Skip to content
Categories:

McCain doubles down on ‘celebrity’ attack

Post date:
Author:

Arguably the most notorious campaign ad of the cycle, at least so far, was last week’s McCain campaign spot, comparing Barack Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. It was widely panned as spectacularly stupid. Today, McCain unveils the sequel, which leaves the young blondes out, but doubles down on the whole “celebrity” attack.

“Is the biggest celebrity in the world ready to help your family?” the voice-over asks. “The real Obama promises higher taxes, more government spending. So, fewer jobs.”

As the music changes, the announcer tells us, over images of a wind farm, “Renewable energy to transform our economy, create jobs and energy independence, that’s John McCain.”

I recognize the subtext of the “celebrity” nonsense, and the campaign must have polling showing that the attack is having an effect, but as a long-term campaign strategy, it still seems like an odd meme on which to hang one’s hat (or, in this case, chances at the presidency). Don’t vote for Obama, because people everywhere really seem to respect and admire him. If you say so.

And, obviously, the tax and spending palaver is just another tiresome lie.

But in this particular ad, the rare effort by the McCain campaign to tie the Republican candidate to something substantive is especially interesting.

Conceding that reality has only a minimal and tangential relationship to “what matters,” it’s worth keeping in mind that McCain is leading with his chin.

“Renewable energy”? Picturesque images of wind farms? The Obama campaign sent around an item to reporters noting McCain’s repeated opposition to legislation that would boost renewable energy.

* McCain Opposed Legislation Extending The Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit; Recent Study Concluded More than 116,000 Jobs Could be Lost If the Tax Credit is Not Extended….

* McCain Voted Against Alternative Fuels Tax Credits….

* McCain Repeatedly Opposed Against Tax Credits to Encourage the Use Alternative Energy Sources….

* McCain Opposed the 2005 Energy Bill that Contributed to a Dramatic Growth in Wind Power Industry.

McCain, in other words, is running on an energy platform of ideas he’s always opposed. No wonder he’d rather talk about celebrities.

In a statement, Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton mentioned all of the many reasons McCain’s ad is dishonest, and concluded, “It’s time to retire these old policies and bring new energy to America,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.”

“Bring new energy” — expect to hear this double entendre a lot between now and November.

Comments

  • JoeW

    says:

    Is it me, or does McSame’s constant whining about celebrity sound like a jealous and petty little hissy fit? Here’s a suggestion for McSame’s next ad: Barack Obama stole my mojo!

  • Drew P

    says:

    “RETIRE these OLD policies” — more subtle perhaps, but let’s hope we hear this phrase a lot as well.

  • Diogenes

    says:

    As for the whole tax and spend thing, I want one GOP economist to show some real evidence that suggests the following:
    1. The Laffer curve exists.
    2. The U.S. is on the right (as in taxes are still too high) side of it.
    If just one big-name pundit would ask this of, say, McCain, I’d be thrilled.

  • Kathleen Parker

    says:

    John McCain does not seek celebrity. He is the salt of the Earth, more likely to enter his wife in an all-nude biker beauty pageant than engage in the shallow, frivolity of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. Though Obama has never met the women, American voters know in their hearts they are his type. We see the blood of the white woman who raised Obama running through his veins, that same lack of blood-purity that McCain instinctively understands.

  • Robby-D

    says:

    Don’t forget that conservatives have made a number of innocuous words into “bad” words now. Point in case: Liberal. It’s used as a smear, as if “being favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs” (ref.) is a bad thing.

  • thorin-1

    says:

    Here’s an idea, run a comercial matching McCain’s ‘tax and spend’ rhetoric with Bush’s 2004 and 2000 campaign rhetoric saying the exact same things, verbatim. It would reinforce the ‘Bush’s third term’ meme and the ‘McCain’s just another politician’ meme. His rhetoric is word for word out of Rove’s playbook.

  • Wilco

    says:

    So you’re criticizing McCain for voting against the 2005 Energy Bill, which Obama voted for and is now criticizing?

    Huh?

    Isn’t that Cheney’s Energy Bill?
    Am I wrong on this?

  • ron paulite

    says:

    McCain is running a disgusting low-road campaign. I once had respect for him. Now I’d rather spit on him than shake his hand. A true low life.

