Thanks, Heebie!
Probably the most useful graphic we can have is the picture of Sarah Palin posing with a pro-bridge Tshirt. That imagine can be downloaded here in super big size or here in ordinary size.
Step 1: Sell T-shirts of Palin posing with the T-shirt.
Since the media is pervaded with photos of Palin looking about 25 years old, if you need to illustrate any of the as-yet-nonexistent you should put up a couple of her looking like the middle-aged teacher-lady she looked like in her big speech.
Some content worth having on the site:
1. History of Palin's support of the Bridge to Nowhere. Most of this can be gotten off of wikipedia.
2. List of false statements McCain/Palin have made about Palin's position.
3. Damning picture.
What about a statement to the effect that Palin says/said one thing to Alaska, and then another to the nation?
Shorter Republican Base: A nasty piece of work undaunted by any hint of scruples or shame? Now that's lack of change we can believe in.
Come on now: she's had her 15 minutes. It needs to be about McCain.
Sure, you can have plenty about McCain lying about Palin, but the real 'bridge to nowhere' isn't some abandoned construction project in Alaska, it's a McCain Presidency. Thanks but no thanks.
I'm mostly in agreement with 8, actually -- there wouldn't be any need for this site if the McCain campaign had just let the matter drop. Instead, they're presenting her as a bridge opponent again and again, running ads on the issue even when there's a picture out of her posing with a pro-bridge Tshirt. "McCain campaign: pathological liars" is as much of a message here as "Sarah Palin: bridge supporter."
8,9: Agree that the focus should be on McCain. And the attention, if any, on Palin should be on how she serves to highlight how well my description in 7 applies to McCain himself.
8,9,10: No, I think we should make sexist remarks about Palin.
11: Will the infamous hogs be wearing lipstick when they chow down? Enquiring minds want to know.
8: the real 'bridge to nowhere' isn't some abandoned construction project in Alaska, it's a McCain Presidency.
I do believe you've hit on something there!
14: Yes.I though it was an apt turn of phrase. But now that DS has mentioned it, the more apt and "resonative"* it seems; exactly the kind of simple, clever dig with embedded indirect ridicule that the media can't resist repeating.
*May I buy an apt word for $200, please.
Are you thinking of the word 'resonant'?
16: Jeez, do you think I would put up a lame made up word if I were looking for a common word like resonant?
...in other words. Yes.
I remember in 1996 when the election was about Bob Dole and his "Bridge to the Past" and Bill Clinton with his "Bridge to the Future".
I that context, "Bridge to Nowhere" has a nice poetry to it.
I think 'resonant' is technically Scots. JP was looking for an English word. You know - American.
How about 'resonize'?
A brick fell on my head in Nov. 1996 and I'm just waking up from the coma What is this "bridge to nowhere" everybody is talking about? Don't you mean the "bridge to the 21st century"?
A couple problems with the Palin picture. First, the backlighting just makes the photo suck. I mean really. Can't somebody photoshop that background down?
Second - when you can finally make out the "Nowhere Alaska 99901" slogan it is not descriptive enough to really 'get' right away. It takes way too much exposition to explain why this is a damning picture.
So, once again, I gotta suggest we step out of this tiny box we put ourselves in and go with the "Sarah Barracuda" thing. Why do we twist ourselves in knots trying to be way too clever and tell a story that is way too complicated?
Sometimes I feel like I'm Dr Evil's son Scott when he can't believe his old man is going to put Austin Powers in a slow moving trap and not even watch him and Powers will escape and Scott could just get a gun and they both could shoot Powers right there.
Hey, speaking of sites created by members of the Unfoggedtariat, the pundit predictions site has been live for a while, but it turns out I don't have anywhere near the time to maintain it alone. I think what's really needed is a cadre of correspondents to send in links to interesting predictions in the news, but I think another owner or two or three to do a bunch of reading would be a good thing. Anyone interested in helping out?
Email me: matt at the domain name linked above.
I really hope you won't need this website for two whole years.
I gotta suggest we step out of this tiny box we put ourselves in and go with the "Sarah Barracuda" thing.
