developing thanks to all of these video games and tech-wizardry.

And the idea makes sense so I had better jump on it before someone else does.

McCain Fails Miserably

Yesterday I rejoiced at the Senate's vote to cease the torture techniques currently used by the Bush administration. It was a great bill. Unfortunately, John McCain decided to vote against it, which has cast a huge shadow of doubt on my ability to vote for him. I know Barack Obama is against torture. Thanks to this vote, I do not know if John McCain is.

He will either have to explain this vote thoroughly, or John McCain will lose my almost-wrapped-up vote in the general election.

Oh Happy Day.

For the first time in a long time, I am incredibly happy with the Senate. They voted to ban waterboarding with their latest bill, a bill that George W. Bush has said he will veto. But that doesn't matter. We all know that Gee Dubya longs to continue his torture policy and it's no secret that he will veto any bill that promotes real democratic values. But finally, through this bill, my voice is being heard. George W. Bush knows, thanks to my Senators, that I do not approve of water torture or "enhanced interrogation."

Less than a year to go.

So Long to the Establishment

The nomination of McCain marks an end to the days when the Republican party rewarded its most insane factions and was guided by an idealogically bankrupt establishment. McCain is a real conservative who can bring the real party together and rightfully alienate those who do not hold a place in its future. And good riddance. If I was McCain and someone was pledging to vote for Hillary instead of me because I wasn't (by their definition) conservative enough, I wouldn't want their vote. Thankfully, this group of masochists are a minority amongst Republicans, as evidenced by McCain's reception as CPAC:



Note the generously scattered boos. That group would prefer an inauthentic, phony Republican merely because they know he'd continue Bush's policies and that McCain would not. McCain will hopefully usher in a return to real conservatism: one that is green, low-spending, pro-civil liberties, and anti-torture. McCain 2008 is a fitting way to say goodbye to one of the most disasterous presidents in American history; the goodbye comes not from a Democrat, but from a fellow Republican who refuses to simply follow the party lines.

McCain is dead wrong on the war, but is more candid about his position than the likes or Romney, Huckabee, and even Clinton. If I must trust anyone to handle it, it would have to be McCain.

Dr. Paul ran a good race, and it will be interesting to see what happens to his supporters. I would encourage them to flock to McCain, but it seems like they've already gotten the hint.

Ding Dong, the Witch is Dead

Adios Romney. I love how he makes it seem like he's doing us a favor by dropping out:

"Frankly I'd be making it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win...I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

I'd have more respect for him if he said, "I spent $40 milllion of my own money on this campaign and still lost, so it's obvious I suck."

McCain/Palin '08

I know I previously suggested that Susan Collins should run with John McCain. But I take it back. McCain would be making a flawless political move if he took Palin on as his Veep. She's attractive, young, and a girl. Palin would immediately inject some life into McCain's Presidential bid and would make him much more appealing to moderates and Democrats. Palin is extremely popular with the GOP, and Fred Barnes wrote this glowing review of her term as governor.

A McCain/Palin ticket immediately gets me excited. Palin would be a blast to watch in a debate, and she would keep McCain young in the minds of voters under 30. And not only that, Palin has remained staunchly conservative, which is more than Ann Coulter can say for McCain. Palin does have a soft spot for climate change, but maybe it's because she doesn't want her state to melt away. I'm sure the Neocons would give her a pass on that one issue.

If McCain doesn't pick Palin, I will immediately go back to "settling for McCain." If there was a woman on the ticket, I'd most certainly be more excited than I am now.

McCain's Vice-President

Like many bloggers, I am tempted to call Mike Huckabee as McCain's Vice-Presidential nominee. After all, they're both anti-torture, anti-Guantanamo, and are more reasonable on immigration. But since I can't stand Huckabee's economic policies, he doesn't really add to the allure of McCain (for me). What would?

Mainly, estrogen.

McCain will be 72 this year. He will either be facing a woman or a young, black Senator. All of that progressiveness will be staring him right in the face. The best way for McCain to combat a very fresh and Presidential Barack Obama would be to put a younger woman on the ticket with him. I know Republicans really like and enjoy "the box," and that this may a little bit too far outside of it for most of them, but I think it would make for an interesting race. The question is, what female Republicans would run alongside McCain?

