Lessons for Canada’s Conservatives – Building a Lasting Base

My message to Canada's Conservatives, after their successful convention (Printed in Canada Free Press):

As Conservatives in Canada have just completed a three day policy convention, certain strategic points must be raised. In short, today’s Conservatives must learn from past mistakes. Today’s Conservatives must take a look both at their own past as well as at similar movements in other countries to avoid the pitfalls of their past and of their foreign brethren.

Consider the Mulroney years. Even the Liberals eventually realized that from a policy standpoint, the platform he initiated (and that they so fervently opposed at the time) needs to serve as a bedrock of Canadian economic policy. Few doubt that had Free Trade not been implemented between the United States and Canada, the current Canadian economy would be a fraction of its strength. In retrospect, the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords are seen as noble attempts to bring Quebec into the Canadian constitutional fold, and thereby fully unite two peoples as one nation. Even environmental activists can find much to favor about the Mulroney years. Just ask Elizabeth May, who sat on a panel that named him “Greenest Prime Minister Ever” a mere three years ago.

But none of the above stopped the venomous hatred of the left from being spewed at him. His government, much as is the case with any administration not deemed worthy of endorsement by the left, was set aside for tar and feather treatment; smeared, administered and glued on by the media of the time. The resulting effect on public opinion needs to be considered by today’s Conservatives. Today’s party must learn from yesterday’s mistakes.

The same phenomenon of all out media attack turning into baseless public loathing was seen more recently in the recent American elections. While Canadian Conservatives, overall, have more differences than similarities with American conservatism, both are the same in one regard (one that they share with British Tories and indeed with the conservative movements of all Western countries): Intense and constant opposition on the part of the left with complete complicity on the part of the media.

Liberals do not temper criticism of American conservatives with acknowledgement that conservative policy has kept the country safe for seven years, nor do they point to the economic incentives (i.e. “tax cuts”), that staved off the recession of 2000-2001 and that created millions of jobs for the middle class in the aftermath of the tech bust and after 2 million jobs were wiped out in one day (9/11). Indeed, liberals do not point out that the economic collapse happened after Democrats took charge of fiscal spending and energy policy and mere months before the capital gains tax rate is set to increase. Everything is the fault of the conservative, as was the case with gas prices, which were reported every hour on the hour in the run up to the 2006 midterms but were never mentioned again as they increased almost exponentially during the first 18 months of Democratic Party fiscal rule.

The media onslaught of the Mulroney years and the over the top criticism of American conservatives (to the point of ridiculous insinuations that offend logic if said of anyone short of Pol Pot) took its toll on public perception. And what is painfully evident is that it doesn’t matter how right or left leaning the conservatives in question are. Your platform can be made up mostly of policies that Liberals favor (or otherwise would if their raison d’être while not in power wasn’t to oppose for opposition sake – a practice that does nothing more than a great disservice to the public). Your platform can include points that the media would enthusiastically rally around so long as they weren’t introduced by your party. If you’re a Canadian conservative, a British Tory or part of the Alliance for Sweden, you are set aside for destruction at the hands of the left and their sycophants in the media.

If coverage of the Conservative convention is any hint, the media masses are at it again. Every party holds strategic meetings and unless their members are insane, those meetings are held behind closed doors. It’s what prevents minute by minute internal debate possibly peppered with insults from being reported on the Obama, Clinton, McCain, You Name It campaigns. It’s what prevents any strategy session from being twisted to sound like a gathering of fools when only the salient parts are reported. Yet only the National Post ridiculed the typical media coverage given to this convention, with commentator Kelly McParland asking the Ignatieff and Rae camps to sit in on their private sessions too.

It doesn’t matter that at the same time as the media is trying to portray the entire event as a closed door session, they somehow manage to report on every aspect of the floor debate, where key policy is formed. The irony of reporting on every nuance of the critical part of a gathering while decrying its lack of access is lost on them.

But Conservatives need to point this out. They need to call a spade a spade, a Liberal lacking, and a reporter a hypocrite.

Countering a media onslaught requires more than this. Even if the party constantly calls out every case of media idiocy, they who control the message are more powerful. Direct addresses to the nation works somewhat, but must be extremely limited, especially in a country where such messages are not the norm.

