Don’t look now, but many conservatives have just been played with the virtuosity of a Nicolo Paganni. Before anyone gets the idea that Sarge has wandered off into Ron Paul territory, let me quickly deny any notions of a conspiracy theory. We are looking at a well planned and perfectly executed campaign ploy, nothing more.
Yesterday, as I read the New York Times attack piece on John McCain, my first reaction was, this is it, this is the best the DNC newsletter of record can come up with? The Drudge link invited comment and I stated as much yesterday, adding my opinion that dragging out an 8 year old scandal, with conservatives on the fence over McCain, seemed to help McCain more than hurt him. The story just didn’t seem quite right. Perhaps the approach of "gezzerhood" has taken the edge off of my cognitive recognition skills? One of Murphy’s Laws of Combat states: If your attack is going too well, it’s probably an ambush. It just seemed too easy!
Question: What is John McCain’s biggest problem as the presumptive nominee?
Answer: Conservatives!
Questions: Who is McCain’s secret lover, a trim looking telecom lobbyist?
Answer: The New York Times and the MSM is more likely.
Then today in the pages of the Politico the lights came back on for this writer. The full story is available by clicking the Politico link or at the end of this article, but here are gathered for your examination, what I believe to be the most salient points of the story. Bolding and bracketing is mine.
[This little nugget was prefaced by a reference to the known animus for the NYT by conservatives]
“Even if they want to quibble
[you might have caught the "snarky quibblers" remark on one of the front page articles today] within our own tribe, they’ll circle the wagons when we’re attacked by the Times,” said McCain campaign senior adviser Charlie Black.”
[The below reference to delay, in this case, seems to reference the 3 months the campaign had to prepare for game day]
“Since
November, McCain’s campaign had feared the story and its impact. But the
delay also allowed McCain’s backers to plot
exactly how they would respond.”
[Now for a little Fairness Doctrine Lite]
“At the same time, McCain backers were gathering up favorable reaction and analysis on the cable networks and forwarding it to
conservative media voices [read: talk radio] and other opinion makers on the right.”
[Bozell a Townhall regular. Bloggers in folowing context is, I assume, referring to Senior Circuit types since I didn’t get the memo]
“Craig Shirley, a public relations consultant working for McCain, called conservative media
critic Brent Bozell — a McCain skeptic. Bozell, who heads the media watchdog group Media Research Center, then issued a statement ripping the Times while defending McCain. Shirley’s firm sent that criticism, along with comments from Pat Buchanan, out to all conservative contacts, ranging from radio hosts to producers to
bloggers. As one of the first conservative leaders to come to McCain's defense,
Bozell provided ideological cover to others, including morning talk show host Joe Scarborough — another McCain skeptic — to support McCain and go after the Times.”
[Now, this is the important bit, pay close attention!]
“A few hours later, Davis
[you remember him for his pandering comment] blasted a fundraising e-mail with the subject line "Here We Go," urging followers to "help to counteract the liberal establishment and fight back against The New York Times by making an immediate
contribution today."
[This fairly well covers the conservative media, no word on the Washington Times]
“Conservative publications including The American Spectator and Human Events weighed in to defend McCain.”
[The following seems odd, they are a daily paper]
“The Times did not immediately defend itself” and “With silence from the paper, the McCain campaign was free to frame the debate.”
[Then comes the money shot]
“At noon, the McCain campaign got perhaps its most important break.
Rush Limbaugh, who has been the senator’s worst tormentor since he effectively seized the GOP nomination, came on the air and immediately denounced the Times.”
[Notice it is not the network news broadcasts, but Limbaugh hammering the Times. Makes me feel better if El Rushbo got snookered too]
“When the network evening news broadcasts came on,
all three of the pieces brimmed with McCain’s messages — and two of them carried
clips of Limbaugh hammering The New York Times.”
[As I said back at the beginning, no conspiracies here, just a well organized campaign fundraiser]
"Tactically, the McCain campaign executed flawlessly and quickly to put this story back in the box,” said GOP strategist Phil Musser, a former executive director of the Republican Governors Association. “They reshaped the coverage from dawn to dusk,
avoided any big name conservative defections and were actually
monetizing the event online at the Gray Lady's expense.”
The last sentence makes me wonder if the Times should consider this a campaign contribution. Is that kosher under McCain/Feingold? Sorry Johnny, you had me going there for a minute, next time try something with Felipe Calderon so you can pretend to actually want to close the border. Who knows it might work!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8629.html