November 03, 2008

11/3: Caught On Tape

Lately, the conservative blogosphere has been obsessed with various audio and video tapes that they believe to be damaging to Barack Obama's presidential prospects. Conservative bloggers spent the early part of last week buzzing about a 2001 audio clip (which was hyped by Matt Drudge) in which Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren to pursue "redistribution of wealth." Righty bloggers thought that Obama's comments revealed his "socialism" and "Marxism". Conservative bloggers spent the latter part of the week complaining about the Los Angeles Times' refusal to release a video tape of Obama praising Palestinian academic Rashid Khalidi at a 2003 banquet. One prominent righty blogger claimed that the tape featured Obama "toasting a known Islamic terrorist" and "condemning Israel" -- which, if true, would obviously hurt Obama's candidacy. Now, conservative bloggers are buzzing about a Jan. 2008 audio tape (which, not incidentally, was also hyped by Drudge) in which Obama asserted that his cap-and-trade proposals would "bankrupt" those who tried to build new coal-powered plants. Righty bloggers believe that Obama's remarks could hurt him in coal states such as PA, OH, and WV.

At the moment, it doesn't appear that any of these tapes have damaged Obama's standing in the polls. But conservative bloggers continue to hope...

OBAMA: The Latest Bombshell

Conservative bloggers are buzzing about an audio tape of Obama speaking with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board on Jan. 17, 2008. In the audio tape, Obama "reiterated his call for a cap and trade system on carbon and greenhouse gases" and made the following comments:

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

Conservative bloggers are accusing Obama of threatening to "bankrupt" the coal industry with his cap-and-grade proposals:

• Townhall's Amanda Carpenter: "Barack Obama has tried to pretend that he's a friend to clean coal, but now this San Francisco Chronicle interview resurfaces courtesy of our friends at Newsbusters. Go ahead, build new coal plants he says. He'll just bankrupt them later through the tax code."
• Michelle Malkin: "Bankrupty: The change Obama thinks the coal industry deserves..."
• RedState's Moe Lane: "Coal States: Vote [John] McCain, or against your economic interests. Your call."
• Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "The coal-based economics of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, and other states will be the first to feel this new policy. Let's hope the voters there pay attention."
• Power Line's Scott Johnson: "How have the media overlooked this enlightening exposition of Obama's policy from earlier this year?"

On the left side of the blogosphere, Daily Kos' Jed L thinks this is a non-story: "Here's the facts that the McCain-Drudge-FOX axis of weasel does not want you to know: The Chronicle had not concealed the recording, which had been on the newspaper's website all along. And rather than reveal some sinister scheme, what it actually demonstrated was that Barack Obama supported clean coal technology -- a position he shares with none other than John McCain."

OBAMA II: He's Related To An Illegal!

Several conservative bloggers were outraged to learn that Obama's aunt is living in the U.S. illegally:

• Carpenter: "There's so much that's personally and politically offensive in this story I don't know where to start. First, the millionaire Obama leaves his aunt to live in the projects. Obama became rich through his best-selling books based on his own life story. Seems like he could have at least helped the aunt who helped make that story better to tell. So much for spreading the wealth. Second, he takes her money even though she's an illegal alien. That is against the law. His campaign can't even screen out illegal money from his FAMILY MEMBERS. This underscores what a huge problem his campaign has had in the campaign finance department. Last, I thought deportation was supposed to be inhuman and undoable. Wasn't that Obama's whole rationale for amnesty? He'll stick up for millions of other illegal aliens but not lift a finger to sponsor his own auntie to stay?? Cold."
• NRO's Victor Davis Hanson: "How many laws can one break? [...] How ethical is it for someone who is in violation of immigration law, and receiving some sort of public subsidy, to then donate money, illegally again, to a campaign? Message: defy immigration law; ignore a deporation order; obtain, again illegally, public assistance; donate illegally to a presidential campagin; and then count on the press attacking those who worry about such serial flouting of the law."
• Malkin: "Turns out Aunti Zeituni Onyango, one of Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama's many relatives made famous in his memoir, is an illegal alien. And not just a run-of-the-mill illegal alien on welfare. She's one of the hundreds of thousands of deportation fugitives -- absconders -- whom I've been reporting on for the past six years. [...] Lucky for Aunti, anyone who thinks she should face the music and get the boot is considered a 'hater' and a 'xenophobe' and a RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST. Lucky for Aunti, she can always take up shelter in a sanctuary-offering, rule-of-law defying church."
• NRO's Mark Steyn: "When first I heard about the Undocumented Auntie, I thought I'd finally figured out how this spread-the-wealth thing works: The government taxes Joe the Plumber to fund public housing agencies that illegally provide welfare and accommodation to illegal immigrants thereby freeing up their cash flow to enable them to make illegal campaign contributions to any nephew who might chance to be running for president and get him elected so he can tax Joe the Plumber even more to fund even more public housing for even more illegal immigrants to make even more illegal campaign contributions... Etc."

