I like how Spears and Hilton are described as "sexually available."  That's like describing Pope Benedict as "affiliated with the Catholic Church."

Dammit, stop playing on McCain's turf. Don't just whine about McCain's tactics; hit back. He's a confused old fool. He wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years. He's George Bush's third term. L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

Minor quibble.  Doesn't the Forbes 100 refer to celebrities who get paid the most?  That's a completely different metric than "buzz" around a celebrity, or someone whose face sells magazines.  I'm not saying that Britney Spears and Paris Hilton aren't yesterday's news, but making a lot of money does not equal celebrity.  I mean, The Police?  Seriously?  I don't think they pull much celebrity attention from the two women who aren't on the list.

This is getting ugly. Sigh.

I'm with prnoonan: hit back!

prnoonan, McCain is not an old fool. He's a rich bully and a playboy jerk and he doesn't know what he's talking about and by the way, he's married to a drug criminal. The "old" thing is a low blow. You need to attack his personality and character, not his age. I mean, how many of his one-time "friends" have spent time in prison for fraud or corruption? At least a dozen. What kind of man doesn't even notice that his own wife has become a drug addict and a thief until after she's charged with a federal crime? And it doesn't take very many video clips of McCain speaking when he thinks no one is listening to make an irrefutable case that he's simply a dick. Even his military record, except for the POW experience, speaks poorly to his character and abilities.

You know, I watched the video and didn't even recognize Spears or Hilton.  I wonder how many other 50 - 90 year old voters this was totally lost upon?

On the other hand, we probably all got the "Triumph of Will" reference.  So maybe it balances out.

Finally, what really astonishes me is that any ad team would prefix the McCain saying "I approve" sound bite with a photo of such an obviously dynamic, vibrant and just plain happy opponent.  Are they utterly incompetent?  Couldn't they find something a little less flattering of their opponent before dragging out the tired old man?

I have to agree with DrDan, sexually available is too polite to accurately describe these girls.

As for Riley, I think he was off base using the Forbes reference (for the same reasons bigfish pointed out) but he is more or less on track with the sexual undertones of the advertisement. As I recall, one of these girls has at least 1 sex tape, and the other likes to go clubbing "au natural". I think these girls were chosen specifically to impart a sense of "black guy with two white ho's" onto the viewer while the narrator chants their Celebrity meme. All in all, rather distasteful.

This Tucker Bounds is a serious a-hole. I would take every opportunity to remind him that he claimed that McCain didn't speak for the McCain campaign but that he does. From TP

   BOUNDS: No Megyn there is no imaginable circumstance where John McCain would raise payroll taxes. It’s absolutely out of the question.

Got that? On Sunday, McCain said a payroll tax increase could be part of a negotiation. On Tuesday, McCain’s spokesperson said a payroll tax increase is “absolutely out of the question.”

And who should we believe? McCain or the person McCain hired to speak on behalf of his campaign? If recent history is any guide, it’s the latter.

McCain is the one who has turned into a fussy, anal retentive old man,

OK, lets not lose our discpline here - picking on Cindy's addiction to pain killers 15 years ago will backfire in two seconds flat.

Also, I think McCain is on to something - or his wicked Rove advisors are anyway - you have to think like a soulless lizard here. If McCains caused Obama to pitch a fit in any way, he wins this round.  Obama didn't of course, he doesn't do that - he laughed, but should have laughed more and hit back much harder - with cold precision, no dramatics -  than he has.  

Does McCain really think he can get Obama rattled after the garbage Hillary threw at him? Not gonna happen.  But if everyone else bodice rips and becomes too overwrought, this is just as provocative to the demographic they were pitching with this ad anyway.

Did we really think we'd get an entire general election without at attempt to Harold Ford-ize Obama? I'm just surprised it took this long.  Let's pace ourselves here.

Rhubarbs, that line of attack works too.  I'm really indifferent.  What I insist on, however, is that we pick a line and stick with it.  That's been the problem with D presidential campaigns recently: all over the place, no core message, no central attack theme.  Vs. the Bush team, and their amazing ability to pick a simple theme and pound it until it is dead, then pound it more (flip-flopper, exaggerator and not, apparently, uppity, er, arrogant).  That's what it takes to filter a message down where it matters, and I don't care if John King or Adam Nagourney tire of its repetition.  

Say it with me now: John McSame is GWB's third term, John McSame is GWB's third term.......

Rhubarbs is right on the money. Why the DNC and folk affiliated with Obama are not starting whisper campaigns about McCain's ties to criminals and his general lack of knowledge on domestic policy and the economy, as well as his tantrum prone personality is beyond me. The RNC hits Obama on a weak connection to Rezko, why in the world are folks not running pictures and explanations of the Keating Five, and McCain's influence peddling.

