Sarah Palin says that Obama is friendly with terrorists.
This is, of course, the already discredited Ayers stuff. The telling dynamic here is that Palin, who’s managed to build up a land speed record reputation for saying nonsensical shit, is the one stuck holding the public bag on Obama-as-spiritual-heir to the 1960s bombings of a man who’s now a college professor and member of semi-polite society. It is with a heavy heart that I must admit that Jeff Goldstein has this one nailed:
A few days back, in response to Jimmie at Sundries Shack and Stacy McCain of the Washington Times, I suggested that, from a strategic standpoint, the McCain campaign might have been waiting to use Sarah Palin as the key attack dog — the upshot being that she draws more elitist fire (jokes about breeder hicks seem to play poorly in Peoria), that the Obama campaign and their media arm concentrates their attentions on her, and that McCain gets to look “Presidential” by remaining above the fray.
An astute prediction for the person in the VP role that’s only been predicted another 2.25 million times on Google (give or take).
At the time, this strategem seemed to some far-fetched, I suppose because they didn’t think Palin’s attacks would carry much weight given her unpreparedness for office.
But it seems her performance in the VP debate has restored both confidence in her abilities and the public’s faith in her competence[.]
A debate which she not only lost, but after which McCain lost ground in polling. Sarah Palin gets results, even if you have to manufacture them to your own specifications. Was Palin, selected for a position whose requirements are summed up as A.) don’t fuck up and B.) attack at all costs, ever not going to be an attack dog? Wasn’t that the entire point of the hockey mom/pitbull line? Isn’t this lauding yourself for predicting that John McCain’s going to wear a suit tomorrow and then saying that he’s so dapper because he’s regained the American people’s trust? Why do I keep asking questions as if I don’t know the answers?
Everything the VP candidate says is news. So she can literally push these potential scandals into the news cycle. And wouldn’t that be gratifying, having herself weathered the storm of tanning beds and teenage daughters…
Where has this insight been for during this election cycle? A person who might be a heartbeat away from the presidency will get news coverage when she says things? Quick, quick, Goldstein Psychic Hotline, riddle me this: will there be any sort of sports broadcasting on my television this afternoon? You say football and baseball? Well, that’s certainly unbelieva…oh, sweet merciful Jesus, it is! IT IS! WHY ARE YOU THE DEVIL?
On the actual story – Clinton already tried the Ayers thing when she was losing six months ago. In fact, it was a part of a nationally televised debate, pushed out by Ehm-Ess-Ehm analyst George Stephanopoulos. Months later, and absolutely no further down this line of inquiry than they were in April, it’s the last thing the McCain campaign has to hang their hat on.
My prediction: Obama wins in the electoral college 354-184, and we start seeing conservatives wonder out loud whether or not it’s time for a second American Revolution.