The first woman that comes to mind is Elizabeth Dole, but she is over 70 and it would be odd to nominate two senior citizens to combat a 46 year-old Senator. Not only that, we would all get the feeling that grandpa and grandma were hoping to run the country. So Dole's out. Who's left?

Kay Bailey Hutchison from Texas seems like a good fit, she's 64 (just a few years older than Clinton) and is probably more conservative (read: neoconservative) than McCain on issues like immigration and would be a good way to reel in the Coulter's and Limbaugh's. However, I believe the best choice for McCain would be Maine Senator Susan Collins. She voted against the surge in Iraq, so that puts her at odds with McCain. But she has supported McCain on other issues, specifically campaign-finance reform (blech) and judicial appointments (she was part of the Gang of 14 with McCain.) Lieberman, McCain's buddy, is also buddies with Collins. Even though they disagree on key issues like the War and abortion, she is moderate enough to compete with the progressive choices being offered by the Democrats. At the very least, it'd be interesting.

What we would see in a McCain-Collins ticket is a Republican candidacy that loudly says "we're ready for change too." It would prove to America and the world that the Republicans aren't just "a bunch of white guys" looking for power and would make the Presidential race a lot more civil. Think of it, a McCain-Collins ticket running against an Obama/Hillary campaign? There would (potentially) be a woman on both parties' tickets. It would bring out the best in both parties and prove to the world that America is still the place where people of any gender and color can rise to the highest ranks of power.

Or maybe it'll just be Huckabee.

Update: A reader left this comment:

"I don't know about two Senators on the ticket, either. I'm sure the radio talkers could make hay with that one.I'd think someone with executive experience would make a good choice, provided it doesn't backfire because of past record. Man, it is slim pickings for female governors out there."

That was all I needed to hear. I don't know why I didn't think of her, but Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska would be a perfect fit for McCain. She's pro-life, a tax-cutter, and is on the climate change bandwagon. And she's pretty hot too. Palin's lack of a penis and her young age (43) makes her a no-brainer for McCain. Did I mention she's hot?

R.I.P. = Romney In Pieces

And so ends Mitt Romney's presidential run. Yesterday was when reality set in for the Romney campaign, and that reality came in the form of Mike Huckabee. He helped McCain seal the deal, and put a rusty nail into the Mormon's coffin. The Salt Lake Tribune said it well:

"So long as Huckabee, an ordained Baptist minister, remains in the race, he bleeds votes from Romney."

While it might be true that Evangelicals are vying for Huckabee rather than Romney, I believe even if Huckabee was absent from the race Romney would not have topped McCain. Romney evokes that snakey-quality we've come to expect from politicians, and I think Republicans hate it more than Democrats (look at Hillary's popularity). I think it really comes down to the fact that people flat out did not like Romney. He's not a great speaker and he's, to put it simply, not likeable. Forget the Mormonism and the flip-flopping, he simply has an un-likeable personality, and every election result has shown that. He spent $1.16 million for each delegate he currently has. He campaigned the hardest and spent the most in Iowa and New Hampshire and came up short. He has outspent all of his opponents and has very little to show for it (not the best example of fiscal responsibility), he even had his contenders ganging up on him in the debates and in West Virginia. He's a politician in every sense of the word and the other candidates didn't like it.

I believe, like Jennifer Rubin and Bill Cristol, that Romney should say his goodbyes as quickly as possible. His presence in the race prevents Republicans from gathering behind McCain. I know it makes Limbaugh and Hannity squirm to have someone who is anti-torture and has a reasonable approach to immigration to reform representing the Republicans, but would they really prefer a Democrat? When it comes down to it, I think not. The Republican party may be splintering off, but if Hillary Clinton is the nominee, you can bet ousting her will be a cause worth uniting for.

So long Mitt. Sometimes I think of what your campaign could have been if you had only developed a backbone, instead of catering to every viewpoint on either side of the aisle. But all in all, I'm saying good riddance.

Cute.

