Obama did specifically call him a liar--or, more precisely, Obama said "they," referring to the McCain campaign--in the video you linked to here. And it still managed to be, as you described it, lighthearted.

Here's the correct approach:

http://underbelly-buce.blogspot.com/2008/08/niche-marketing-mccain-campaign.html

1. Yes, Obama can outright call McCain a lier.

2. A direct accusation forces the MSM to look at the facts, so they can report whether or not Obama is certifiable for calling their friend a lier.

3. It is a good idea.

I don't think he has to say the word "lie" so long as he explains what happened in a concise and clear way. That way, it will speak for itself (that is, people will understand how dishonest McCain was).

This way he avoids looking like he is over-reacting-- although I must say, it sounds like McCain is acting pretty terrible.

I wrote:

I don't think he has to say the word "lie" so long as he explains what happened in a concise and clear way.

You know what I mean-- he should point this out: ...the depth and reach of Obama's energy plan, which has been available for months...

Posted by: on August 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Whoops, that was me...

At the risk of getting repetitive, but:
Yes Obama needs to be more aggressive about McShame. McCain has shown he is desperately dishonest, not just by hiring a Rove-ite but through his recent energy price ad smears against Barack Obama. McShame was dishonest enough to put out an ad implying that people like BHO were responsible for the high gas prices today. Well, first that's hypocrisy because McCain opposed OSD for years until recently too. Mr. Fake Talk Express has implied that he, McCain, was always for off-shore drilling - But McCain just changed his mind several weeks ago, only a few weeks before Obama.

Second, it's a lie because the core reason for the recent oil price rise is rising consumption - we and citizens of other countries are responsible for our own gluttonous appetites, not environmentalists. If we'd followed the advice of the latter, such as strict CAFE standards opposed by Repiglicans, the price of gas would be maybe a dollar lower not the few cents someday from OSD.

*Tires: Didn't Obama explain that the savings from properly inflated tires was maybe a bit more than what we'd get from OSD?*

(BTW - let's allow some off-shore drilling but only *on condition* that the oil from such wells *must* be used directly in the USA! - See how they like them apples ...)

This explains a lot: I found out from a piece in The New Yorker that McCain used to be called "punk" in his youth. Then he marries the narcotics-stealing woman he had an affair with - see, Republican family values as the icing for his partisan hackery. The S**t-talk Express.

1. Yes, Obama can outright call McCain a liar.

2. A direct accusation forces the MSM to come up with "balanced" reporting which could turn out to be anything, but usually involves reporting the McCain camp retort verbatim, along with quoting some expert who can come up with some scenario or shading of facts in which the McCain charge might not be a total lie.

3. It may be a good idea.

Can't Obama flat-out say, "John McCain is lying. He'll obviously say anything to get elected president. American can't afford another president who has no regard for truth or the facts."

Jesus tap dancing Christ, that's all Democrats ever say about Republicans and vice versa. That and claiming that it will be the end of the world if their opponent gets elected.

Oh wait, only Democrats believe that their election is absolutely necessary to save the planet (Pelosi), or to keep the oceans from rising (the One) or to get the crippled to walk again (Edwards).

If this response to one of McCain's latest ads is any indication, they may well be taking up that kind of language on a broader level. I think it's a great idea, and not only because it happens to be true. Nothing is gonna get that wrinkly old fuck from 0-to-apoplectic faster than being called a liar, and from that point on, pass the popcorn & enjoy the fireworks.

How many times did Obama lie about the 100-year-war thing? ten? one hundred? How may times has Obama lied about McCain being in the pocket of "big oil"?

If Obama starts calling McCain a liar then McCain starts calling Obama on all his lies. It's zero sum.

Explicitly calling McCain a lier is dangerous because the press loves McCain, so they may turn on Obama, reporting that Obama is a humorless scold rather than reporting the truth, which is that McCain is running a profoundly unserious campaign.