Tripp, why don't you start your own blog, do just that, then come back in a year and tell us how it worked out?
Yeah, if somebody could deal with the backlighting as suggested in 22 that'd be great.
So I've bought bridge2nowhere. I'm totally in favor of people buying whatever the hell else they can get their hands on and running their own anti-McCain projects.
But we've got a particular angle to play on the bridge to nowhere lying issue, and a domain name that can put us at the center of that debate. So if anybody feels strongly about that issue, understands it, and can design a good website, I'm ready to hand it off to them. Otherwise, I'll do what I can, but between War or Car and running my own little fleet of attack ads, I've got too many irons in the fire to do a great job on this.
25: Why don't you?
Besides, I already know how this all turns out. The decline continues, people get even more frustrated, and around 2020 or so enough people agree with the "I'd rather revolt than live in an unjust society" sentiment and the armed revolution begins.
Then we meet the new boss, same as the old boss, but we have less food and consumer electronics.
BTW, have y'all noticed that Josh Marshall seems to have gone off the deep end about McCain? That's not really fair - he's not ranting, nor descending into gibberish - but he basically doesn't mention McCain anymore without using the word "sleazy." He just called him "not morally fit to serve as president."
This is random speculation, not grounded in anything particular Marshall's written that I remember. But Marshall's professional press, and has been for a while, and that was McCain's base; everyone in the press, regardless of ideology, really kind of liked him personally. If (and again, I'm pulling this out of my ass) Marshall was in the class of "reporters who liked McCain in a personal kind of way, regardless of substantive disagreement with him", seeing him act sleazy might get a little more emotionally intense.
29: why does it make him off the deep end that he's noticed how unbelievably sleazy McCain's campaign is? Don't reinforce harmful narratives, JRoth!
These seems like the most political thread, and it's dead anyway. So I'd like to respond to this.
That it's utter bullshit need not be said; that much could have been inferred from the "I'm John McCain and I approved this message" tagline. What needs to be said is that, sure, Obama needs to swing back at McCain, but even more than that, he needs to fire some pointed attacks at the media. Why are they reporting lies? Shouldn't their questions to the McCain team at this point consist more or less solely of "What factors led you to believe your campaign needed to resort to telling bald lies?" and variations thereon. Those need to be the questions asked in the goddam national debates. "Senator McCain, you've been consistently lying about Senator Obama's record and proposals in your campaign ads and stump speeches. Do you think a McCain presidency is important enough to justify deceiving the American people? Why?" "Senator Obama, what effects do you think Senator McCain's repeated lies in this campaign have had on our democratic discourse?" Anything less is just enabling.
I think he needs to scorch the media. Unfairly, even--they've been doing a better job in recent weeks, mostly over the "bridge to nowhere" thing. But they need a kick in the ass. I know politicians want to make friends in the media, but I don't see how this loses him any friends--anyone who isn't a complete hack would have to acknowlege the truth of his attack. Because they honestly have no defense, and I think a fairly strident attack might galvanize some reporters into actually reporting the goddam truth a little more often.
Or maybe I'm daydreaming.
30: I think you're right -- Josh has said he was an admirer of the 2000-2002 vintage McCain.
How come nobody told me Toby Keith is a Democrat? This makes me very happy.
Oddly, 32 ended up sort of on-topic.
32 -- The refs could use some working, sure. I sent a letter to Broder today, imploring him to step up. I don't expect much, but if my letter was just a part of a flood of them . . .
This would have been a better link for 32.
Hilzoy uses this set of Cub Scout comic books to ridicule the repugnant McCain ad on sex ed:
"This 8-page comic is the third in a series of youth protection comics for Cub Scout aged kids featuring Akela, Baloo, and T.C. It illustrates scenarios that advise kids about the dangers of strangers and inappropriate behavior by adults toward children, and what to do in scary situations."
That is all well and good, but did they really think through "Powerpack Pals" as the name?
Democrats/Blue-staters have to do the hard work of examining various institutions--inc., but not limited to, the media--to sort the wheat from the chaff. The Reds have both their own media and have compromised ours. That might take an election loss, which would suck. But this, of late, is unreal.
