Embarrassing beyond comprehension.

Keemo on July 24, 2008 at 9:08 PM

Yep

I can’t figure out why a CNN anchor would make a Dem look better than he really looked. I mean, FNC is the only biased network out there right? /sarc

Thus ends my hypothetical. I can’t believe you read this far. ;)

AnonymousDrivel on July 25, 2008 at 2:57 AM

Heh.

You paint a plausible scenario. I still think he has more integrity than that, but Luntz did seem to have been trying to emulate Obama, coming up with such a strange, irrational opinion seemingly out of nowhere. Let’s hope it was just the acid. :)

He always struck me as being pretty honest, if misdirected a bit here and there.

I agree with that (with his misdirection occurring a bit more now than, say, a year ago);

He was clearly excited by something…

And that, too.

Here’s where I’m going with this, though. Speculation to be sure, but I’ll offer it anyway. Luntz has been hired by left- and right-leaning media outlets to measure wordsmithing and message management. His foundation has been predominantly GOP-centric as I understand it, but he was getting pigeonholed as a rightwing operative. I don’t know that to be true but he did provide extensive guidance for the GOP as consultant. That’s his business.

Since the “Contract with America,” the GOP has been the strong horse, but the tide has turned. Also, Luntz lost some business via MSNBC; i.e. he was reportedly dropped from their list of pollsters/analysts – surely as a result of his GOP-consulting pedigree. With the very leftward lurch MSNBC has taken rather recently, that’s an entirely plausible reaction from MSNBC management.

Now, that’s fine if you have lots of business from a message machine that’s been successful and you’re the one selling that winning message. Just keep doing what you’re doing. Alas, when your team is losing, even if your message actually helped but in a losing cause, your value is diminished. Rates may need to be reduced or new clients sought out as old ones quit calling. Or the number of viable candidates to hire you actually diminishes because they’re now out of office. The environment may have changed.

Enter the Democrat tide. If one were to read tea leaves for a living and one were to see bad news on the horizon for the group that had traditionally hired you, would one be tempted to start courting a new clientele? The clientele with money and an upside of repeat business even if it was riding on coattails of public opinion? My Magic 8-ball says “quite possibly.” And how could one market oneself to appeal to that lost source of revenue? One could discover that the contrarian message is inspiring, motivational, sublime… just what the other message managers want to hear.

While it’s possible that Luntz found some component of Obama’s wordsmithing exemplary, I just don’t believe it. We’ve heard this empty rhetoric for some time and I’ve never seen Luntz react this way. Him reacting this way without any immediate data makes his reportage suspect. The only thing that causes such a paradigm shift is money.

Thus ends my hypothetical. I can’t believe you read this far. ;)

Then we listen, cadences et all:

- world free of nukes
- eradication of AIDS (no mention how much Bush did toward that)
- feeding all of Africa (never mind that we’ve been feeding her forever, with little effect)

Entelechy on July 24, 2008 at 9:36 PM

Well, at least we know (based on that oeuvre) that when he loses this election, he’ll be really well-positioned for the Nobel Peace Prize, not to mention the Oscar.

(And c’mon, really – who could deny him?)

I wonder more and more how his disciples will react when he loses the election. I am predicting it won’t be pretty.

SouthernGent on July 24, 2008 at 8:32 PM

I’m more curious as to how *he’ll* react. Maybe he’ll put on 50 pounds, grow a beard and get really really cranky at speaking engagements. Though all of the really good blame-the-West movie ideas have already been taken (or have they?), so what, pray tell, will we be watching every night for a year on HBO in the coming decade?

I can only surmise there’s an economic incentive for him to have skewed his opinion so starkly. I’ve never seen him perform this aberrantly.

AnonymousDrivel on July 25, 2008 at 1:21 AM

Possibly, but I don’t get that kind of vibe from Luntz. He always struck me as being pretty honest, if misdirected a bit here and there. I’m willing to give him a pass on this very odd performance. He was clearly excited by something … I just can’t figure out what the hell it might have been. Maybe he was having a flashback? I’d accept that.

No, you recalled accurately. Luntz didn’t cite any hard numbers. Plus, by presenting as he did, he is poisoning the well and biasing potential pools of poll takers. Very unprofessional unless he has decided to wear a different hat and is not being hired as a pollster but as an “analyst.”

I, of course, have no idea what he knows or doesn’t know, but from my perspective, his opinion was too fawning – too deferential and sappy. I can only surmise there’s an economic incentive for him to have skewed his opinion so starkly. I’ve never seen him perform this aberrantly.

Is Luntz really that smitten by the stagecraft that he looks beyond it or just starts to believe it’s true? I don’t buy that for a second. He’s a professional pollster, a supposed scientist of sorts, and I’m not buying what he’s selling. Something’s up.

AnonymousDrivel on July 24, 2008 at 10:23 PM

There was something wrong, there. Hannity looked as baffled as I felt. And Luntz is usually okay. He’s got his own schtick, but I’ve never seen him like that. Maybe he did have some immediate polls that showed something? I don’t recall him mentioning any and, frankly, I can’t believe that many Americans like the idea of our Presidential candidates campaigning around the world. It’s just too weird.

I’m surprised Amanpour even noticed the “lack of enthusiasm.”

To the Berliners it was a summer event: beer, brats, and a kinda famous American.

PattyJ on July 24, 2008 at 10:59 PM

And don’t forget the free concerts before and after.