It is a tough call. Obama's response has to be very finely calibrated, but he cannot be like Kerry and refuse to lower himself to the level of his attackers, counting on the great American public to recognize a scoundrel.

2000 and 2004 taught us that the great American public rewards scoundrels.

Doesn't this say something important about McCain's character? Don't the last eight years show us what happens when you campaign in the Rove style and then try to govern?

Chait is missing the point. The aim of the GOP is not to govern, but to rule, to use the coercive power of the state to enrich themselves, their friends and relations, and to unleash the punitive power of the state on those who are not their family, friends, and relations not to exact justice, not because they pose any danger, but simply because they are not their family, friends, and relations, and because they can.

It’s the political philosophy — actually that’s pretty kind, because they don’t actually believe in a polity, just a clan, a tribe — of the early Middle Ages.

I would love to see McCain baited into saying "it was just a joke." That opens the door to discuss his joke about bombing Iran, and insulting his wife, and then offering her up for a strip show for bikers... Let's launch an ad with 20 seconds of clips of McCain's "jokes" concluding with the question, "is this what John McCain means by straight talk and responsible leadership? Or do you want a president who actually says what he means?"

Obama campaign should hand out dipsticks.

Washington, including Obama and McCain, have a common enemy--the people of the United States. And the enemy of my enemy is my friend. They stage a pillow fight now and then because the sheeple still imagine they have a choice between the Democans and the Republicrats.

Of all the supposed great things in Obama's energy plan, Barak highlights the "put air in your tires" part of it?

Speaking of prevaricators, our good friend, Orwell, is back, and he's pretending that the sensible inflation of automobile tires is not only a part of Obama's energy plan, but that it's a highlight of it. Of course, your average third-grader could look through the plan in question and point out that there's absolutely no mention of tire pressure to be found. But let's not deny Orwell the opportunity to make an ass of himself -- again.

Why is it always couched in terms of offshore drilling or no drilling? Drilling is now permitted in 80% of proven offshore reserves, which are the high-yield areas. So the question is not whether or not to drill; it is whether to drill in the less productive areas.

I think Obama has the charisma to call a lie a lie and come out stronger.

The real reason McCain is such a liar:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/08/10885/

Obama needs to be presidential and reply with wit and some humor. The public doesn’t like whiners or angry old men (which will catch up with McCain sooner or later).

I remember the first Carter – Reagan debate, where Carter let loose with an angry devastating list of the dumb things Reagan had said over the years (and that’s quite a list). With a smile Reagan replied “there you go again�, and the public and MSM immediately agreed this throw away line demonstrated his presidential timbre.

Obama needs to hit back hard while staying on the high road. Meanwhile he needs to let loose the attack dogs to talk about lying senile old men who have vile tempers, six houses, and their own executive jets.

A joke?

John McCain is joking around? He's spending millions of dollars of his donors cash on a joke? It that his plan? After 8 years of Bush, we don't need jokes. We need solutions. I'm Barack Obama and I'm the serious candidate. If you think we have time to joke around in 2008, vote for John McCain.

Now what?

Kevin wrote: "... given the realities of today's media environment ..."

Do you mean the reality that "today's media environment" consists of a handful of giant corporations who own and control virtually all of the mass media from which most Americans get most of their information?

Do you mean the reality that those corporations use the mass media not to impartially inform the American people in the public interest, but to propagandize for their own interests and their own agenda -- which is pretty much the same as the agenda of the rest of America's Ultra-Rich Ruling Class, Inc., namely to put in power right-wing extremist Republican presidents?

Do you mean the reality that the corporate-owned mass media is campaigning for Their Man McCain and engaging in an onslaught of character assassination against Obama, in close cooperation with the right-wing media and the Republican Party, exactly as they did to Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004?

Do you mean that "sensible liberal" bloggers are finally going to stop pretending that the corporate-owned mass media is impartial in this election and its absurd coverage is the result of laziness or incompetence rather than a very deliberate, carefully constructed propaganda campaign aimed at getting McCain close enough to steal the third presidential election in a row?