29: BTW, have y'all noticed that Josh Marshall seems to have gone off the deep end about McCain? That's not really fair - he's not ranting, nor descending into gibberish - but he basically doesn't mention McCain anymore without using the word "sleazy." He just called him "not morally fit to serve as president."
:-)
About goddamn time.
why does it make him off the deep end that he's noticed how unbelievably sleazy McCain's campaign is?
It's just that JMM is all Mr. Reasonable Partisan Democrat. Sure, he pokes plenty of fun at various comically corrupt Republicans, but his attacks aren't usually this direct and blunt. I'm not saying he's wrong. It's kind of like the mild-mannered baseball manager who finally loses his shit at an ump - he usually has a pretty good reason, but it's still a sight to see.
I actually have some issues with these "stranger danger" teachings (which my son got last year, and then went through a phase where he wouldn't say "hello" to the cashier at the supermarket because she was, well, a stranger). But this is no time for nuance! So I have to ask:
Why does JOHN McCAIN oppose efforts to help protect your children against PEDOPHILES?
Why does JOHN McCAIN support PEDOPHILES?
Not that I would ever advocate such a patently unfair response, of course. But I just had to ask.
I'm told that John McCain has consistently voted in favor of pedophilia. It wouldn't surprise me if he's into child porn. Do we really want a pedophile in the White House?
I'm told that John McCain has consistently voted in favor of pedophilia.
How could he do otherwise and lead the party of Purity Dances and five year-olds in--gawd help us all--beauty pageants?
43: Of course we want to be scrupulously fair because some people may think it's John McCain the PEDOPHILE, rather than John McCain the guy who supports PEDOPHILES.
John McCain hasn't had sex since he was a Boy Scout leader. Pass it on.
Significantly less of a stretch than many ads in this campaign:
"John McCain wants to make it easier for strangers to rape your children."
48: Or based on some of the specific content of the bill in question.
"John McCain wants your child to die of AIDS."
I'm told that John McCain has consistently voted in favor of pedophilia.
Well, he does have a thing for young, nubile, flesh.
Meanwhile, back in Alaska:
"The ENQUIRER has learned exclusively that Sarah's oldest son, Track, was addicted to the power drug OxyContin for nearly the past two years, snorting it, eating it, smoking it and even injecting it. And as Track, 19, heads to Iraq as part of the U.S. armed forces, Sarah and her husband Todd were powerless to stop his wild antics ...
THE ENQUIRER also has exclusive details about Track's use of other drugs, including cocaine, and his involvement in a notorious local vandalism incident.
"I've partied with him (Track) for years," a source disclosed. "I've seen him snort cocaine, snort and smoke OxyContin, drink booze and smoke weed."
The source also divulged the girls would do anything for Track and he'd use his local celebrity to manipulate other guys "to get them to steal things he wanted."
"He finally did what a lot of troubled kids here do," the source divulged. "You join the military."
Let me try that again:
Here's one way to treat the image.
Next we need a caption contest.
People in the lower 48 don't understand Alaskan culture. Call in the sensitivity trainers. There are no absolute rules of "good" and "bad". Palin's kids are not even "different". They're statistically normal.
Next we need a caption contest.
[Above image]: "McCain."
[Below image]: "No way. No how. No where."
But I think the caption shoud probably just say something like "McCain/Palin '08". The real gem is Napi's original construction in 8.
he needs to fire some pointed attacks at the media
He does, but meanwhile the McCain campaign is working hard to alienate its erstwhile media pals on its own. If you get to talk to Palin, which you probably won't, it's off the record.
She's sticking to a greatest hits version of her convention speech on the campaign trail and steering clear of questions until she's comfortable enough for a hand-picked interviewer later this week.Note that the piece closes by (mildly) bringing up her dishonesty about the Bridge to Nowhere and the sale of the plane Murkowski bought.
Smithers, release the hounds.
58: Wow, the straight talk express, indeed.
56: Napi's 8 really didn't get nearly the love it deserves, did it? I personally intend to circulate it in the ranting emails to all my friends or family.
I think you're right -- Josh has said he was an admirer of the 2000-2002 vintage McCain.