  • a-mao

    says:

    If Obama was smart — that’s EXACTLY what his theme would be:

    We don’t want the same OLD Washington politics. Every ad should feature the word old and if McCain ever brings it up — they just laugh and say we never meant to say McCain is old — I guess you people are just sensitive about your candidate’s weakness.

    But this is a major problem for McCain and the more people think about voting for an old fogey with skin cancer willing to maintain the same old policies — the more an inexperienced black guy looks a little less unappealing.

  • The Answer is Orange

    says:

    “Buzzword to buzzword our buzzword, buzzword and buzzword, that’s John McCain.”

    I hope he keeps this crap up long enough for someone to ask for details. But in a few days he’ll get a call from his pals at Hess and McCain will run an ad that compares windmills to pinwheels “While Americans wait for a solution to the energy crisis, Obama wants us to play with toys.”

    Popcorn?

  • doug

    says:

    McCain shouldn’t be surprised by Pairs’ response ad calling him the older than dirt. When McCain trivializes our national debate with talk of celebrities, he in turn will be duly trivialized.

    McOld is the joke.

  • Lance

    says:

    JSMcC*nt: “You can’t vote for the other guy! People LIKE him! In America we have to hate our Presidents!”

    Isn’t that pretty much what he’s saying?

  • Chad

    says:

    I have no problem with McCain’s ads attacking Obama’s celebrity. How many covers of magazines have McCain ensconced in halo-like images? How many interviews has McCain done for People, Us, Redbook, Vanity Fair, etc…? How many people faint during his speeches? How many people will push old ladies aside just to touch McCain?

    I was in St. Paul during Obambi’s acceptance speech for the nomination. There were people waiting in line for blocks and blocks just waiting to get in for a chance to see the Messiah. I walked around thinking these people are a bunch of suckers buying into and further perpetuating this hysteria over an every day politician. They’re acting like this is the guy they’ve been waiting for to deliver them from their miserable existences. If you look to government to save you, you’re going to get what you deserve. Why not do something for yourself rather than rely on a snake-oil salesman.

    Anyway, back to topic. Obama is revelling in this celebrity and McCain is merely pointing that fact out. It’s not an attack, it’s an observation.

  • Toon Moene

    says:

    I think Paris Hilton’s “reply video” puts it all into perspective:

    If you think “celebrity” is important in presidential campaigns, only celebrities will campaign for presidency.

    Her spoof was almost perfect. The only thing to improve was her “energy policy”. Because we had free natural gas in the Netherlands since 1960, we have done some thinking on it.

    The most profitable way to use the proceeds from such natural resources is to pool it provide for infrastructure (be it in the energy sector, like renewables, or in other infrastructure, like our most needed Delta Works).

    She’s close to that with her “tax” proposal, but it’s better to use the *proceeds* (or the surplus of that, after subtracting the cost of exploitation),

  • Ghillie

    says:

    “Celebrity” is the new “elite.”

    If it’s said often enough it will become a brand because of the context, and the sense of the word will make no diference.

  • pete6982

    says:

    * McCain Opposed the 2005 Energy Bill that Contributed to a Dramatic Growth in Wind Power Industry.

    Mccain opposed this because it was an outragous spending bill that also included plenty of goodies for the oil companies. Obama is now trying to accuse Mccain of schmoozing up to big oil when he (the chosen one) is the real big spender. Mccain has battled pork, corruption, and wasteful spending for years. For higher taxes and a higher deficit, Vote for Barak Obama.

  • Little Dick

    says:

    One of our brethren posted this comment on another blog: “McCain knows how to appeal to stupid people. It might be the only thing he needs to win this election.”

    There is, unfortunately, with the climate of our society the way it is, too much merit in this logic. Scary stuff……

  • tomj

    says:

    Was the second celeb ad ready to go before the Paris response ad?

    I still think this whole ad campaign is meant to shore up base support before November, and to keep the undecideds on the fence. Keeping undecideds on the fence requires new attacks or new information, even if they are false.

    But if undecideds find out they have been played by McCain, the next attack will not work.

    Another potential reason for the campaign may be to gauge how much they can move the polls with bogus information.

  • Tom in Ma

    says:

    Democrats used to own the environment issue. Republicans owned the Energy issue. Now that it becomes clear everywhere that they are the same issue — who was going to own it? The GOP has lost it — those windmills in both McCain’s and Obama’s ads tell the whole story.