I didn't think so.

Orwell wrote: "There ain't much there there."

If you are talking about your brain, you are correct, you weak-minded ignorant dumbass.

Chait says "McCain is only hanging in close in the polls because he's seen as a straight-talking maverick." And he's seen that way why? Because of "journalists" like Chait who keep repeating it. (Chait EIGHT DAYS ago: "Yet, somehow, I still feel some pangs of affinity for the old codger.") Anyway, isn't he "hanging in" because the "celebrity" attack has been successful?

It is dangerous for Obama to be more direct about calling McCain a liar. Pundits avoid discussions of facts and head toward discussions of impression for an obvious reason: It's easier to avoid making a fool of yourself around impressions.

As a pundit, if you get your facts wrong - whether or not offshore drilling is a good idea, or going to have an impact on gasoline prices - you look like an idiot. So you avoid that conversation, and focus on crap like "flip-flops" or whether it's good politics. You sound like an expert, you commit yourself to nothing that can be challenged, and you avoid being told that you said something inaccurate. In fact, the pundits seem to have a similar attitude toward discussion as that of a lot of political candidates. Stay vague, sound good, and leave the specifics to the nerds.

In that environment, if Obama calls McCain a liar, there's no way the pundits will discuss whether McCain is or is not a liar, or whether what he said on some occasion is a lie. Instead, they will discuss (ad nauseum) whether Obama has gone too far, how the word "lie" will resonate with voters, whether he's flip-flopping on the issue...anything, in short, except for whether McCain is a liar. He's hit the right note so far, saying "they know they're lying," using the word without assigning it to the candidate. The more often he's able to say "they're lying," the more that gets associated with McCain and the less he can coast on his straight-talk hooey. McCain doesn't have to be branded a liar for people to wonder whether he's being truthful.

Bob Dole used the l-word in the 1988 primary (exhorting Bush 41 to "stop lying about my record"), and it was not well received by the campaign press. So you really want to stay away from that word, if the discrepancy in question can even remotely be imputed to a difference in opinion.

Obama's probably safer pointing out that McCain is wrong, then saying something like "of course I respect McCain's integrity, so obviously he's been misbriefed or maybe he misremembered. But he seems to get an awful lot of facts wrong lately."

Hey Fat-uous White Guy, most analysts can tell you that the amount of off-shore oil that will actually get to us (considering it being put on the market) is about the same as what we save every year with good tire inflation - it makes that much difference.

But - if Congress would pass a law requiring the drillers to provide all their oil to the American market instead of just putting it out on the world market as they are wont to do, I could go along with allowing more drilling. Would free-market fundamentalist Republicans go along?

If Obama has the data to back him up then he should show it to us. But personally I like President Paris. Lets do both. Drill and inflate.

McCain feels he needs a surge to break the campaign his way. Obama isn't looking to peak in August, his plan is to peak in November. Sure, he took some flack for his successful overseas trip but come October people will only remember the images of him looking presidential. McCain may be getting some daily tracking points for his negative ads now, but come October people may just remember McCain going negative and not the silly content.

In the fall he has to bring it up time and again without actually calling him a liar until McCain takes the bait. Won't be pretty.

By the way, Obama's campaign is now calling McCain tactics a "lie."

"This ad is a lie, and it's part of the old, tired politics of a party in Washington that has run out of ideas and run out of steam. Even though a host of independent, nonpartisan organizations have said this attack isn't true, Senator McCain continues to lie about Senator Obama's plan..."

Good for them.

Obama and his campaign can call McCain and his campaign liars, but given McCain's apparent tendencies and the craven behavior of the media, I expect there will be ample opportunities to do so, and Obama can't do it over and over. I think the Obama folks are correct in judging that a crest has been reached and I'm glad they've finally broken out and used the term out right, calling McCain and his people for what they are revealing themselves to be.

I'm also pleased that Obama's ad to be run during the Olympics does not mention McCain once (I think I remember what I heard in it correctly.)