PALIN: Her High School Civics Teacher Should Be Fired

Liberal bloggers are accusing Sarah Palin of being ignorant of the First Amendment after she said that "her First Amendment rights may be threatened by 'attacks' from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama":

"Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.

'If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations,' Palin told host Chris Plante, 'then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.'"

• Salon's Glenn Greenwald: "Somehow, in Sarah Palin's brain, it's a threat to the First Amendment when newspapers criticize her negative attacks on Barack Obama. This is actually so dumb that it hurts. [...] Is it even possible to imagine more breathtaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?"
• TAPPED's Adam Serwer: "[Palin's] understanding of the First Amendment, not as freedom of speech, but as freedom of speech limited to me and those who share my political views, coupled with a freedom from criticism of those views, is the most frightening interpretation of the Constitution I've ever heard in my life. Those 'attacks' from the MSM are protected under the Constitution, Palin's 'right' to be 'free' from such 'attacks' (read: critical coverage) is most definitely not."
• Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "[This is] yet another example of a woman saying stuff that would be considered disqualifying in a state senate race. [...] Needless to say, there is no first amendment right to be immune from criticism."
• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "[Palin] honestly seems to think that the role of the press is to serve as stenographers for those in power, cheerleaders for the government at large, and that when they refuse to do so, they are somehow acting not in accordance with her twisted understanding of the Constitution. We need to get this nutjob back to Alaska where she is their problem."
• Mark Kleiman: "I'm glad we have a hockey mom to teach us civics. Not only didn't I know that the Vice President runs the Senate, I didn't even know that the First Amendment is there to protect officials from criticism by reporters."
• Brian Beutler: "Sarah Palin has a third grader's understanding of Constitutional rights."

HORSERACE: Keep Hope Alive, Conservatives!

More than a few conservative bloggers see positive signs for McCain:

• Morrissey: "I think John McCain will win a squeaker over Barack Obama, 273-265, by holding Florida, Nevada, and adding Pennsylvania as a trade for Virginia. [...] GOTV will make a difference, but so will those undecideds -- and as I've said before, if that many people still haven't made up their mind to vote Obama, then I expect most of them to take the safe fall-back position of McCain."
• AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer: "There's a massive last-minute shift in the electorate. Massive. What's not clear is whether it is all in one direction or not. If it is all or mostly in one direction, it is in McCain's direction. But it could be a shift in two directions: One, a bandwagon effect, leading some semi-McCain leaners to go to Obama; versus two, a 'safety' effect, leading a whole bunch of undecideds and some semi-Obama leaners to move to McCain as the better known quantity in uncertain times. But what's clear to me is that there is an incredible amount of movement. And as all the 'bad' news in the past few days has been bad for Obama -- bankrupting the coal industry, an illegal-immigrant aunt who isn't being cared for, more information about Khalidi and vote fraud -- I tend to think that even if there are countervailing movements in general, the movement in McCain's direction will be stronger."
• Dan Riehl: "It seems fairly apparent that Obama has opted to play prevent defense with just two days to go before the election. That's a dangerous play under any circumstances. Doing it when the news cycle last hours, not days, could prove to be even more disastrous. At least two Jeremiah Wright ads are running in key states. Everyone, including CBS, is talking about Obama bankrupting the coal industry to a nation that, based upon undecideds and Obama's inability to really break away from below 50%, has yet to become comfortable with him as President. [...] While it would be foolish to discount whatever lead Obama might actually have, he proved to be a poor closer in the primaries. His performance in the General may be mirroring that."
• Townhall's Hugh Hewitt: "McCain is right to be optimistic about Tuesday. On every count except image and speechifying, McCain is the far better choice for president. McCain is counting on the collective common sense of the American electorate. Obama's hundreds of millions of dollars cannot obscure the fact that he's spent less than four years achieving nothing in a do-nothing Senate, has never run so much as a shift at a fast food place (except for the Annenberg Challenge which he ran with Bill Ayers) and has a long commitment to the very ideas that have driven Europe into its deep hole. MSM has failed to sell the 'its over' message, because some of the 'polls' stayed close enough long enough for voters to care about the race in its closing hours and thus to continue the focus on Obama."
• RedState's Dan Perrin: "The media could be the real mid-wife of the November 4th victory by Senator McCain and Governor Palin. [...] Legions of off-air producers and researchers slavishly work for their message of every day: Obama must be elected. [...] But Americans are not sheep. They are not like Europeans who collectively behave in a manner in which the elite-made machine dictates. Americans do not allow impassable class structures to form. This is one manifestation of why Americans resist, mightily, being told what to do. [...] And thus, believing their own propaganda, will the media machine of 2008 help elect the object of their contempt and disrespect; which is funny, and human, and exactly the opposite of what the machine wants."

