archives

George W. Bush has never ridden a horse in his life. His activities at his Crawford "ranch" consist of wrangling brush, fishing, and riding his bike. Yet the "liberal media" have always played along with Bush's faux cowboy persona.

Now McCain's doing it too, and once again the major news outlets are being good little enablers (The Washington Independent):

For months, the media has been reporting that Sen. John McCain spends weekends at his "Arizona ranch," where he can be with his family, visit with close friends or occasionally entertain possible vice presidential contenders.

The steady reference to the presumptive GOP presidential nominee's "Arizona ranch" projects a powerful image of the American cowboy that has long played an important role in presidential politics. The description of McCain's sliver of Arizona's outback as a "ranch," however, is misleading at best. And, perhaps inadvertently, it allows McCain to obscure his carpetbagger role in Arizona politics with a veneer of American mythology. [...]

The property is located in a "subdivision" where there is no cattle roping, branding or herding of heifers. Far from a ranch, McCain's getaway is really nothing more than a retreat. But the retired Navy captain and surge advocate certainly doesn't want the media stating that McCain went to his "Arizona retreat" for the weekend, lest that conjure up images of French cowardice.

It's a $1.7-million house surrounded by 20 acres of land. I think that's called an "estate."

Paul Waldman on the great visuals being produced by the Obama campaign:

The imbalance [between the campaigns] is more than just the two campaigns' relative talent at staging photo-ops. The fact is that in every aspect of campaigning, Obama's team is showing more skill and results than that of his more seasoned Republican opponent.

To say this is a reversal of recent history would be an understatement. Over the last few decades, we've gotten used to Republicans running circles around Democrats. In a book that was released in 2006, I note that the 2004 Bush campaign outperformed its opponents in field organizing, the one area at which Democrats had always excelled. As a consequence, the Democrats faced "an extraordinary realization: there is now not a single area of campaigning — not organizing, not message development, not candidate recruitment and training, not fundraising, and certainly not ruthlessness — at which Republicans are not demonstrably better than Democrats."

Why was this the case? The most important reason may be that Republicans have almost no interest in governing. Freed from the burden of coming up with new ways to more effectively deliver services that will produce tangible benefits to the public, they put their finest minds to work on the messy business of getting elected and keeping their opponents on the defensive.

The sophisticated techniques that the GOP developed — in framing political language, in staging photo ops, in pushing back on media bias, etc. — are now being used by Democrats. But, where the GOP had to hide their real goals (dismantling government and privatizing everything), Democrats are using these same techniques to enhance a genuinely popular agenda: using our government to make everyone's lives better.