To the Berliners it was a summer event: beer, brats, and a kinda famous American.

I don’t know who you were referring to, but I heard Frank Luntz’s ridiculous assessment (and I usually like him) and almost threw my TV out the window. The idiocy, and Hussein fawning, was just pathetic.

I saw that H&C piece. “Ridiculous” and “pathetic” were assessments that entered my mind, too. The analysis seemed so fishy to me that it made me wonder what’s really going on, i.e. what’s his angle. Is Luntz really that smitten by the stagecraft that he looks beyond it or just starts to believe it’s true? I don’t buy that for a second. He’s a professional pollster, a supposed scientist of sorts, and I’m not buying what he’s selling. Something’s up.

Wethal on July 24, 2008 at 9:54 PM

When Obama did his presser in Sderot the other day he had some guy that he said would be picking the reporters to call on so that BO couldn’t be accused of cherry picking them. All the guy did was point to a reporter and then a question was asked, but that guy had a stack of index cards in his hand and he would just shuffle the card to the bottom of the stack once he called on someone. I think it’s fairly obvious that not only were the reporters preselected, but the questions were screened in advance as well.

“Today, he spoke in Berlin, Germany. In a city where a wall once divided the free from the oppressed, he talked about tearing down the walls that divide all peoples so we can address our common problems — the threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons, global warming and genocide, AIDS and poverty. Watch Barack’s historic speech and share it with your friends.”

1. That wall to which he referred was there because of the weakness, ineptness, and failure to act by the “young”, the “enlightened”, John F. Kennedy.
2. I’d like to know which walls he plans on tearing down, because everywhere I look I see him building the walls the rest of us are trying to get past.
3. So, what are his solutions to these “common problems”? Terrorism: to run, hide, hope they don’t hit us? Why not just say “surrender”? Nuclear weapons: “tough diplomacy”? What the $%^& is that anyway? Isn’t this like parents who keeps threatening their kids with spankings and never does it? Global warming: sure, let’s ban all green house gases. Let’s start with the biggest contributor: water vapor. Genocide: Sure thing, I’m all for it. How about staying in Iraq to prevent one on a scale unprecedented since WWII? AIDS: unless Obama says: “Men, keep your zippers up. Women, keep your legs crossed. All of you, quit doing drugs,” then I am not interested because his plan is destined to fail. Poverty: What? Take more of my money and not only give it to Americans on welfare, but also start a global welfare using my money as well? Thanks, but no thanks. “Those who don’t work, don’t eat.” I’m all for charity, to which I donate, but that’s my choice, not Obama’s or anyone else’s.
4. “Historic”? Sure, in in how it shows that there’s nothing new under the sun. From Xerxes to Mussolini, from Stalin to Chavez, there have always been men deluding others into thinking that they and their tool of government can solve the ills of all humanity, when all the while they seek nothing but power for themselves.
5. “Share it with my friends”? You bet.

Oh, and isn’t Obama scheduled to give a speech/press conference outside 10 Downing Street? By himself (Brown not invited/too smart to show)?

The British press are not kind. This should be fun.

“…Today, he spoke in Berlin, Germany. In a city where a wall once divided the free from the oppressed, he talked about tearing down the walls that divide all peoples so we can address our common problems — the threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons, global warming and genocide, AIDS and poverty. Watch Barack’s historic speech and share it with your friends.”

Gee, who could have possibly predicted this? Only those with anything above room temperature IQ:

Obama’s hoping to set a historical narrative that he and his puppetmasters can advance for future generations. There’s an impact of both immediacy and of legacy in play.

[...]

So, why the charade? Obviously he had to in order to create a line on his cover sheet for an embarrassingly thin resume. On a grander scale, however, he’s trying to show that he can meet and unite. On one day, he’s commiserating with the Israelis. The next, he’s meeting with the Germans. More than that, he’s making a public speech on German soil, addressing the masses with appropriate fanfare. Remember, this man lives in the past, much of his focus caught up in conflict of yesteryear in a nation that can do no good. Just ask his wife, pastor, and associates. A subtext of uniting even Germans and Israelis cannot be too far off the mark in his perception of modern society, nevermind that that’s old news.

The takeaway message he’s selling? I’m the Messiah. Only I can mend the conflict of people’s. Look at me. I’m a black man having just met with Israelis. And now I’m in front of you, German masses. Adoring masses. See how great and historic I am?

Obama’s narcissism is so deep that he finds it necessary to think not just of politics now but the historical imprint he alone will leave for biographers and huddled masses worshiping his earthly being. It’s a spectacle for portraits, history books, and “The Paper of Record.”

Sorry about the elongated post and patting-self-on-back link, but this guy and his campaign team are so transparent as to be embarrassing. It’s to the point where the narcissism isn’t a character trait more than it is now an Achilles heel. Team Obama won’t be able to leap tall buildings with this and even knuckle dragging gun-clingers like me can figure this out.

I’m no fan of McCain, but McCain’s odds are getting better all the time… thanks to Obamessiah.

He was negative, unsmiling, loud, and completely uninspiring. His words said nothing, his eyes showed his shadow side.

Keep an eye on this Mr. Flim Flammer. Mr. Wanna-be-President of these United States of America.

Screw it, why even have an election? This tool is acting as if he has already won. I say this backfires on his arrogant ass.

carbon_footprint on July 24, 2008 at 9:17 PM

c_f,

I think he’s gone beyond that. He sounds like he thinks the US Presidency is too small a job for him now.