HORSERACE II: It's Not Looking Good, Guys...

Other conservative bloggers are more pessimistic about McCain's chances:

• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "It's not difficult to imagine undecided voters breaking for McCain. But as weighed down as he has become by dissatisfaction with the administration and anger over the economy, I find it difficult to see them breaking for McCain decisively enough to derail Obama."
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "While it's possible that late-deciding voters may swing toward McCain, and that for other reasons, too, McCain might outperform the polls, I don't see any strong reason to expect that to happen."
• Hot Air's Allahpundit: "[My prediction is] Obama 318, Maverick 220, with The One pulling 51 percent nationwide to McCain's 47. I gave McCain Ohio partly because he and Palin have spent so much time there but mainly because I don't have the stomach to sketch out a truly gruesome landslide, my reputation for Eeyore-ism notwithstanding."
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "Although I reserve the right to alter my predictions until the first polls close tomorrow at 7 p.m., right now I predict that Barack Obama will be elected our next president, by an electoral count of 338-200. [...] I'd put Obama's potential range at a minimum of 291 electoral votes and a maximum of 375 electoral votes. I haven't been convinced by those arguing that McCain has a ligitimate shot at Pennsylvania (sorry, Quin), and I don't think Obama will win Georgia."
• RedState's Erick Erickson: "Frankly, as I've said for a while now, it is still [Obama's] to lose. That does not mean he will win, but the odds are in his favor."

HORSERACE III: Cruising Home To Victory

Liberal bloggers are feeling pretty good about Obama's chances:

• MyDD's Jerome Armstrong: "I think it comes down to 5 states that are going to be the closest and decide the election: OH, PA, VA, NC, & FL. McCain would need to win all five, while Obama is at 257 EV's and just needs to win in one of those 5 states. MD currently shows Obama taking PA & VA, while McCain takes OH & NC. FL goes both ways. Even giving it to McCain, still a 291-247 two-state win by Obama. Good enough for me."
• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "Victory certainly seems to be almost assured. My best bet is that Obama's final electoral total will be either 338 or 353, depending on whether he wins North Carolina or not. I think that Indiana, Missouri and North Dakota will just barely slip toward McCain, with Arizona, Georgia and Montana going for McCain by somewhat wider margins."
• FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver: "McCain's clock has simply run out. While there is arguable evidence of a small tightening, there is no evidence of a dramatic tightening of the sort he would need to make Tuesday night interesting. [...] Even if John McCain were to win 70 perecnt of the remaining undecideds (which I don't think is likely), that would only be worth a net of about a point for him. Frankly, McCain's winning scenarios mainly involve the polls having been wrong in the first place -- because of a Bradley Effect or something else. It is unlikely that the polls will 'tighten' substantially further -- especially when Obama already has over 50 percent of the vote."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Missing Karl Rove

The Atlantic's Ross Douthat unloads on the McCain campaign:

"...Allowing that this was a hard time for a Republican to run for President, and allowing that Barack Obama might well have won the White House no matter what McCain did, it's still the case that this has been a lousy, lousy conservative campaign for the Presidency. [...] There were moments when the frantic tactical improvisation worked out well (the 'celebrity ad,' for instance), and McCain's convention speech was well-crafted and well-aimed, and the Palin pick was the right kind of gamble, I think, even if it was taken without adequate preparation and/or consideration of what they might be getting themselves into. But in the aggregate ... well, I always thought that Karl Rove's political genius was overrated, and that huge political opportunities (to say nothing of policy opportunities) were left on the table during the campaigns of the Bush years. And obviously Rove, Ken Mehlman and company were running campaigns in considerably more favorable political environments. But watching the McCain-Palin ticket stagger through the closing months of this campaign, pinning their hopes on a working-class backlash against the progressive income tax in a state that no Republican has carried in twenty years, has given me a newfound appreciation for Rove's abilities: He might not have found a way to win in 2008, but I don't think his efforts would have been quite so embarrassing to watch."

LEST WE FORGET: Obama's Record-Breaking Fundraising Effort Bankrupting NPR, World Wildlife Fund, ACLU

From The Onion:

"WASHINGTON -- After taking in more than $150 million in September, Sen. Barack Obama's historic fundraising drive has continued to completely devastate the causes of public radio, the environment, and civil liberty defense, sources reported Tuesday. 'We've been offering twice as many tote bags, wall calendars, and handsome mugs, but no matter what we do, Obama keeps raking it in,' said Azalea Kim, spokeswoman for the World Wildlife Fund. 'We had a whole campaign ready to end poaching in the Bering Sea and runoff in the Coral Triangle. That's all gone now.' Kim went on to say that she's delighted that the Democratic candidate has garnered the support of so many Americans, but seriously now, enough is enough."

Posted by Ian Faerstein at November 3, 2008 01:42 PM