I decided I'd say something like, "My opponent has chosen to campaign in a negative fashion, and many people, even among my supporters, say I need to respond in like fashion. That I insist on talking you you all like adults is seen as a weakness. It is not. It is a choice. It is a kindness, which all too many people mistake for weakness."
"To prove it is a choice, for the next two weeks we are going to campaign against Mrs. Clinton the way she campaigns against us, just to show we can. Then we're going to return to campaigning as we should, as America needs both of us to. Hopefully when Mrs. Clinton sees the choices we've made she will join us in elevating the discussion to a true consideration of the issues that are important to America."
Some shit like that. And I'd do it just like that.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
and how would you change that up
if at all, to address the far more damaging memetic assault that roger ailes and faux news have made on candidate Obama?
His current problem is
His current problem is stickier than it had to be because he himself called Rev. Wright's words 'divisive.' I wouldn't have done that. My response would have been that part of Rev. Wright's job was to give voice to the concerns of the community and part of my job was to hear that voice. You (Fox) have no idea what those concerns are...in fact, you have no idea what he said beyond thirty seconds out of 36 years to representing the community.
While listening I found he was actively doing work the community needed, and I joined him. And anyone who wants me to abandon him must abandon every friend who is "a good guy, he just doesn't like Black people, or Latino people, or Asian people, or for that matter white people. And if you think Rev. Wright falls in that last category, ask the white members of the church.
P6 - I think you are right.
P6 - I think you are right. It is extremely hard, however, to pry candidates loose from the prevailing paradigms - often reinforced by friends and close supporters who generally don't really know shit from Shinola - about how a candidate should respond to negative attacks. I think the approach you are suggesting would be so novel and markedly different from the norm that regular folks might actually pay attention.
His current problem is
I'm waiting for someone to come up with some kind of story saying Obama was present in the congregation during one of the soundbite sermons. I do, however, believe Obama does feel Wright's words were "divisive" (esp. when stripped of context) if for no other reason than the way Whites react to them, right or wrong.
Seems to me Obama decided to give his race speech to try to make the point you have without calling White folks a lie and being even more "divisive." He said he was going to give the speech because of the Farrakhan-esque caricature the media was sketching up on Wright. So he both conceded that the comments were "divisive" and felt the media coverage on Wright was wrong.