Not that I'm an Obama supporter or anything....but this girl is pretty cute.

Go Giants!

"We want to win the game. We're not here to be second-best to anybody. We came here to win a game."

Ann Coulter Goes the Way of Britney Spears

I suspected there was something awry when she called John Edwards a faggot at CPAC. This video makes me suspect that Ann Coulter is really losing it a la Britney Spears. While I think drugs and the like are responsible for Spears's collapse, is it possible that Ann Coulter is suffering from some kind of dementia? There is some link between Menopause and dementia, though it's rare. But Coulter has really gone off the deep end and I don't think it's just to sell books. I mean, at one point in this interview, the host tells Coulter to "Calm down." A part of me feels bad for her. Another part wishes abortion was legal in 1961 (Yes, she's almost 50 and STILL SINGLE! WOOOO.)

Everyone Hates John McCain

And so the backlash begins. Two days away from Super-Tuesday, with John McCain in a solid first place, and the Neoconservatives are squirming. There are pleads from Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the like to "VOTE FOR ROMNEY!" Yes, the far-right has selected Romney as their candidate because they don't like John McCain on the issues. But let's look at the issues:

1. McCain is anti-torture.
I actually commend Coulter for having the balls to say she does not want to support McCain because he is against the torture techniques used at Guantanamo. She pointed out in this video that while Hannity calls it "interrogation," it really is torture. What's sick is that she openly supports torture. I don't want to belittle the atrocities comitted by the Nazis in Europe, but I think it is safe to compare Coulter and others to them. Torture is not an American value. Every nation that has ever supported torture always thought it was "doing the right thing," and no matter what happens on 24, torture is never okay. I've spoken about it heavily on this blog and when the practice is finally discontinued and the sun sets on the Bush Administration it will be a great day for America. But there is nothing I can do for you if you support torture. John McCain may just not be your man, but don't expect someone who supports torture to get the nomination, since most of the country is against it.

2. McCain-Feingold.
I'm not a fan, but I can look past this piece of legislation. It makes sense in a logical sort of way, but when you get down to it, it's a restriction on free speech. Even though I think this bill is a minor issue for the Neoconservatives, they still tend to make a big deal of it. So instead of supporting McCain, they choose to support Romney instead. With that said:

"During his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney “proposed taxing political contributions to finance publicly funded campaigns,” while during his 1994 Senate campaign Romney “publicly advocated placing spending limits on congressional campaigns and abolishing political action committees (PACs).”

Surprise surprise. Romney had a different position a few years ago than he does now.

3. Bush's Tax Cuts
Yes, McCain did not support the tax cuts. He now says he did not support the tax cuts because there was no cut in spending to accompany the tax cuts. I personally think he was disgusted with what the Republican party did to him in 2000 and he wanted to teach them a lesson. Regardless, he wants to make the cuts permanent. Anyway, here is Romney's position on the tax cuts:

"Romney refused to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush's economic program in 2003. Romney's spokesperson said that it's 'just not a state matter.'"

Take note that Romney said he was "quicker than McCain" to endorse Bush's tax cuts.

4. Immigration
Despite all the hooplah about every other issue, this is the real reason neocons hate John McCain. While it's true the bill was less than perfect (much less), McCain has a much more reasonable approach to the issue than the far-right, and I suspect Romney does as well he's just not saying it. Well, at least he's just not saying it now:

"The Lowell Sun reported (12/2/2004) that Romney supported amnesty and did in fact agree with the McCain-Kennedy Immigration Bill. Romney stated, " I don't believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from out country. With these 11 million people, let's have them registered, know who they are. Those who've been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn't be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship, as they would from their home country."

I'm pretty sure Romney's kids were hatched from eggs. If Romney isn't the typical, lying, slithering politician, I don't know what is.

My main point is obviously that Romney, though chosen by the establishment, has occupied every position that McCain has and then some. I'm pretty sure the neoconservatives hate McCain because of the immigration bill and everything else they cite is just to reassure themselves that they don't hate a candidate because of one issue.

I believe know John McCain is a conservative. I do not support the Iraq War, but if I can trust anyone to manage it correctly, it would be John McCain.