BARACK IS SCREWING THIS UP

Why is Obama allowing the Republicans AND the Clinton Campaign to define him as not having any history of accomplishments, no policy of substance, and being nothing but a media creation?

more below the fold

 I have been watching this one sided argument for months. It started in New Hampshire. The "compressed schedule", and an inability for the voters to interact with Barack in townhalls to flesh out policy with Barack was blamed for Obama's loss.

A month later, this has gotten ridiculous. He has Barck Obama's Blueprint for Change. It is a detailed, highly specific BLUEPRINT FOR CHANGE.

 What the hell is wrong with Axlerod? Why the hell is this even an issue? I mean, now we have REPUBLICANS using the same damn argument! Why isn't some of that $150,000,000 being spent on printing these and dropping them on porches like phone books all over Wisconsin, Ohio, and Texas?

 I am getting increasingly concerned at the tendancy of Obama's campaign to be tone deaf to attempts to define him by his opponents. I find the excuse that he doesn't want to make speaches "boring" with a bunch of policy to be just that, an excuse, and a false premise as well. It's about walking and chewing gum at the same time. He can still give his speeches, as long as every single person is walking out with a copy of the Blueprint.

It is starting to look like he is in a bubble that is blocking his ability to recognize serious problems. It appears to me that this is a result of his campaign's mistaken belief that the average voter doesn't give any of this any weight. This is a huge mistake.

I am increasingly frustrated by this, and I am sick of hearing it constantly from all sides. His surrogates haven't even been prepped half the time. I saw Gov. Jim Doyle get fucking OWNED the other night on national TV when he couldn't answer a question about "one thing that Barack has accomplished in the past". WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE?!!

This is not the first time this has happened. Look at the email BS. That crap has been floating around for over a year now. What have they really done to dispell it? I STILL to this day have people talking to me about not supporting anyone who wants to get sworn in on a Khoran, and refuses to take the pledge of allegiance.

It seems to me that anytime the Clintons want to dial it up they can at will, and it always comes the night before an election.

Case in point:
The MSM has been running footage all day of Bill Clinton reacting to Pro Life demonstrators that were heckling him at a rally over the weekend. Bill Clinton got angry and engaged the demonstrators in a confrontational way. The crowd got riled, and Bill just stalked the stage as if he had somehow "won" another round against the VRWC.

Back in New Hampshire, the same thing happened to Barack. He was giving a speech a day or so before the election, and a Pro Life group in the balcony errupted in loud yelling and chanting. The crowd immediately started booing loudly and getting riled up. Did Barack start arguing with the demonstrators? No, he didn't. He DEFENDED them to the CROWD for their right to be heared! He immediately diffused the situation, and got an on the spot agreement from the Demonstrators to sit down with him! It was a perfect example of the core of difference between the Obama Candidacy and the Clinton Candidacy.

Why isn't the Obama camp all over this? The video of the two different incidents is readily available, and would make a great juxtiposition in methods between the two camps, and the results that you get when you don't demonize people and treat them instead with respect.

This is only one example, but I think it shows a weakness that is especialy troubling. The Obama campaign is losing the definition battle at this point, and is just letting itself be punched.

I am not advocating tit for tat. I am decrying an ability to recognize these things before they occur, and make the electorate more comfortable with his technical vision to the Presidency in a nuts and bolts manner. This "all hat no cattle" argument shouldn't even have had the chance to get started in the MSM. On one hand you will hear the talking heads say "Their policies are virtually the same", then in the very next breath you will hear them say "Hillary has a better grasp of the issues that matter to the blue collar core Democrats"....It's ridiculous.

The worst part is that it is unnecesary. He has the money, he has the endorsees. What is lacking is the ability to take the threat seriously or even recognize it.