Rod Blagojevich, Barack Obama, and the Republican Attack Ad
By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
I guess the folks over at the RNC have a lot of time on their hands. They have put together a nearly three-minute-long Web ad slamming Barack Obama for connections to disgraced Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Questions remain, the ad argues. John McCain whacked the RNC for the ad on Sunday, and Allahpundit over at Hot Air notes that while questions do remain, "I'm not sure any really important questions do." The blogger closes by asking: "Should the RNC have waited on this? No benefit of the doubt during the interregnum, at least?"
Partisan preferences aside, as a practical strategic matter, the answer is "Yes." Obama is an enormously popular politician at the moment and has said and done the right things in terms of appearing to want to move past the era of hyperpartisanship. Granted that the RNC's raison d'être is to remove Barack Obama from office, the RNC could at least be smart about it. With Obama enjoying a happy public-opinion honeymoon, the GOP would be wise to lie low and wait for something to happen (and it will) that will make the public more receptive to anti-Obama criticism.
Instead, the RNC leaps after a hint of pseudo scandal in much the same way my dog chases leaves blowing in the street—and with as little regard for oncoming traffic. Weighing in with a three-minute attack ad now might make the party's cranks happy, but it also risks marginalizing the GOP as a crank party.
- Read more by Robert Schlesinger.
- Read more from the Thomas Jefferson Street blog.
- Read more about Rod Blagojevich.
- Read more about the Obama transition.
- Read more about Republicans.
Tags: Republicans | RNC | Rod Blagojevich
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (6) | Print
Reader Comments
So my only choices are "Obama is up to his neck in a scandal despite there being no evidence of that" or "Obama is the Messiah?"
And which one I choose indicates whether I'm an "Obamatron" or not?
Three cheers for nuance. Oh wait, "nuance" is one of those sorta gay things that effete liberals indulge in, right?
Carry on.
@DavidBronx
You cite Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh as examples that there is no liberal media...all right, just want to let you know that that is illogical. Ann Coulter writes, the only people who read that are those who want to read it...she is not part of the mass media. Rush Limbaugh has a radio show. People know that it is a conservative radio show. As such only those who wish to argue with Rush or listen to his ideas tune it.
The alphabet soup news agencies hide what they are. So does Fox. On cable news you cannot get truly balanced reporting, CNN/CBS/BBC (yes, BBC), and ABC are all left leaning, FOX leans to the right. If you can count, you can see that there are more station that lean to the left than to the right.
That is why it is called the liberal media...because the majority of cable news is liberal.
@DavidBronx
You cite Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh as examples that there is no liberal media...all right, just want to let you know that that is illogical. Ann Coulter writes, the only people who read that are those who want to read it...she is not part of the mass media. Rush Limbaugh has a radio show. People know that it is a conservative radio show. As such only those who wish to argue with Rush or listen to his ideas tune it.
The alphabet soup news agencies hide what they are. So does Fox. On cable news you cannot get truly balanced reporting, CNN/CBS/BBC (yes, BBC), and ABC are all left leaning, FOX leans to the right. If you can count, you can see that there are more station that lean to the left than to the right.
That is why it is called the liberal media...because the majority of cable news is liberal.
advertisement