APOSTROPHER said in 2004 that he was an admirer of the 2004-vintage McCain.
Anyone can be hoodwinked! At any time!
You know, I really like 2008 vintage McCain.
he was an admirer of the 2004-vintage McCain
Not quite. I said:
I wouldn't have voted for him then or now - wrong party, you know - but I have far more faith and trust in the socially libertarian and fiscally conservative wing of the Republican Party that he represents (and seemed to be eulogizing) rather than the evangelical, rigidly ideological, "deficits-don't-matter" wing embodied by the Bush administration.
Since then, of course, he's pretty much abandoned all of that and run, pants down and bearing flowers and chocolates, toward the Falwell crowd. But it's true that I didn't actively hate him in 2004 the way I did by 2006. And 2006 is nothing compared to today. I'd totally use him to stop a trolley.
How dare you bring McCain's personal genitalia into this, Apo.
I'd totally use him to stop a trolley.
But that's not even a moral quandry. The real quandry is: John McCain and four innocent people are on the tracks ahead of your trolley. Do you stop?
63: I feel and felt exactly the same way. Why can't you run for President?
66: he's too black where it counts.
His black parts are too gay? Or his gay parts are too black?
Andrew Sullivan, a former admirer, has denounced McCain in completely unmistakable terms. IIRC he makes it retroactive.
I still can't stand Sullivan, but he's a voice, I guess, and represents a demographic, I guess. Or a straw in the wind, at least.
Hate him
Might as well hate them all ...
"The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block [largely African-American voters] from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP's effort to challenge some voters on Election Day."
How dare you bring McCain's personal genitalia into this, Apo.
You know, McCain spent five and a half years without apostropher's enormous, talking, gay, black schlong and for that he is qualified to be President.
apostropher's enormous, talking, gay, black schlong
...that craps pot.
So this is a little buried down here, but I'm sure someone will catch it.
On the original topic, what if we were to splice together clips of Mcain and Palin's most obvious lies (Bridge to Nowhere, earmarks, human causes for climate change, family values claims) each preceded by a title: "LIE:" and followed by the video or textual evidence of the lie (with the title: "TRUTH") go through a series of 5 or 6 LIE/TRUTH juxtapositions, followed by a narrator saying something like "We can't afford another Republican administration that lies to the American people (quick flash to a shot of Nixon giving the victory salute with a voiceover of "I am not a crook", Bush I saying "Read my lips: No new taxes" Rumsfeld saying "We know where the WMDs are" Stand up, America, and tell John McCain and Sarh Palin that if they can't win the presidency by telling the truth, then they shouldn't even be in the race. Cut to pic of Old Man McCain looking old and smiling a doofy grin next to a shot of Palin in the Nowhere Alaska t-shirt, play a clip of kids chanting "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire, Nose as Long as a telephone wire!" while Mccain's and Palin's noses stretch out like Pinochio's nose.
Plop the vid on the site, host the video on YouTube or something similar, have links to all of the lie/truth evidence, maybe another page that pulls the money quotes from all the newspaper reports, another page that gives John McCain's campaign phone number and asks readers to call McCain and ask him to stop lying, another page that asks viewers to submit their own videos, and another page that allows people to e-mail letters to the editor of their local paper/television station/network news (with suggested points to make, but not canned astroturf), and yet another page that allows people to e-mail friends and families an HTML e-mail with an embedded link to the video to encourage them to visit the site and to pass the e-mail along.
We could promote through web ads. We'd probably need to take donations to fund the ads and maybe try to raise enough money to get the clip (edited to 30 seconds) on television/radio.
Thoughts: I can write, rough out wireframes, potentially do voiceovers (I smoked like 30 goddamn cigarettes last night and sound like Barry White today). I can't do web design, edit videos, or do any fancy lawyerin' needed (do we need to incorporate as a 501(c) organization? How do we set up a bank account that can accept web donations and dispense funds?)
Anybody into this idea enough to pitch in with their skillsets/dollars? I would fucking love to get the media to use the word "Lie" instead of "distortion," "half truth," "incomplete," etc.
Also, I had 3 hours of sleep last night, so please forgive the rambling.