Conservatives need to do much more if they are not to suffer the same fate that they have met before. Specifically:

· Whenever a pressing issue arises, do find a way to address the public directly. While few will take kindly to their primetime programming or sports game being interrupted, many would be willing to watch at a time when relatively little else is on. Do this in tandem with a radio address. You won’t get most people, but you will get many. Far more will be aware (and will share your points with their friends) than are now. As well, the media will be harder pressed not to ignore your side of the issue. After all, there’s only so much distortion that can be done repeatedly to publicly aired press conferences. If mass distortion does take place, appeal to the public to watch one for themselves and decide.

· Shock the nation – Look for bold alternatives that the public can rally around. Want to get tough on crime? Great. Decry harsh sentencing as counterproductive and a method that has only led to the breeding of violent criminals, sometimes out of first time offenders. Instead, introduce hard work programs in which convicts are sentenced to perform harsh tasks. Study after study has shown such a system to be exponentially more productive at reducing crime and at bringing about rehabilitation. Similarly, announce funding for research in natural medicine and dietary health. Both of those measures will surprise people and show the Conservative Party to be bold, innovative and made up of true leaders that truly benefit the nation.

· *This one is key – Mobilize a grassroots movement of supporters to refute the insanity of the other side. Get them to spread key counterpoints to their friends and to local media. This is done more easily today than ever before.

The last point needs to be comprised of several activities:

• Organize lists of supporters by riding. Call them (direct contact is needed, and this task can be accomplished by riding boards, with national direction) and ask each of them to learn the reasons for conservative policy from the points outlined in emails to supporters. Ask them to share those points with friends.

• Provide each person recruited by their riding board with a list of emails (or submission websites) to their local print, radio and TV media. Include contact info for national media as well. Appeal to them strongly to take action and to write letters. Even most supporters won’t do so unless urged repeatedly.

• Concentrate this effort on large metropolitan ridings where national media can be reached, but don’t forget or leave out the smaller ridings in any way, even those ridings where Conservatives haven’t traditionally done well.

• Reach out to college students and form active college groups. Share your talking points with them and encourage the officers of each group to spread the message to all who are interested. Fund this effort with gatherings/parties that will attract new members or questioning undecideds. It will pay off in the short as well as long term.

• Reach out to all ethnic groups individually. Start a dialogue with their leaders and explain how Conservative solutions are best for society and for their communities. Solicit the support of those who are receptive and guide them with talking points and events planning (such as a meet and greet with their local candidate and with national leaders) for their community.

Conservatives have to cultivate a broad base of supporters who understand the reason for their positions and who know better than to be influenced by games played by the media. The above steps are crucial in this effort. Simply put, they are necessary for the long term well being of the party.

Baby Hugo Doll

A number of crazed Obama fans in Miami are still selling Obama t-shirts and apparently they're running out of them as frenzied supporters purchase them by the dozens. A friend of mine, a strong Democrat for McCain, keeps getting messages to buy all kinds of Obama junk and is almost apoplectic at how mass hysteria has kicked in. He forwarded the ads and asked what's next.

Here’s my response. The sad thing is this is no laughing matter.

And new, from the Obama Store, we present to you:

Baby Hugo

Baby Hugo cries and wets his pants whenever the Chinese Communists aren't around. Pull the string and cuddly Baby Hugo says "Me Love Ahmadinejad."

And now there's change. So the Obama Store presents:

Baby Hugo 2.0

Baby Hugo 2.0 is older, wiser and comes with a little Baby Book called “new US policy” that doubles as a hand puppet. Baby Hugo no longer wets his pants and is in fact quite happy. Watch Baby Hugo brandish a knife and kill off his other Baby Neighbors. When Baby Hugo 2.0 wets his pants now, it’s with oil, but Baby Hugo no longer gives fake discounts to Northeastern Americans in the winter.

Buy the Baby Hugo 2.0 dolls at the Obama store now. Buy today, before the US dollar starts trading on par with the Russian ruble. Speaking of which, here comes Baby Vladimir 5.0.

New, from Mattel. Brought to you by the hapless Republican PR machine and millions of American Idol voters who actually made it to the polls after losing the number to text message in their vote for "Obama."

Mike Huckabee 2012

The GOP has better policies. In a dangerous world, GOP candidates make better leaders. Just ask Dmitri Medvedev, who ordered the deployment of Iskander missiles to the Polish border within hours of President-elect Obama’s victory. In July, Medvedev was satisfied with merely criticizing the (purely defensive) US missile shield that he so opposes. He dared not threaten action.

Any economy has its ups and downs. But the correlation between lower taxes and job growth, economic stability and even increased government revenue is documentable. It’s economic fact; when you lower taxes, you free up revenue. This allows businesses to expand, thereby creating jobs and greater tax revenue overall. This has been proven every time that it’s been tried. It’s what was largely responsible for staving off the recession of 2000-2001.

