Obama and ACORN

Obama's ACORN past:

Pull a Judo Move on Obama: Thoughts on How McCain/Palin Should Close the Deal

While Obama's enjoyed a nice run the last couple of weeks, McCain/Palin are still clearly in the running.  One might look to the 2004 election for parallels.  "Who 'ya gonna' trust?" is a question that loomed large in 2004 and looms large in the final stretch of this campaign season.  The current economic climate is a top-of-mind issue for many. As are energy and international issues. McCain/Palin are well positioned on all of these issues. Both are hightly effective communicators. This is doable. 

A two-pronged approach for squeezing Obama seems fruitful. 

1. Prong one is to shine a ray of hope. To make clear that McCain has a vision that can simultaneously navigate us through current challenges and transcend them.  Take on the Democratic leadership. Take on how the Democrats came into leadership promising improved ethics, etc.  Take on how ineffective they have been. And how Obama is part of the effectiveness problem.
   
2. Prong two is to pull a judo move on Obama. Obama has frequently held up his days as a community organizer as evidence of his leadership skills.  Obama is silent on what he has organized. Turn Obama's history of community organizing against him by shining the light on the issues around which he organized communities, the effectiveness of those efforts, and the Chicago context in which those efforts took place. 

This isn't terribly different from the path the McCain campaign has been following, but they must become more focussed and more effective in making these points. In particulary, they must be more effective in communicating how  McCain intends to lead through the financial crisis and beyond.  Make the path clear!  

When the truth becomes uncomfortable, it becomes a smear

The Anchoress is on a roll:

Now, the GOP is trying to shed some light on the clear and important connection between Barack Obama and the corrupt ACORN - whose activities are on the verge of discrediting the election in 11, or perhaps as many as 14 states - and even Thom notices that their effort is “seen mostly as ‘another right wing attempt to smear Obama.’” Because you know, when the truth is uncomfortable, it becomes a “smear.”

The choice of many in the press to champion Obama is beyond disgusting.  How they behaved during the Clinton era is a mere shadow compared to current efforts.  

Shout Out: Grizzly Groundswell

A shout-out to Grizzly Groundswell for doing fantastic work this election cycle bringing to the fore issues the msm are too blind, lazy, or inept to touch. 

On Limited Government: KISS?

While ruminating this afternoon about the current presidential election campaign, something shifted in a way that revealed how the concept of limited government has been emasculated. The concept of limited government has been reduced to war cries about two issues: abortion and taxes. To be clear both are vital issues. However they have become means to different ends, rather than two manifestations of a common theme: limited government or minimizing the role of government in our daily lives.    

The abortion 'debate' gets pitched as a debate about "individual rights," "reproductive rights," and myriad other "rights."  At risk of being overly simplistic, the discussion should be about individual choice.  A less government approach would preclude the government from entering this arena; would allow individuals to make decisions about their lives. Simplistic, yes. 

Taxes reflect the scope and range of government programs.  Fewer government programs translate to less demand for government funds. Lower demand for government funds translates to a lower tax burden.  Simple. 

Encourage discussions about programs to take place at the local level. The closer a program is to the source of need and support, the more efficient the program is likely to be in terms of financial and human resources.  

Would that our politicins be able to communicate clearly about what government programs, especially federal government programs cost -- both in financial and human terms.  Would that our politicians could effectively make the case that less government translates to greater individual  freedom, greater efficiency in delivery of programs (if decision making is moved to the local level), and a more dynamic set of choices as market forces are not impeded.

Simplistic? Yep. But there's much to be said in support of the KISS principle. 

Catching Up

For reasons of convenience, I have been posting on the 2008 Presidentail Campaign over at Digito Society. I'll try to resist the pull of convenience and return to posting political ditties here. Digito Society will return to its normal apolitical issues. 

Entering a Post-Convention Era

A modest proposal: Can the Conventions!

Political conventions have been a fixture of American presidential politics since the beginning. Will changes in electoral politics and Hurricane Gustov change that? Both parties ended their primary seasons with only one candidate standing. The Democrats went so far as to do away with the traditional roll-call vote to determine their candidate. They opted for a behind the scenes, out of public eye, voting process.

Hurricane Gustov has the Republicans curtailing their convention plans.

Given the inevitability of the conventions' nominating processes, why hold the conventions at all? Couldn't the voting be handled by a secure on-line system? Granted the host cities would not reap the millions of dollars of revenue the presidential conventions bring to town. However, couldn't the human capital and monies be put to better use?

McCain's introduction of Sarah Palin as his VP candidate was far more dramatic than anything that could happen at the convention.

Solution? Can the conventions!