Yes, we all know that he says that he did not really interfere, he just showed up at a meeting set up to pressure members of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Company investigating his friend (and political contributor) Keating. This explanation is as lame as Bill saying that he smoked dope, but did not inhale.

Also, why are they not running ads showing McCain giving the same answer in 2000 and 2008 about' "not really understanding economics". This would be political gold, and an effective reply to McCain's assertion that high gas prices are Obama's fault. How in the world is a man that does not understand economics lead the country during a recession?

Finally, I hope that the Obama folk will not let the debates be limited by banning the candidates from ask ing each other questions. Gore made this mistake in the debates with Bush. He only really scored heavily when he violated the rules and asked W direct questions. then Bush looked horrible as he could not recite the memes that had been drilled into his head.

Could you imagine the fun in watching Obama making McCain come unhinged during a debate?

This ad was not only inane, it was inept.  I realize that the words running at the same time as the images were negative, but Obama looks happy and intelligent and well-lit.  (Oh, also, he's in color.  Don't these people know your opponent is always supposed to be shown in black and white?)  At the end of the ad we get a shot of McCain looking like he's contentedly watching a group of ducks through the window.  Not the images I would have chosen.

I have to agree with prnoonan. Obama has not fought back on this nearly hard enough. Where are the ads proclaiming John McCain opposed funding our veterans and a new GI Bill but still wants to stay in Iraq indefinitely? They should be going after him hard. The definitive response to smear tactics remains Jim Webb in 2006: www.youtube.com/watch .  Obama should take some cues from this.

One thing no one has mentioned: the first thing I think of when I see Paris Hilton and Britney Spears is that they are both stupid people. Perhaps, the McCain ad was somehow trying to say Obama is a good entertainment, but he's also a really, really dumb person. Or, the people who cheer for him are really really dumb, for being interested in someone so unintelligent.

Am I alone in wanting Obama to please please please do some fighting back.  Why do Dems always, every four years with brain-numbing regularity, no matter who the nominee is, stand there scratching their heads wondering why the Repug campaign ads are suddenly getting nasty?  When are they going to understand that these people know no limits, have no decency?

DrDan, what you did not realize is that those were Hezbollah ducks.  And McCain was watching them vigilantly, not contentedly.  Only he can protect our nation from terrorist waterfowl.

"Say it with me now: John McSame is GWB's third term, John McSame is GWB's third term......."

An article on Drudge I read this morning indicates this is exactly what Obama has been chanting during his most recent stump speeches.

Blackton, McCain is obviously trying to give Dems who don't want to vote for Obama an excuse to vote for him instead by parroting the "all options on the table" line, which Obama used when he was being grilled about his stance on Social Security reform. all the while, he's hoping no one notices him and his surrogates holding down the conservative party's stances to keep their base happy.

So, what Tucker said was perfectly true: don't pay no mind to McCain; he's just pandering to the Democrats who need a reason to not vote for Obama.

A "sexy [white] babes" ad may have helped defeat Harold Ford, Jr. in '06. I'm sure it's still on youtube.

Re: Obama-as-gay meme, John Avarosis at Americablog (admittedly highly partisan against McCain) this a.m. has an *intriguing* post:

www.americablog.com/.../mccain-is-gay-baiting-obama-and-it.html

"UPDATE: I'm not the only one who thinks McCain is gay-baiting.

I know a thing or two about gay-baiting. I've been working on gay civil rights issue since the early 1990s, when I helped Senator Kennedy's office prepare for the gays in the military hearings, and legislation, in 1993. Since then, I helped Kennedy on the ENDA hearings in the mid 90s, and then moved into my own civil rights advocacy work regardings Matthew Shepard, Timothy McVeigh (the gay one), Dr. Laura, Mary Cheney, Ford, Microsoft and beyond. It's fair to say that I have a pretty good nose for anti-gay bigotry. And McCain is trying to gay-bait Obama.

Of course, McCain isn't stupid. As he's surrounded himself with senior gay male advisors since at least the 1990s, McCain is usually careful about overt gay-bashing (though he did promise the religious right a few weeks ago that he'd be more publicly anti-gay, and just last week said he didn't think gay people should be able to adopt children (he then backtracked, kind of)). Instead, McCain and his people are attempting to define Obama as "gay" by describing him as the stereotypical gay man. Yesterday, a McCain spokesman described Obama as fussy and prone to hysterics. A few days earlier, we were told that Obama was "flitting" around Europe. And before that, a GOP operative called Obama "a fancy lad." Also, who is Obama compared to in the latest McCain ad? (An ad that independent fact-checkers say is totally false.) Two women, and kind of ditzy women at that - Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Let's review. A fussy, fancy lad who flits around Europe, is prone to hysteria, and reminds you of ditzy blonde chicks. Sorry, but that's a stereotypical gay guy. And as I said, McCain knows his gay guys. He's surrounded by them."

