As long as we let the right wing smear machine define us, we're going to lose.

[Mooney]

I'm getting really sick of all the people cowering in fear of the right wing smear machine. What set me off is this whole "PastorGate" nonsense, but this applies to Hillary too. It doesn't matter who our nominee is. Whoever it is will have an epic shitstorm of mud and smears flung their way by every quarter of the right wing. Whether or not what they say is true is irrelevant. If Obama had no association with his pastor, the right wing would simply make shit up. The same goes for Hillary Clinton. Even if she had absolutely no negatives to speak of, they would make them up and parrot the talking points relentlessly until the accusations stick. Please see the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections for examples of this phenomenon.

We need to get on an aggressive footing and attack the right wing relentlessly right up through election day if we're going to win this thing. Trying to predict what smears they'll come up and adjusting our candidates accordingly in an effort to neutralize future smears is not going to work. It didn't work before and it won't work this year.

The Republicans have a terrible candidate who their own voters can barely stand. The current administration has caused so many fuckups that I lost count sometime in 2005. If we can't hammer away at these points relentlessly and keep the focus on them, then we deserve to lose. We have to make this election about them, not let them define it by what scandals they're going to exploit. We have to make them too busy trying to defend their shitty record to even have a chance to attack. We have to keep them so busy trying to get out from under the Iraq war and the economy that they never even have a chance to mention PastorGate or the Rose Law Firm.

This is how we'll win. Not by playing on their terms and with their issues. We have to keep the focus on their fuckups, and do it with inquisitorial intensity. Otherwise, yes, we're going to lose.

/rant

[scheming daemons]

1. A-fucking-men

[Mooney]

2. Thank you

The pathetic, simpering cowardice is making me nauseous.

[Mooney]

3. Damn. Only one response, huh?

That's too bad.

[NorthernSpy]

4. this time, we're going to do it to them...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5059676


If we don't, we have no chance of winning, and even if we don't win, we might as well accomplish something while losing.

[Mooney]

5. There's also this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/world/middleeast/11iraq.html?scp=11&sq=&st=nyt

and this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/world/middleeast/07iraq.html?scp=24&sq=&st=nyt

and this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7289766.stm

and so forth.

[NorthernSpy]

6. thanks for the links...

I will check them out.

[Mooney]

7. That's just the result of five minutes online, too.

And I didn't even get started on the economy. Once again, if we can't nail the Republicans on the economy and the war because we're too busy wetting our pants over Obama's pastor, then the Democratic party is officially irrelevant.

[Bullet1987]

8. I agree...

[BeyondGeography]

9. That's not a fair way to describe the Clinton campaign

Then again...

[Forkboy]

10. Seems the left wing smear machine is willing to do their work for them.

[Mooney]

11. Can't argue with that. n/t

[Mooney]

12. Kicky-poo! n/t

[ecstatic]

13. these days, I'm more frightened of the left wing smear machine nt