Even the mortgage crisis can and should be laid squarely at the feet of the Democrats. Not only was it they who rebuffed Republican efforts to regulate Fannie Mae, it was their party that, in 1995, came up with the entire ratings system whereby a bank would have to qualify a number of risky loans or face a lower federal grading.

But ask a man on the street and more than likely he’ll give you another reason for anything that’s ever happened to America, the profound and analytical retort of “it’s all Bush’s fault.” The problem is that he means it. A bigger problem is that we let this happen.

Why is this? The question does not even need to be asked. The obvious answer is the lack of able PR coming from our side.

While President Bush has been, contrary to conventional opinion (opinion that will change within months of his departure from office), an able leader on defense and on many economic issues, he has never been allowed to communicate the true reasons for his decisions or to defend himself from over the top attacks. His handlers have been cautious, and cautiousness, while having a rightful and important place, does not carry the day.

President Bush’s actions will speak louder than the words of his opponents. But this will only be apparent upon retrospect. And when it does, it will not automatically translate into confidence in just any Republican, especially not in one who cannot communicate to voters. To win the confidence of the American people, the next standard bearer of the GOP must be a sincere and able communicator. Fortunately, our party has someone who fits that mold.

Gov. Huckabee was relatively unknown when the manner in which he connected with voters, his sincerity and his steady determination caught on. But being relatively unknown, far less conservative competitors were able to raise doubts about his fiscal conservatism.

But his record shows another story. Gov. Huckabee is a true fiscal as well as a social conservative. The programs he proposed, such as arts education, a program that has been shown to be effective at reducing drop out levels and lowering teen crime, were qualitative, not costly in nature. In fact, dating as far back to his first years in office, Gov. Huckabee pushed for the first comprehensive tax cuts in the entire history of his state. Two years later, he followed up by cutting the state’s capital gains tax and by gaining passage of the Property Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights, limiting the amount that property taxes can be raised. Governor Huckabee has supported conservative measures to fix social security, encourage school choice and advance tort reform. What’s more, he’s also the most widely known and outspoken proponent of the “fair tax” in the nation.

But the key to a Huckabee candidacy in 2012 is his ability to connect with voters. He does this without compromising his conservative principles. Indeed, he articulates them with a clarity that allows others to see where we’re coming from on key issues. If the GOP’s biggest problem has been its inability to communicate, then common sense dictates that it nominate a candidate who excels in this area. Huckabee is among the best we have and his candidacy would propel us farther than would any other.

A Huckabee candidacy would solve the GOP’s greatest problem. Were President-elect Obama to try to paint GOP policies as being harmful for the middle class (something he’d have great difficulty doing in four years, after voters see the contrast, but nonetheless, we must prepare, as even Jimmy Carter was able to defend his fiscal record with some success thanks to the media machine), Gov. Huckabee could and would squarely counter those arguments.

By connecting with voters, by explaining policy in ways they understand, and by demonstrating his sincerity and his unwavering commitment to core values, Gov. Huckabee is best prepared to lead the GOP and to advance conservative principles, principles that he has successfully fought for throughout his entire career.

Not Congratulations, But Sincere Advice

Far more important than congratulating the new President-elect, is to give him the advice he needs to guide this nation well. He may not take it. In large part, I suspect he won’t. And that would be both his loss and that of the nation. But it is our duty as citizens to give it, and sometimes doing so may have a beneficial effect upon the nation’s wellbeing.

Much of President-elect Obama’s rhetoric shows that he naively believes that negotiation with terrorists will solve the world’s problems. He has yet to learn that such action only emboldens them. We must be vocal reminders of same.

President-elect Obama also risks falling for economic advice that suit only the holders of the monopolies from which he takes it. It is not for nothing that investment institutions whose existence date back almost to the founding of this nation have filled his campaign coffers with unprecedented wealth. In return, and largely unbeknownst to him, they seek unprecedented control over his policies, and due to his inexperience and lack of expertise, he can easily be persuaded. He will need our determined and vocal guidance. Only our pressure can lead him to realize what is truly in the interest of the middle class.

Another key demographic that will play for the President-elect’s support are activist groups. The dangers of placating them and the havoc that their agendas can wreak on the middle class and on society as a whole, do not seem to be realized by the President-elect. If he wishes to be a president who truly serves his nation, he must resist the urge to listen to them, even though they are his biggest supporters.