    Regarding age: no one is more alert and observant about signs of possible mental decline than older folks. They watch for it in their family members, their social circles and themselves. Of course, loyal GOPers will deny seeing it, and loyal Dems will see it every time McCain is on TV, but signs of confusion and disorientation will have an effect on lots of older voters decisions. So far, McCain has always presented himself as a vigorous and “with-it” guy in his 70’s. But that may no longer be an accurate view.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    pete#whatever:

    First rule in trolldom, at least spell your own candidate’s name right. Misspelling the opponent isn’t very smart, but getting your own candidate’s name wrong is unforgivable.

    It’s McCain, not Mccain, you idiot.

    Of course, if only idiots support McCain, a very arguable position, then you help prove it.

  • slappy magoo

    says:

    I’m starting to think the reason the McCain campaign used Spears & Hilton in the first celebrity ad was “reverse-reverse racism,” a racist concept made worse by trying to appear LESS racist.

    “Let’s compare Obama to popular black celebrities.”

    “Yeah! Like gangsta rappers! That Snoopy Dog Dog feller! And that Dippy!”
    “You mean Diddy?”
    “Yeah, that boy!”
    “Wait a minute, we’re really going to compare Barack Obama to gangsta rappers? The press will skin us alive…and they LOVE us!”
    “Oooh….sooooo….who do you have in mind?”
    “Uh…how about…Will Smith?”
    “Ooh, Denzel Washington!”
    “Sidney Poitier!”
    “Oh, my wife loves Sidney Poitier!”
    Wait wait wait guys Guys GUYS! Listen to us! We can’t use any of these guys!”
    “Why not?”
    “Uh, I don’t know, maybe because…PEOPLE LIKE THOSE GUYS?!?!?!”
    “Oh, that’s right, we’re supposed to make Obama…”
    “Unlikable”
    “Yeah, that’s the word, thanks, Bob.”
    “So…that leaves athletes, then.”
    “Great, compare Obama to physically fit specimens, then juxtpaose that with McGrampa! Stupid!”
    “Well, f*** it, let’s not use black guys in the ad at all!”
    “You mean, white guys?”
    “White women!”
    “Yeah! Britney Spears!”
    “PARIS HILTON!”
    “Lindsey Lohan!”
    “Nah, my kid still loves The Parent Trap.”
    “How old is your son, anyway?”
    “25.”
    “Fine, forget it, Hilton and Spears, there’s our ad.”
    “Yeah, no one will ever accuse us of race-baiting that darkie now!”
    “Great, let’s get lunch!”
    “How about Chink?”
    “We had Chink yesterday…”

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    As far as the ‘age issue’ goes, will someone do a feature on how being President ages someone. It IS a hard job, even for GWB, and comparing pictures proves it. So even if McCain is less affected by it — and the time as a POW — than he appears, just imagine what four years would do to him.

  • pop star

    says:

    John McCain is older than ranch dressing.

    John McCain is older than “flip-flops” (the footwear).

    John McCain is older than 91% of America.

    John McCain is older than The Grapes of Wrath.

    John McCain is older than the zip code system.

    John McCain is older than the peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

    John McCain is older than Kraft Macaroni and Cheese.

    John McCain is older than Scrabble.

    John McCain is older than duct tape.

  • TR

    says:

    JSMcC*nt: “You can’t vote for the other guy! People LIKE him! In America we have to hate our Presidents!”

    That would certainly explain why McCain is trying to be so unlikeable.

  • SaintZak

    says:

    “Is it me, or does McSame’s constant whining about celebrity sound like a jealous and petty little hissy fit?”

    John McCain was a celebrity politician. He certainly has never beem bright or inspired or insightful. He got where he is on a maade to order Hollywood backstory that had nothing to do with being qualified to serve in the US Senate. He rode that gimmick for decades. So if Barack Obama is Paris Hilton I guess that would make John McCain Pia Zadora.

  • Chad

    says:

    Yeah, we get it, McCain is old. But at least he’s experienced. He has a record of working across the aisle.

    What is Obamarama’s record? 143 days as a Junior Senator from Illinois, a very liberal voting record. No documented bi-partisanship. A questionable past with questionable affiliations. A community organizer in a still run down part of Chicago. Obama just does not have the experience to lead a country. I wouldn’t even trust him to lead my kid’s boy scout troop. This is like letting the paper delivery boy run the newspaper.

