October 8, 2008, 12:56 pm The Right Goes Negative . . . on McCain By Tobin Harshaw
Alright, the morning-after recriminations have set in, and the right side of the blogosphere is furious — with John McCain. “We have a disaster here — which is what you should expect when you delegate a non-conservative to make the conservative (nay, the American) case,” writes Andy McCarthy at the Corner. “We can parse it eight ways to Sunday, but I think the commentary is missing the big picture…. Memo to McCain Campaign: Someone is either a terrorist sympathizer or he isn’t; someone is either disqualified as a terrorist sympathizer or he’s qualified for public office. You helped portray Obama as a clealy qualified presidential candidate who would fight terrorists. If that’s what the public thinks, good luck trying to win this thing. With due respect, I think tonight was a disaster for our side. I’m dumbfounded that no one else seems to think so. Obama did everything he needed to do, McCain did nothing he needed to do. What am I missing?” His Corner colleague Ed Whelan seems to have head in hands: Did McCain give voters who are undecided or leaning to Obama any reason to vote for McCain? Did McCain give his supporters any cause to be enthusiastic about him? Did McCain open up any lines of attack that he can develop in the remaining weeks? Did McCain give anyone any desire to watch next week’s debate? The answer to all these questions, I think, is clearly no. So McCain’s performance was a dismal failure. “He spent the entire debate assailing massive government spending — while his featured proposal of the night was to heap on more massive government spending to pursue home ownership/retention at all costs,” adds Michelle Malkin. “If Obama had proposed this, the Right would be screaming bloody murder about this socialist grab to have the Treasury Department renegotiate individual home loans and become chief principal write-down agents for the nation…. It’s a great idea…for everyone who bought overpriced homes with Adjustable Rate Mortgages. Those who rented or bought within their means or locked into fixed-rate loans that they can afford are out of luck, naturally.” Melissa Clouthier thinks McCain stumbled from the start, with the question on people losing their retirement savings. “McCain says that Americans are angry, upset and a little frightened,” she writes. “McCain has the answers. Energy independence and home values–buy up bad home loans in America. Isn’t that socialism?… The problem in America today is that ‘we don’t have trust in our institutions’. Ugh: First impression–McCain is sounding like a bumbling Senator. Why didn’t he go over the regulation deal that Obama said? Does he want to lose? With the pithiest summation is Eric Lindholm, the Viking Pundit: “My debate analysis in three words: “Congratulations, President Obama.” http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/the-right-goes-negative-on-mccain/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/WebTV-Pals -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