Along those lines, I’d like to offer a few suggestions:

President-elect Obama, if you are serious about bringing change and expanding minority opportunity then demand that financial literacy be a part of every high school curriculum, so that graduating students have some business skills and understand the pitfalls of credit, as well as the tangible benefits of hard work and savings. To this end I’d be happy to donate a course I wrote on this subject to the cause.

Then take the advice and idea of Dr. Marion Thorpe, former Chief Medical Officer of the State of Florida, who just ran for Congress in that state. Encourage and promote lifeskills training, in which students learn job skills, how to resist peer pressure and how to detect and avoid harmful relationships.

Then switch the focus of the war on drugs from arrest to confiscation and destruction. Destroy the drugs that plague minority areas to the extent that such is possible. A lot can be accomplished in this area. Then make the criminal justice system more rehabilitative and remove the focus from incarceration, along the lines outlined herein - http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3207.

Note that these are conservative ideas and implementing them would be the conservative thing to do. Conservatism is the most compassionate philosophy and one that produces the most beneficial results. Not nanny-statism.

Additionally, President-elect Obama, and this part is more controversial, show political courage in defense of minorities and speak out against Planned Parenthood’s targeting of Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. I understand that you are pro-choice and that you have no intention of switching sides on this issue, but certainly you are not pro-abortion. You must at least wish to reduce the number of abortions. Certainly you object to the targeting and destruction of the potential birth of the next great moralist, scientist, educator or even the next minority President by a group that targets minorities for abortion.

Lastly, be fair to those who oppose you. You would do yourself no favor by being anything but, nor would you be serving your own political interests. Strongly resist any temptation to deviate from this precept. Your leadership and your legacy will be judged accordingly.

And now some advice to fellow conservatives:

Guide this man. Make it very well known when you are doing so, so that the left can’t take credit for the success of our policies, policies that their side has fought to destroy and would do so if given the chance. But do guide him. Do correct him. Take full credit when that credit is due, but don’t let him falter or give way to his harmful misconceptions to the detriment of the nation.

If Democrats had supported the President, President Bush, on foreign affairs and other key issues when he was right, they’d still be worthy of being a party. They did not. And because of this, despite last night’s election results, they are no longer worthy of consideration in the minds of thinking Americans.

Let us not be like them, for then we would deserve their fate as well. Specifically, let us help our new President-elect. Let us guide him so that the nation may be saved. But when we do so, let us make sure that all know that it was our conservative principles and policies, and only our principles and policies, that saved the nation. For if we don’t publicize this fact, the message will never be taught and the dangers of liberalism will never be learned.

Don't Believe the Polls, Here's Why

Traveling recently through North Virginia, it was clear that the area is no where near as pro-Obama as the media would have you believe. It reminded me of the CNN reporter in North Carolina who just days before had said on air that while the polls gave Obama an edge in that state, John McCain seemed to have a clear advantage on the ground.

Then there was early voting in Florida. I stood in line for over an hour in left wing Broward County, in what is a very diverse part of it. Broward Republicans only try to carry a third of the vote in the county. If they meet that mark, they know the rest of the state will go well. As such, Republicans and Democrats for McCain here tend to stand quietly when at the polls. This was especially true on that day, as Democratic campaigners for local races worked the polls, being allowed to mingle with voters more than 100 feet from the actual polling station.

During the wait, someone with a certain temporary and minor physical disability pulled up in a car with a McCain bumper sticker. She saw the line and thought of coming back the next day. Several people who had been waiting for over an hour made way for her. No one objected. After she had been escorted into the polling station, a number of them quietly mentioned how they only let her in because of the McCain sticker. Included in these silent McCain enthusiasts were some in very Democratic leaning groups, and I don’t mean Jewish or Catholic.

Our volunteers in Florida are greater in number than the GOP had in 2004. The enthusiasm is there. It may be subtle, but it is widespread. In all, things look good for John McCain.

So what’s happening? Why are the polls wrong?

80% OF THOSE ASKED TO BE POLLED REFUSE TO RESPOND

Now most people who are asked to respond to a poll refuse. But that number has traditionally been about 66%. Most of those are Republican and the increase in that number can be attributed almost exclusively to McCain supporters. When the media portrays a candidate as being hip and labels all kinds of accusations against all who refuse to support him, those who aren’t supportive will be incensed and will rally to vote against him, but they will keep it to themselves.

Many who are phoned also wonder whether the dialer is really a polling firm. They are apprehensive, especially given the heavy handed tactics employed by the Obama campaign and by its supporters (see below).

