War of the Dogs: Romney is not McCain

Mitt Romney is not John McCain. That is something that Obama and company discovered in the “War of the Dogs.” Obama has used the fact that Romney, loading five kids, himself, and his wife in a station wagon, put the family dog in a dog carrier on the top of the car during a family vacation. It polled horribly in focus groups, and made the participants immediately have negative feelings about Romney. So, Romney’s aides went on Twitter and posted Obama’s own words in “Dreams from My Father: A Story of RACE AND INHERITANCE” about eating dog. Also, snake and grasshopper. While growing up in Indonesia. While that revelation makes Obama seem even cooler to SWPL-hipsters, for everyone else it is repulsive and more evidence of how alien and out of touch Obama is. Game, set, and match to Romney. Even the MSNBC morning crew were laughing at Obama. Eating dog beats putting the family dog on top of a crowded station wagon, in a carrier. What kind of American eats Dog? No kind, and that was the message of the laughter.

Obama is in trouble. He might still win (White professional women still love him) but he’s up against a guy who is not John McCain. I’ve often wondered if McCain threw the election. There was a story that appeared briefly in the Obama-NY Times, about an alleged affair with McCain and some campaign aide. That was quickly dropped, right around the time McCain stopped attacking Obama. If so, that would be par for the course with Obama. He got the Jack and Jeri Ryan divorce records unsealed to reveal the tawdry allegations of Jack Ryan forcing Jeri into swinging, sex clubs, and the like. Giving him the weak, disorganized Alan Keyes as an opponent. Obama disqualified his mentor Alice Palmer, easily winning the election after that sleazy, Nixonian move. Obama’s only loss came against Bobby Rush, who in that district, as an ex-Black Panther, and ex-con, was scandal-proof. There was plenty of dirt of course, but it was all out in the open, to the approval of the all-Black district: the weapons charges, the violent rhetoric against Whites, and so on.

Obama has been successful against White guys with scandals, or mentors susceptible to dirty tricks. Against a guy with no scandal, or against a guy with scandals known and liked (in his district), Obama’s weapons don’t work. If Obama dug up dirt against McCain (known early in his career as a womanizer), he’s out of luck against a squeaky clean Mormon. Who entered politics already quite rich, out of noblesse oblige and duty to avenge his father’s defeat, not to make money (Gingrich, Santorum). There is no deep, lurking scandal. And as a man facing anti-Mormon hatred, Mitt Romney is well versed in attacking with a smile. Just ask Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Mike Huckabee how that went.

Romney has attacked the media as being in the tank for Obama, which they are. He is aggressively quoting Obama’s own 2008 words against Obama. He is not McCain, which points out the weakness of the Chicago School of politics. Against someone with nothing to lose, or someone with no scandal, or scandals known and actually liked by the voters, digging dirt is useless. Obama’s campaign machinery has CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, NPR, and every newspaper in America pulling for him. But they do so outside his direct and immediate control, being so big. Even a Journolist “telling people what propaganda line to say” style site or mailing list is too prone to leaking out, and requires too much coordination to be effective in instant-on internet news cycles. This makes Obama at a disadvantage, since the only time he faced a guy who went all out on him, he lost. [Bobby Rush is still the Representative in Congress from his district.] Obama’s answer was to run in SWPL/Black, half and half, districts, or the dirty trick against Jack Ryan in the Senate Race.

Against McCain? I would not discount the possibility that Obama’s team dug up dirt on McCain, and used to make him throw or back off the election. It explains the famous McCain temper seemingly go out, suddenly. And other very suspicious behavior. It is not as if McCain was not enmeshed in the Keating Five scandal (where he was guilty) and politicians seldom change habits of fooling around or financial skullduggery, as we learned with Bill Clinton.

Against a Mormon who does not even drink … coffee, and an economy in free-fall, Obama must be planning his Plan B, a Fujimori Self-Coup, even now. In case the massive fraud, and votes from White professional women, don’t carry him over. Since he himself is likely to go to jail, if out of power, given all the crooked deals he has pulled, and his subordinates KNOW they will be in jail. Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, must know their goose is cooked if Obama is defeated.

About whiskeysplace

Conservative blogger focusing on culture, business, technology, and how they intersect.
This entry was posted in obama, politics. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to War of the Dogs: Romney is not McCain

  1. sestamibi says:

    I too concluded that McCain threw the election around the beginning of October 2008, when his poll numbers sank to a level from which he must have believed he could never recover.

    I think he cut a deal with the Obama campaign where in return for him backing off active campaigning, the Dems would not raise a serious challenge to him in his 2010 senate re-election bid. Sure enough, their most serious possibility, Gov. Janet Napolitano, was appointed Homeland Security Secretary, and the Dems wound up running a non-entity named Rodney Glassman, who got 41%. McCain did five points better in his re-election bid than he did in the presidential race, winning Arizona with a disappointing 54%.

  2. Mike says:

    I remember the New York Times attack, but if memory serves (and I’m only going by memory) the story was all innuendo, no actual facts, and the woman involved actively denied there was anything going on. Eventually the Times did some walk backs on the story, after waiting as long as possible for maximum damage to be done.

    I think McCain wanted to show how noble he was by running a campaign that didn’t actually attack his opponent. A dumb tactic, but McCain probably didn’t feel comfortable attacking a black guy. It was the ultimate racial force field. Even with all of his failings, he was just about even with Obama in the polls until the financial crisis hit and McCain went into confused old man mode, suspending his campaign, but then not actually doing anything when he went to Washington. The campaign never recovered from that.

  3. Elusive Wapiti says:

    “Against a Mormon who does not even drink…”

    It is interesting to me to note that those most opposed to Romney are not conservative Evangelicals but leftists themselves. Nice try on the part of Dems to project their biases onto others, but it didn’t work.