    I tell you, the Democratic party made a huge mistake nominating this neophyte. If you strip it all down to who do you trust and who do you know, Obambi falls short with both of those questions.

  • military man for Obama

    says:

    Chad,

    McSame is an incompetent, opportunistic, quick tempered, stumbling, dishonest (cheated on his first wife), dishonorable (used his seat in office to enrich himself), stupid (finished second from last in his college class), old bag of wind.

    But I guess you’re saying that at least I know he is old lying back of wind.

  • military man for Obama

    says:

    MsMuddled, please, this is your argument. That Obama is popular. Win on ideas, or go home.

  • stormskies

    says:

    chad: why not go back to staying fixed on your ‘fox news’ ..that way you can keep yourself totally believing your delusions … either that or apply a ‘liberal’ dose of preparation h to what you consider, sadly. to be your brain .. that would end of your problems and well as the problems you create for others because of your stupidity ……..

  • The Other Ed

    says:

    This looks like the right thread –

    Speaking of “Biggest Celebrity”, have you seen John McCain’s IMDB profile?

    He has more TV & Movie credits than Paris Hilton but not quite as many as Britney. Barak Obama comes in a distant 4th among the four of them. This looks like a case for FactCheck.Org since this is hilarious, did this guy ever miss a chance to promote himself?:

    John McCain – http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0564587/

    Paris Hilton – http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0385296/

    Britney Spears – http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005453/

    Barak Obama – http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1682433

  • ted76

    says:

    #31 military man for Obama

    Please don’t confuse a wingnut with facts, then and ask the question how bad are things going to become before the will be turned around. We cannot expect any changes from Bush to McSame.

    Secondly, it is hard to understand why a wingnut would post their drivel in this space. Are they so naive that they think they are believable?

  • MsJoanne

    says:

    Chad, here you go, son.

    Obama’s Senate Accomplishments:

    This is from the the 109th and 110th Congresses which cover the years 2005-2007.

    In a nut:

    Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.

    Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.

    Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.

    His record is in fact quite impressive for a junior Senator from Illinois.

    Most of his legislative effort has been in the areas of:

    Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills)
    Health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills)
    Consumer protection/labor (14 bills)
    The needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills)
    Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills)
    Foreign Policy (10 bills)
    Voting and Elections (9 bills)
    Education (7 bills)
    Hurricane Katrina Relief (6)
    The Environment (5 bills)
    Homeland Security (4 bills)
    Discrimination (4 bills)

    Oh, you want more details? Ok, here ya go, son. Including bill numbers so you can go to http://www.thomas.gov to check it out.

    http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/obamas-senate-accomplishments/

  • Chad

    says:

    From: http://www.govtrack.us

    Statistics: Barack Obama has sponsored 133 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 119 haven’t made it out of committee (Average) and 2 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Obama has co-sponsored 638 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers). [On 4/2/08, the numbers were updated to consider companion bills in the other chamber identified as “identical” by the Congressional Research Service when determining if a bill was enacted or made it past the introduction stage.]

    Looks like anyone can sponsor a bill, but if the bill is so outrageous as to be ridiculous, it doesn’t make it out of the committee. On the same site, his voting record is poor compared to other Senators.

    Statistic: Barack Obama missed 287 of 1268 votes (23%) since Jan 6, 2005 (Exceedingly Poor relative to peers).

    It seems he talks a good game and knows how to pad his stats.

    No matter how much smoke you try to blow, the fact of the matter stands, and these are out of Obama’s own lips, he’s too inexperienced to lead this nation. What exactly has changed since he said that to now?

  • Fast Eddie

    says:

    Chad, the point about experience vs inexperience is a fair one. But here’s another one. Smart vs dumb.

    Obama was tested at school in Hawaii using the Stanford-Banai IQ Certification. Two tests put his IQ as being 166 and 172 respectively.

    McCain meanwhile graduated 894th out of a class of 899 at his naval academy. Effectively, you’re talking about electing the village idiot as Leader Of The Free World.

    You may say that ‘smart’ isn’t everything. It isn’t. And neither is experience. (I’d also point out that McCain has no executive experience whatsoever. Cheney has. Perhaps we should elect him.)