"But would the press report it that way?"

They would if the message/theme from Obama is ridicule and mocking of "Straight Talk." If Obama starts hammering on "Straight Talk," by name, Chris Matthews' leg will tingle and the media will collectively engorge over this bold line of attack.

The most dangerous thing for Obama, is to be seen as weak of character (i.e. unable to show some angry emotion and fight back when his honor is challenged). A goodly part of the electorate equates defending personal honor, with will hit back at a foreign enemy if we are attacked. So if he doesn't show some manliness against insults, he is assumed to be too weak to be commander in chief. This is one area where he could take some coaching from Hillary. The tricky thing is that he should be careful in picking how and when to have this thing out. If the first obvious attempt goes wrong, he may be taken seriously on second try.

They would if the message/theme from Obama is ridicule and mocking of "Straight Talk." If Obama starts hammering on "Straight Talk," by name, Chris Matthews' leg will tingle and the media will collectively engorge over this bold line of attack.

Personally, I've been calling it the StraightJacket Express, given McCain's recent collapse into doddering dementia.....

"Just a joke" is a common phrase for bullies who are called on their abuse. It is an effective way to dodge responsibility for abusive behavior, because third-party authorities are reluctant to commit themselves to enforcing rules of fair conduct. I don't see the mainstream press taking it well, if Obama decides to push hard.

Chicounsel, you dumb wing nut, have you not heard this is a Seldon Crisis!

> And considering both the depth and reach of Obama's energy plan, which has been available for months

Ah, but it's mostly on the internets... which McCain has already admitted that he is at a loss to access it.

That, I think, is the route to attack McCain on this: "Of course he thinks that's the entire energy plan, the dude can't get on the internet. We'll print it out and send him a copy".

Do that with pretty much everything, in fact. Call him, not in so many words, stupid. But imply it in every possible way.

Call the rest of the Republicans stupid directly to their face.

> And considering both the depth and reach of Obama's energy plan, which has been available for months

Kevin, do you find it hard to type one of these threads with one hand while constantly giving Obama a reach around with the other? "Depth and reach!?" Gimme a break. Paris Hilton had a more detailed plan.

Vote for McCain: He's been in Washington over 25 years, but the country isn't screwed up enough.

So is Obama going to pass a tire pressure law. Maybe the police at DWI road blocks could also check your tire pressure. And give you a ticket or cart you away to jail if you don't blow the proper PSI.

PS Over inflation could be hazardous to your health.

> And considering both the depth and reach of Obama's energy plan, which has been available for months

Kevin, do you find it hard to type one of these threads with one hand while constantly giving Obama a reach around with the other? "Depth and reach!?" Gimme a break. Paris Hilton had a more detailed plan.

Posted by: Pat on August 8, 2008 at 8:38 PM

Pat, do you find it hard to see to type with your head up your ass?

Barrack Obama's Energy Plan makes no mention at all of tire gauges. McCain knows this and chooses to pretend otherwise for the sake of a cheap campaign gimmick and deserves to be called on it.

"Drill and pump" isn't much of an energy policy, either, white-haired dude.

From the hyperventilating, I can see that you all recognize how damaging this is to Obama. Nancy can stonewall until after the election, as she says she is doing, but he can't.

That's what surrogates are for.

And that, actually, is part of McCain's problem -- what should be done by surrogates, he is (so far) doing himself. That's fine for the Republican base, but it won't work for the independent voters who have always been in his corner. I can't help but think that this is, in the long run, counterproductive.

And it would be if Obama did it too.

Don't confuse Pat ... were she literate, she wouldn't have supported Clinton.

... who still isn't, and won't be, the nominee.

Thats it! Ignore McCain's lies. It will be just as effective as it was for Kerry and Gore.

If these elections were sporting events, the Democrats would be investigated for throwing the contests.

