DON'T you dare tell Obama what to do!!
Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:42:11 PM PDT
After getting my head handed to me by the Obama worshipers on this site for daring to propose a course of action for Obama to take. This is a mild example I left out the name calling ones
i think he knows what he is doing and that he is capable of making his own decisions.
I started to get a sense of why the Clinton folks had their ridiculous "Strike". I'm an Obama supporter (have been from the beginning) and the way I was attacked for proposing that he do something different was shocking - I love the DKos for its perspective and its a great place to test out ideas but this was new.
So to try and keep the following comments thread constructive I will preface the following statements with the fact that I am not sure the right approach - I am just positing the following to be discussed - a debate of the pro's and con's - maybe even have people read the comments before voting in the poll.
Ok so here goes - he types nervously - Rev Wright could end Obama. He needs to do a frontal assault on the right wing media by going on FOX News Sunday (FNS) with Chris Wallace, Go on Rush Limbaugh, Bill-O, the Wall Street Journal etc. BUT change the ground rules - do it on his terms. What do I mean (below the fold)
Go on FNS but for whole hour - 1 on 1 with Chris Wallace - no B-roll and have the hour broken down into three 20 min segments:
Part 1 on whatever Wallace wants to bring up (Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko etc.)
Part 2 International policy
Part 3 Domestic policy.
Hell do it twice back to back one weekend after the other so Wallace can follow up.
Do Bill'o but not in his studio - do it one on one for the full segment un-edited in front of a live audience.
Sit down with Rush Limbaugh for his whole 3 hour show.
Meet with reports from the Wall Street Journal for as long as they want or for several days in a row on different topics.
He just sat down on Friday with the Chicago papers and answered every question they had about Rezko it was a great move.
The most remarkable facet of Obama's 92-minute discussion was that, at the outset, he pledged to answer every question the three dozen Tribune journalists crammed into the room would put to him. And he did.
After the meeting, the Tribune stood by its endorsement of Obama noting:
When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him.
Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict.
I think he can win over alot of people by getting in front of them just like he did the Chicago paper. He will take some hits but they are going to go after him anyway.
This way he can show he is a new kind of candidate. He can focus on serious issue and frame the debate instead of getting caught up in the old gotcha, and pundit game they have going now. I also would be a good example of his I will talk with our enemy's foreign policy approach.
He needs to address this now - go on the offensive - change things up - one GREAT speech is not going to end the Rev Wright thing. It will sink him unless he does something drastic he might not win them over but at least he can stand up to them.
Fox News etc. represent real voters not all of whom are Republicans he needs to win these people over if he is going to win in November.
Ok ripe me to shreds - tell me why I'm crazy - go ahead I can take it.
UPDATE: To clarify this idea is not just how he should respond to the Rev Wright issue but rather how he should approach the next 7 1/2 months - take it to the enemy!
UPDATE 2: Some are saying this is a better General Election strategy - if you don't think we are already in the GE you are mistaken.
Permalink | 41 comments