    A smart man can learn quickly. On the other hand, you can’t teach an old pitbull new tricks. It just sits there, licking its balls.

  • JoeW

    says:

    Experience? Lets think about the 2 most experienced people to serve in the Executive Branch over the last 40 years. Those would be Dicks Nixon and Cheney. Experience isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

  • Chad

    says:

    So we’re electing a President based on IQ now? If that’s the case, my vote goes to Marilyn van Savant or whatever her name is. Let’s elect the smartest person in the world. I’m sure lots of world leaders have had high IQs, that doesn’t mean they all deserved to lead.

  • Robby-D

    says:

    OK, to everyone picking on Chad (I don’t mean those who are disputing facts or arguing points, this is addressed to those offering personal attacks or telling him to leave): Grow up.

    Seriously. Chad may not believe the same things as you and me, but he has every right to voice those opinions. Hopefully through this conversation we can change how he (or perhaps others) see the world to our view, or maybe we will learn a thing or two from him. But confronting him with personal attacks or telling him to go away to Fox News or whatever is lowering yourself to the level of those who you wish to no longer control the national dialogue. And frankly, I’d much prefer his comments to those of Mary or IFP, who are bona-fide trolls and never worthy of response. (Sorry to IFP if you’re satirical, I could never really tell for certain).

    To Chad: Thank-you for coming here and reading Steve’s blog. Thank-you for taking the time to comment, to back up your opinions, and to engage in a reasonable discussion with the people here. Please come back daily and continue to read Steve’s writings – some of his observations are very good. Hopefully over time both you and the rest of us can learn more and more about the two imperfect candidates seeking the most important job in the world, and can cast our votes knowing we stand amongst the most-informed of voters.

  • libra

    says:

    Statistic: Barack Obama missed 287 of 1268 votes (23%) since Jan 6, 2005 (Exceedingly Poor relative to peers). — Chad, @41

    What about Sen. McCain, *in the same period of time*?

  • Jen

    says:

    libra —

    great minds and all that — from my back of the junkmail calculations, McCain’s missing percentage is closing in on 40% in that same time period.

  • Jen

    says:

    Now, let’s remember the difference in time frame, too, these are from Chad’s website above:

    Statistics: John McCain has sponsored 537 bills since Jan 21, 1993, of which 340 haven’t made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 31 were successfully enacted (Exceedingly Good, relative to peers). McCain has co-sponsored 1227 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers). [On 4/2/08, the numbers were updated to consider companion bills in the other chamber identified as “identical” by the Congressional Research Service when determining if a bill was enacted or made it past the introduction stage.]

    Both he and Obama are in the top 10 of most missed votes. Interestingly, the top three are all people who’ve only been there since 2007:

    Statistic: John McCain missed 719 of 4085 votes (18%) since Feb 4, 1993 (Exceedingly Poor relative to peers).

    They do break it down by quarter and his %age missing since ’05 is higher than Obama’s (assuming that each quarter has roughly the same number of votes, I have no idea if that is true)

  • Bruno

    says:

    Troll Chad said:

    Obama is revelling in this celebrity and McCain is merely pointing that fact out. It’s not an attack, it’s an observation.

    Did your incredible observation skills also find that:

    McCain has been on the Daily Show more than any other person (political or celebrity)?

    McCain’s own website, until recently, promoted him as the “political Celebrity”?

    McCain’s appearances on Jay Leno, Letterman, and many more shows?

    McCain’s performances on the Saturday Night Life show?

    McCain’s cameo appearances in movies?

    Ronald Reagan was a movie star before being a governor and president?

    Fred Thompson running for president on his “Law & Order” fame, and being a former Senator?

    Arnold Schwartsenegger was (and still is) a celebrety before turning to politics?

    It’s soo sad that Chad hasn’t been able to talk about anything substantive without being able to prick his balloons with a blunt object.

  • AlchemyToday

    says:

    As the music changes, the announcer tells us, over images of a wind farm, “Renewable energy to transform our economy, create jobs and energy independence, that’s John McCain.”

    The wind farm shown in the ad is the same one in T. Boone Pickens’ ad: YouTube Link

    There’s a reason you picked that shot out of the ad, and it’s because McCain’s stealing Pickens’ imagery. He knows his policies on energy will do nothing at best when it comes to developing alternative technologies, so he’s riding Pickens’ coattails.