Aside from the numerous other problems that people have cited with the ad, there's the fact that it's just all over the place.  If you start out trying to push the Obama-as-shallow-celebrity theme, just stick with it.  Instead, the ad careens from character attacks to offshore drilling to taxes, and finishes with that bizarre music change.

Also, I don't think "gay-baiting" is the right term.  Saying that Obama isn't tough and manly is quite a bit different from saying that he's gay.  Incidentally, the only political quote I know of from Britney Spears was saying that we should, like, trust the President.  The parallels with Obama are striking!

AlanSP:  I agree it's not "gay-baiting" as such.  I'm more concerned with the odd use of the word "superfluous."  I'm not sure Bounds knows what it means.  (Why would he blast an Obama statement as unnecessary?)

It's a classic defense posture for threatened white masculinity to try to paint blacks as BOTH sexually voracious for white women (a notion deeply entangled with white guys' fears of inadequacy) AND somehow sexually emasculated (whiny, high-voiced, excitable etc) if not actually homosexual.

It makes no rational sense, of course, but it doesn't have to.

Again with the starlet-cleavage photo, and *still* no Daniel Craig!

AlanSP: Saying that Obama isn't tough or manly may not be gay-baiting; but saying that he's "fussy" and "hysterical" probably is. In his choice of words, Bounds carefully trades on gender stereotypes: a fussy and hysterical man is not just lacking in toughness or other manly qualities, he's positively effeminate. (And if we're thinking in terms of stereotypes, that's not a far step from saying he's gay.)

I agree it's not strictly a gay-baiting tactic since mostly  gay-baiting suggests that the person is actually gay, "gay acting" (beats me what this could imply)  and/or gay friendly.

Now "gay-baiting," as well you might imagine, isn't anything new under the sun. For example, here is a brief essay on "Gay-baiting in Colonial Boston," from the blog, Boston 1775:

boston1775.blogspot.com/.../gay-baiting-in-colonial-boston.html

Does this clear it up for you?... No?

Senator McCain is attacking Barack Obama with an ad claiming Obama is the world's biggest political celebrity, on a par with Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. Others have noted that McCain is a bit of a celebrity himself, and, more importantly, the two

what McCain called "hysterical" was Obama shrugging his ad off with a laugh. THe one who's been sounding shrill and hysterical to my ear is McCain. Obama has to come back at this stuff. He's had so many many opportunities to throw McCain's stuff back in his face, and all he does is laugh and shrug. Laugh and shrug is a good start, but he's gotta do more than deflect -- he has to parry.

sdemuth:  I too thought it was incredibly incompent for many reasons, but as you point out, I couldn't believe that they used such a flattering picture of Obama - he looked fresh, young, dynamic, and happy.  Then they trot out Grampa Simpson to give the "I approved this message"

And McCain & Co. should be careful with the gay baiting, the "flitty" and "fancy lad"   references before people start looking too closely at his toady and traveling companion, Sen. Lindsey Graham.  

They should never have used McCain's face for the "I approved this message" tag - that was actually the weirdest bit for me in the whole ad. He DOES look like he's watching baby ducks, and considering that we all just saw a sleazy ad, it's really not the right expression on his face.

I didn't read nearly as much into that ad as y'all did, but, hearking back to the ugly primary, I can sense where this is headed (eg, Bill O'Reilly comparing Obama to somebody's ex-wife).  But remember, the Rove formula was to hit the other guy right at his strong point.  Portray Gore the good scout as a pathological liar, Kerry the war hero as traitor.  Thus H Clinton became not a strong, independent woman but a shrew.  The problem for McCain here is that Obama's strength is not his manliness.  I mean, it's obviously not a weakness, he's a good-looking guy, but the basis of his appeal is not a snake-charming smile and subliminal swagger; Obama is not Denzel Washington.  Rather, the roots of his appeal are his youth and his integrity, which have proved (so far) very difficult to undermine.  No way Obama loses this election.  

It's exactly 10 weeks since the Log Cabin Republicans said this: We understand the general election starts today and Log Cabin will do its part to educate gay and lesbian voters about Sen. McCain in the weeks ahead. Contrary to what many Democrats are