Palin defends her accusations against Obama, Time Magazine calls her ’simply wrong.’

Time Magazine joined the many news organizations to discredit the charges that the McCain campaign continues to make.

The latest is that Obama “pals around with terrorists.”

Time Magazine points out there the accusation is “simply wrong.” The truth is that Obama met Bill Ayers when they ended up both being on a charity board in Chicago.

The liberal media strikes again….

Today’s assault comes from the left-wing Associated Press.  They suggest that the McCain campaign’s decision to assault Obama’s character is over the line, comparing it the the Willie Horton campaign in 1988 and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004.  The AP has the audacity to claim that trying to pair Obama with terrorists is over the line.  McCain and Palin just want voters to believe that Obama is not like us, and if that means they have to turn him into a terrorist sympathizer, what’s wrong with that?

Read the whole AP analysis here…if you can handle their liberal bias

Is McCain saying, “If Obama would debate me, I wouldn’t lie about him”

Each time McCain airs an attack ad, “liberal” media types like the Washington Post, the Associated Press, Factcheck.org are quick to point out the falsehoods, misleading nature and misrepresentations in the ads.  Lately, McCain has been asked about them.  His response is that first, the ads are correct, and second, Obama won’t debate me.  Here’s an exchange from his interview with NPR:

Have you come back to your advisers at any point and said — for example, the ad that ran with your name on it saying that Barack Obama supported comprehensive sex education for primary school students, something that factcheck.org said was wrong. Have you ever gone to your staff and said, “Take that ad off. It’s not right”?

It’s factually correct. It’s absolutely factually correct, and you can go on my Web site and you can see the exact language of the bill that Senator Obama sponsored. But the point is that if he had agreed to the town hall meetings that I asked him to do all around the country, like Jack Kennedy and Barry Goldwater had once agreed to do, the tenor of this campaign would be dramatically different. (emphasis mine) If we’d have gone around the country, and stood side-by-side before the American people and listened to their hopes and dreams and aspirations, the whole tenor of this campaign would be dramatically different. I’m proud of the campaign we are running, the ads are factually correct. And if someone named factcheck.org or anybody else doesn’t agree with it, I respectfully disagree with their conclusions.

So when McCain talks about a different tenor, what is he trying to tell us.  If all of his attacks are honest, why wouldn’t they fit into a campaign with a more positive tenor?  Maybe that will be the next question he tries to answer.

Who will Obama pick?

Obama’s all-important VP selection is endlessly being speculated about, so why not add my take to the mix? There seems to be a number of categories of candidates for him to choose from. However, each category comes with complications. Should he choose a woman? military commander? someone with foreign policy experience? a Washington DC outsider? There are pluses and minuses to each. Lets start with the Outsiders.

The most likely names on the Outsider list are Gov. Tim Kaine of VA, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of KS and former Senator Sam Nunn of GA.

If Obama wants anyone to back him up on foreign policy, Kaine and Sebelius won’t be his choice. I don’t know about you, but I was less than impressived with Sebelius’s Democratic Response to this year’s State of the Union Address. However, both are experienced governors who will have records of working across party lines. Nunn also finds his way into this category, but I question how a former Senator of 24 years becomes an Outsider.
While he does have experience in working to reduce the presence of nuclear material across the globe, a point that Obama likes to emphasize, it seems clear that he is only mentioned because he is believed to offer Obama a way to win Georgia in November, assuming Libertarian Bob Barr can attracted 5-8% of the vote in that state. Choosing Nunn would also inflame the GLBT community, where Nunn is remembered as the guy who ruined President Clinton’s attempt to allow gays to serve openly in the military. Nunn went so far as to record video of the barracks that our soldiers live in, showing how close they sleep to one another. This was supposed proof that gays could not sleep in the vicinity of straights without violating them? The GBLT community is a fundraising base that Obama is unlikely to want to further alienate.

The category of women overlaps. Here, the top choices seem to be Sen. Hillary Clinton, Governor Sebelius or maybe Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri? I haven’t seen McCaskill on too many lists, but she is from an important state and has proven to be a great campaigner on Obama’s behalf. The question that surrounds this category is: Can Obama get away with picking a woman other than Hillary Clinton? Will that cause Hillary supporter who are on the fence about supporting Obama to fall further away from Obama? Or maybe they will come to love the female choice? My guess is, if Obama chooses a woman, it won’t be Hillary. However, I don’t think he will choose a woman.

The scenario that changes this will be that McCain announces his choice first, and he selects a woman. Does this influence Obama?

In the category of foreign policy experience, Obama could choose from Senators Biden or Bayh. These two certainly aren’t outsiders. They both offer positive aspects to the campaign….but has Obama talked too much about the problems of Washington to bring them on board?

In the final category, military commanders with no political experience are probably seen as too risky. The experience of being on the campaign trail, being asked constant questions and always being watched and recorded is a unique one. Campaign gaffes could become a larger problem for this category.

So, in conclusion, I don’t know who Obama will choose as his VP. I wonder if he’s figured it out yet.

Words that (will try to) work

Frank Luntz authored the book, Words That Work. In it, he explains to his readers how he used language to help push the 1994 Contract With America.

Now it’s 2008 and battles of language are still going strong.

First, do Republicans support Deep Sea drilling or Off-shore drilling? Deep-sea drilling is believed to sound better to voters, but it hasn’t quite caught on yet.

Second, Unilateral took on a negative connotation after Pres. Bush took us into war with Iraq. Democrats were successful in making this “Bush’s Unilateral War.” The McCain campaign has taken notice. They are now accusing Obama of wanting to make “unilateral” changes to NAFTA. Can one simple word change voters’ minds about this? Maybe.

Lastly, the phrase “Yes we can” has gained popularity as a slogan for Obama. It didn’t originate with him, but it’s his now. The McCain campaign has taken notice. They now talk of McCain’s position on lowering gas prices as “Yes We Can” while Obama’s position is “No We Can’t” I guess that is much simpler than explaining how they are going to give consumer an ounce of relief at the gas pump.

Only a fool or a fraud…..

John McCain’s latest television ad begins with…”Only a fool or a fraud talks tough or romantically about war.’ The question is, who is he talking about? Is it an attack on his campaign opponent, Barack Obama? One would think if you were going to run an ad talking about fools and frauds, you would be referring to your opponent.

Ironically, this comes at the same time as President Bush admitting that he may have talked too tough about war. So, the real question is, Is John McCain calling President Bush a fool or a fraud? It sure does seem like it.