  4. Sgt. Joe Friday says:

    McCain did throw the election. His quote two weeks before election day was something like “Sen. Obama is an honorable man, and you have nothing to fear if he becomes president.” At that point, I said to myself if this guy doesn’t want the job bad enough to not say something so incredibly brain-dead, then he doesn’t deserve my vote. So I cast a protest vote, for Bob Barr.

    This time around, what we have is a situation similar to what is sometimes encountered in the business world: how do we fire the black guy without getting sued? IOW, there are too many people who are uncomfortable with the idea of giving Obama the boot because blacks might cause trouble.

    • Mike says:

      “how do we fire the black guy without getting sued?”

      Ha! Classic!

    • I always feared that the only reason he received so many votes was the ‘racial force field’ (excellent term, btw). Whites who voted for Obama did so to prove they were ‘superior’ to the brain-dead, knuckle dragging racists who showed just how racist they were by voting for the “Crazy-Old-White-Dude-and-the-Alaskan-Moose-Princess-Who-Didn’t-Have-Enough Common-Sense-to-Abort-Her-DS-Baby.” TM

      “there are too many people who are uncomfortable with the idea of giving Obama the boot because blacks might cause trouble.”
      Not only will dead people cast (multiple) votes, but I suspect there will be random acts of violence should the election get dicey. And Sharpton will be in the LEAD.

    • Whitehall says:

      I’m still trying to figure out how McCain got NOMINATED!

      It just seemed to happen.

      But he was a dork from the beginning. He was all-in on global warming from early in the campaign, for example. I gagged at that but still put in the hours as a volunteer – what a waste.

  5. agimarc says:

    Heard a story out of an Arizona insider that had the LA papers starting to ramp up against McCain’s second wife and her brewery business dealings in the early 1990s. He reportedly made a trip to LA and all the negative articles stopped, after which he became more “independent.” I think he has been compromised for a long, long time. Cheers –

  6. njartist49 says:

    “Since he himself is likely to go to jail, if out of power, given all the crooked deals he has pulled, and his subordinates KNOW they will be in jail. Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, must know their goose is cooked if Obama is defeated.”

    If Obama goes to jail, will that make him white?

  7. Odds says:

    The more I watch Romney’s speeches since Santorum dropped out, the more confident I am that Romney is going to win. Romney is saying all the right things and regardless of what people think about this wealth and aloofness, those are both things that women deep inside love in their men. Romney is going to run a very effective campaign against Obama and let us remember that the GOP machine is only getting warmed up. If gas prices remain high and the stock market takes a dump, Obama does not have a prayer.

  8. sestamibi says:

    By the way, McCain got more static in the 2010 Arizona GOP primary from J. C. Hayworth than he did in the general election.

  9. bluegrass91 says:

    I believe Romney, to attempt a split in this seemingly entrenched “white-women” democratic vote, should enact a cultural-campaign policy I would term the “mad-men doctrine”.

    That is: never state explicitly, but through interviews, images and the like Romney should always show his wealth, always show his well-dressed and fertile white family (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/01/15/sunday-review/15SIEGEL/15SIEGEL-blog480.jpg), and always press the Mormon conservatism (which in my opinion has embodied the nostalgic throwback to 50’s white America, hence the pic). Women would connote him with that old-school misogynistic 50′ dominance that has them so wet watching Mad Men and reading 50 shades of Grey.

    I had reservations about Romney’s chances a few months ago, but things look quite a bit brighter. He’s not going to change anything, being an elitist Rino wiggling his way to the top, but that may be the only candidate who would win against Obama anyway.

    He’ll give white America 4-8 years of breathing room if he wins, but the racial/economic crash is still inevitable in 10 to 20 years.

    • Oh yes, agreed. The Mad Men strategy is a winner, and we need time and space. If we get time and space, something might turn up. No one ever has it their own way always. And yes, women go nuts for Don Draper. Obama has tried to paint Romney as Don Draper, which is stupid. The White female demo loves that dominance.

  10. chucho says:

    Anxiously awaiting your review of the new HBO show, “Girls.”

  11. Listener says:


    “I don’t know if Romney believes in evolution, but evolution believes in him!”

  12. Retrenched says:

    Could be a very close election. It will probably be decided by black turnout (or lack thereof) in the urban centers of OH, PA, VA, NC and FL. My guess is that Obama still wins, though by a smaller margin than last time.

  13. bob says:

    So I cast a protest vote, for Bob Barr.

    And how is that working for you now?

    Even if it were theoretically worthless voting for Romney, it is absolutely vital to vote against Obama – and voting for Romney is the only way to do.

    These folks who say they want to vote 3rd party or stay home never cease to amaze – and anger – me.

  14. Obama’s in total collapse. Things will get worse – for him. Prediction: 40 State sweep for Romney.

  15. Prof. Woland says:

    One thing that makes Doggate so sweet is that the self rightousness of the SWPL liberal pet owners that came down on Romney for his supposed mistreatment of Seamus unexpectedly bounced back in their faces. Many childless people (read infertile Democrats / single women) treat their dogs and cats as their surrogate children. They even go so far as to give them human names and demand heroic medicine for 18 year old cats. Hunting is something only barbarian Republicans do and that the Democrats treatment of animals and the environment is an example of how morally superior they are. I can still hear Ed Schultz’s outrage of how Seamus had deficated on himself while on his 12 hour car ride on the Romney’s vacation. Never mind that I have dogs that ate shit and liked it. Seamus was exactly where he wanted to be, with his pack. Imagine these same do gooders now having to explain why Obama ate his family dog. The only explaination is that he is from a different culture and that we should not judge him by ours. This hits Obama exactly in a place where he cannot hit back.

Comments are closed.