EXIT POLLS WILL HAVE THIS EFFECT ON AN EVEN WORSE LEVEL

There’s another reason why people are hesitant to answer polls. Obama’s supporters seem especially crazed this year. They are made up of more loud and threatening college activists, wannabe hippees and the like than in any year since ’72. Even during the primaries, there were reports of physical fights between Obama supporters and those who supported Clinton. Add to that the heavy handed tactics that Obama himself has used against opponents (canceling ads on TV stations that pressed Biden, removing reporters for certain news outlets from his campaign jet, his goon squad of prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri who threatened to go after people or groups who aired ads that they deemed “untrue,” his threat of litigation against TV stations in Pennsylvania for airing negative ads while his campaign busily airs blatantly false ones at the same time, and so on).

This has nothing to do with race. Many of my Black friends, most of whom vote Democrat, have crossed over and an actively supporting McCain. They simply do not believe the hype about Obama, and are offended by it.

America is not racist. If Democrats had nominated Harold Ford, Jr., or anyone else who eschewed the overbearing tactics of the Obama campaign, polling discrepancies would have been no different than in any other election. The rabid support of some Obama supporters, the frenzied pushing past security guards and out of place hero worship is what scares people. This has nothing at all to do with race and to say it does is a tremendous disservice to everyone.

The refusal of McCain supporters to respond to exit polls will have everything to do with the heavy handed tactics of Obama supporters, including the incessant demeanor many of them portray when canvassing neighborhoods and asking people to put up yard signs.

Generally speaking, don’t expect mild people to be tremendously vocal. But do expect them to turn out the vote.

IN THE END WE’LL WIN – EVERYTHING LOOKS THAT WAY ON THE GROUND

In 2004, pretty close to the end, Zogby predicted 311 electoral votes for Kerry. He does not predict anything greater this year for Obama. Exit polls in 2004 were taken in urban areas and were 60% female (there is a gender gap, which should be a factor in honest polling). It was surprising that the real returns differed by only 5.5%. Expect it to be larger this year because of all of the tactics listed above.

The large and unusual amount of McCain supporters I was privileged to witness at early voting were almost all quiet or hushed in their support. Most would probably be apprehensive about announcing their selection in public, which is exactly what you do when responding to an exit poll. Many of these polls are conducted within earshot of voter lines and people worry about a few of the frenzied Obama supporters, like the ones we see shoving past security guards on televised rallies. Many were canvassed by pretty insistent Obama workers and some would just rather avoid any possibility of an argument. For these reasons, exit polls will be meaningless.

As the night goes on, it will be clear that the real votes do not match the polls. John McCain will win. This has nothing to do with race. If one campaign has student activists/other activist types and puts them at the forefront, the public silence, but private opposition, are commonplace. What materializes is not to that campaign’s liking.

We will pray and do everything we can to ensure that the better candidate prevails. And on the ground, the situation is the exact opposite of how the media’s portraying it. John McCain is winning.

Obama Plan Would Hurt Seniors First and Foremost

The media would have you believe that the Obama tax plan calls for income tax cuts for all who earn under $250,000 a year. Sen. Obama has changed that figure many times and his voting record shows a desire to raise taxes on those earning just $42,000 a year. But the worst part of his plan is his attack on seniors, a detail that the mainstream media has conveniently chosen to ignore. This comes in the form of an increase in the capital gains tax rate, a measure that Barack Obama has strongly advocated since the beginning of this campaign.

Let there be no mistake. While a capital gains rate increase would hurt American corporations, and therefore American jobs, by lessening the total amount of money invested in them, the most devastating affect would be on the seniors of our nation. Seniors who have spent a lifetime accumulating some form of savings and seniors who rely on their IRAs as their main source of income would all see their taxes go up under the Obama plan, no matter how meager or sorely needed their savings may be. Why the media hasn’t made more of an issue of this scandalous situation is anyone’s guess.

There are other economic reasons to support John McCain. It is no secret that our economy faces some serious tough times and that concrete, well thought out real results are needed. It is therefore crucial to examine the economic platform of each candidate.

The following points, in particular, should lead one to support John McCain for President:

In his unwavering battle against reckless spending, Sen. McCain has often fought the leadership of both parties in Congress and has never backed down from a fight.

It should be emphasized that Sen. McCain’s abhorrence of spending should not be viewed lightly. According to non-partisan federal budgetary agencies, the United States faces falling into a junk bond credit rating within the next 15-20 years should we not take aggressive measures to curb spending and promote growth. John McCain recognized the dangers of wasteful spending well before most others did and is one of a select few members of congress to consistently take aggressive action to put government spending on the right path.