This is why Dems tend to lose presidential elections, they have no balls. While the other side is willing to do whatever is necessary to win, Dems fret whether calling a lie a lie is too going to far. They fight with two arms behind their back. The only chance to win this election is to attack on all fronts, using the truth, half-truths and outright lies. That's how elections are won.

g. powell:

Damn straight! When is McCain going to come clean about cheating on his wife? He is going to be subject to blackmail, you know. We also need to look into allegations that he committed war crimes while in Vietnam. We don't want a president standing trial at the Hague!

TCD

Even though I'm a liberal, I totally agree with McCain and the Republicons. I am going to my next door, neocon Republicon neighbor and suggest that he let all the air out of all four of his car tires. Hell, I'm such a good guy, I might even do it for him.

Obama CANNOT be seen to be going 'mano a mano' with McSame.

The low-info, low attention (WHITE) working-class voters will respond badly to the appearance of their war-hero (seemingly) being "mugged" by a black person. I developed this theme at greater length here.

But personally I like President Paris. Lets do both. Drill and inflate.

I don't know why, but this kind of turns me on.

Simmer down, little boys. No one's attacking your love, the One, the Mocha Messiah. I just enjoy coming here to read everyone stating the exact same views and then feverishly validating each other. It's like RedState or LGF, only for Democrats. Any dissenting view is immediately rabidly attacked, or more likley, simply deleted by the sad little moderator.

I also get a chuckle out of seeing Kevin scold the biased mainstream media, as if he was some brave truth teller. Anyone who reads here knows he's so far up Obama's ass he ought to be looking for pollups while he's there. Kevin's posts: 1. Catblogging. 2. Trying to make people forget he was a huge cheerleader IN FAVOR of invading Iraq. 3. Explaining why whatever terrible position or lack of policy detail of Obama's is actually OK. 4. Attacking McCain or explaining why the media is biased for him.

You may all return to praising Barry and attacking Johnny now. Repeat!

Once again, the Obama camp- the candidate himself and especially his supporters, are overreacting. Such behavior looks like that of humorless hacks- Chait especially looks this way, but, fortunately for the Obama campaign, practically no one knows who he is.

Obama made the initial mistake by connecting energy policy to the tire inflation idea, but mistakes like that happen, and he did later explain it away, but I think he overdid it. However, his media supporters are killing him with their utterly humorless overreactions.

Such behavior looks like that of humorless hacks

We have your expert opinion on that, Yancey.

Orwell is a McCain troll. The McCain campaign committee is offering prizes and gifts for each troll put up on liberal web sites. Orwell is probably well on his way to winning an Official John McCain Ballwasher.

It is the fact that Obama has an energy plan that puts deranged congressmen in charge that worries us.

Yes, yes, Pat, it's a terrible thing when Democrats attack Republican policies and the weaknesses of Republican candidates. So unfair are we to that noble John McCain. My god, we're even trying to get Obama elected! If that's not outrageous bias, I don't know what is. We are shameless.

You're not even trying to pretend you're a Democrat anymore, are you?

Nice work on the constant repetition of the used-only-by-wingnuts epithet "Mocha Messiah," by the way. That adds sooooooooo much credibility to your previous claim to be an African American.

Nope. I'm black. All over. I just got out of the shower and can confirm it.

You are also a troll. When you come here and say "Paris Hilton had a more detailed (energy) plan", you are not contributing to a debate and you are being either dishonest or grossly ignorant.

I don't care whether you are a McCain troll, an "I haven't given up on Hillary Clinton still getting the nomination" troll or an "I just enjoy pissing everyone off" troll, you are still a troll.

Gracious. Don't let me stop you from "contributing to a debate." No matter that my entire point (which is, of course, lost on you) is that THERE IS NO DEBATE here. But please, you may now return to saying the same thing everyone else is. No free lunch? Hilarious.

I've gone through your blog. Cool I returned again. Nice work

Yet another good comment, I like it. I just checked out some other stuff around here and I look forward to more. Cheers.

A lot of weird comments on here. Happy I checked it out another time. Nice work