Central to his economic proposals is the fact that he recognizes the need to reform corporate tax rates. US corporations are taxed at a higher rate than in any other industrialized nation except for Japan. If this situation is not rectified, more and more American corporations will move their headquarters to other countries. John McCain’s proposal to reduce corporate tax rates in a responsible way is something that members of both parties can rally around. It is a measure that is clearly needed to save jobs here in the United States.

John McCain is also the only candidate who can work with both parties in Congress to actually achieve economic change. He enjoys wide respect that crosses party lines. This is largely because his proposals are reasonable and widely recognized as being needed.

Furthermore, under the Obama plan, payroll taxes would increase for those earning slightly over $100,000. Those earners may still be relatively wealthy, but that’s a far cry from his claim not to increase taxes on anyone earning under $250,000 and should lead you to question just how far he’ll go now that his previous commitment (to make $250,000 the threshold for a tax increase) is off the table (it also challenges his honesty). In the past, Sen. Obama has proposed tax increases on anyone earning over $42,000. His plan to increase the minimum wage by almost 50% would also destroy small business and cause mass layoffs among low wage earners. In short, his plan would bring joblessness and unemployment to the impoverished while doing more to hurt business than any administration in recent memory.

In short, based on his 25 year consistent record of fighting wasteful spending, the fact that his economic program is innovative and hits on all major economic issues facing America and the fact that his opponent’s platform penalizes seniors first, it is in the interest of the nation that Sen. John McCain be elected President.

America Is Better Than All That

The media, however, isn’t. How can they turn a blind eye as Obama has a team of prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri threatening to prosecute anyone who airs ads against their candidate which they deem to be untrue? Note that Obama has taken great liberties to try to distort statements made about him by McCain as being untrue. His objection to anything unfavorable as being “false” is a prelude to what he and his team would go after in their quest to stifle debate. Can there be a bigger challenge to free speech?

It is also worth mentioning that their call to action comes at the same time as the Obama campaign is airing ads throughout the Northeast saying that McCain and Palin would ban all stem cell research. I’d point out that no one wants to “ban” “all” stem cell research. In fact, President Bush, someone considerably to the right of McCain, is the first president to fund any embryonic stem cell research at all. President Clinton deferred the issue over possible moral objections, leaving it to the current administration to determine proper ethical grounds. And the current Administration did not “ban” research on existing lines, they just did not allocate grants for it.

The Obama campaign is threatening to sue television stations in Pennsylvania if they air negative ads about him. And what is the reaction of Chris Matthews, who is looking to run for the US Senate in Pennsylvania in 2010? Well, don’t ask him. He’s too busy offering sickeningly vivid renditions of how Obama makes him feel. Here’s a message to Chris: If you can’t stand up for free speech and against what can only be called thuggery, then you have no business even being a reporter. Forget about holding public office.

And it doesn’t stop there. Just this morning the Obama campaign removed reporters for three newspapers from its campaign. The three papers, the NY Post, the Dallas Morning News and the Washington Times had all endorsed McCain. If McCain pulled a similar stunt he’d be left without any of the mainstream media, who have sold whatever journalistic integrity they had left as they fight for their beloved orator of the Greek Temple.

Can we believe that this is what journalism has come to?

As for the news media themselves, certain reporters with a conscious have been able to examine the dangers of the wholesale sellout to Obama on the part of their industry. Notable thanks goes to Michael Malone of ABC who has shown himself to be a true journalist, and therefore writes that he’s embarrassed by recent media coverage to identify himself as same.

A free press allows for access to information. A press that turns the other way as freedom of speech is run roughshod over endangers the public. The effect upon the public interest can be devastating and we have a moral duty to stand up against this.

And here’s what the McCain campaign needs to do:

In the last days, go after Obama’s insane attack on civil rights and on free speech. Make an issue out of his supporters’ attacks on Joe the Plumber, an average man who dared to ask Obama a question he did not like. Expose the thuggish tactics of his so called “Truth Squad” in Missouri and his threats upon the free press in Pennsylvania.

Then point out that the capital gains rates under the Obama plan would first and foremost affect seniors who are living on their meager retirement savings. Capital gains rates do affect the middle class. McCain-Palin: Expose the Obama pipedream for what it is, in ways that the public can understand.

Note: In recent days I’ve had the opportunity to visit several key battleground areas first hand. The situation on the ground is far more pro-McCain than the media would have you believe. Things look good for our side.