Karl Rove is the acknowledged master of the dark arts. When he was in the White House, his thoughts were highly filtered and only sold under the counter to clients with "special tastes".
Now he  writes in the Wall Street Journal and his political pornography is retailed and available to all.

In todays WSJ he reveals a detailed blueprint of what is going to be the Republican campaign if Barack Obama takes the nomination, as is likely.

T'aint pretty, but it's worth looking at. Here are some excerpts:

And what of the reborn Adlai Stevenson? Mr. Obama is befuddled and angry about the national reaction to what are clearly accepted, even commonplace truths in San Francisco and Hyde Park. How could anyone take offense at the observation that people in small-town and rural American are "bitter" and therefore "cling" to their guns and their faith, as well as their xenophobia? Why would anyone raise questions about a public figure who, for only 20 years, attended a church and developed a close personal relationship with its preacher who says AIDS was created by our government as a genocidal tool to be used against people of color, who declared America's chickens came home to roost on 9/11, and wants God to damn America? Mr. Obama has a weakness among blue-collar working class voters for a reason.

His inspiring rhetoric is a potent tool for energizing college students and previously uninvolved African-American voters. But his appeals are based on two aspirational pledges he is increasingly less credible in making.

Mr. Obama's call for postpartisanship looks unconvincing, when he is unable to point to a single important instance in his Senate career when he demonstrated bipartisanship. And his repeated calls to remember Dr. Martin Luther King's "fierce urgency of now" in tackling big issues falls flat as voters discover that he has not provided leadership on any major legislative battle.

Mr. Obama has not been a leader on big causes in Congress. He has been manifestly unwilling to expend his political capital on urgent issues. He has been only an observer, watching the action from a distance, thinking wry and sardonic and cynical thoughts to himself about his colleagues, mildly amused at their too-ing and fro-ing. He has held his energy and talent in reserve for the more important task of advancing his own political career, which means running for president.

But something happened along the way. Voters saw in the Philadelphia debate the responses of a vitamin-deficient Stevenson act-a-like. And in the closing days of the Pennsylvania primary, they saw him alternate between whining about his treatment by Mrs. Clinton and the press, and attacking Sen. John McCain by exaggerating and twisting his words. No one likes a whiner, and his old-style attacks undermine his appeals for postpartisanship.

Mr. Obama is near victory in the Democratic contest, but it is time for him to reset, freshen his message and say something new. His conduct in the last several weeks raises questions about whether, for all his talents, he is ready to be president.

Every word here is filled with meaningful menace . every paragraph holds the germs of dozens of attack ads. For me the most menacing is the last sentence quoted that is the summing up of all that precedes it:

His conduct in the last several weeks raises questions about whether, for all his talents, he is ready to be president.

No Swiftboating here, just condescension. This is a deadly game plan based on deflation of a balloon and not difficult to follow.
 http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/

With 60 percent of Americans considering Hillary Clinton untrustworthy she just beat Barack Obama by 10 points in PA. Now if you calculate how John McCain's story resonates with white, working class men, you can imagine that November will be a perfect storm. Like Nora Ephron says, "you can't trust white men".

"Hillary can't win!" you say, "she should drop out, because she is damaging Obama's chance". Look at it from her angle.

At this point I think Hillary is almost as interested in Obama losing as her winning. Because she wins either way.

I think that if Hillary can't be president she would rather see McCain, who is a friend of hers, in the job than Obama. She would be an influential senator and Obama would be out in the cold if he didn't finally win. She would have power and prepare her next moves. If Obama became president she would be finished. Obama wouldn't want Bill Clinton anywhere near <i>his</i> White House.

So I think she will do Obama as much damage as she can so that either she is the candidate or he loses to McCain.

If I had to say what the Pennsylvania Democratic primary means. It would be this: If Barack Obama can't beat Hillary Clinton after her Bosniagate surreality, he'll never get enough white votes to beat McCain in November.

Richard Cohen puts Hillary's plight nicely in the Washington Post, As Cohen says, Hillary has

planted her foot in the unforgiving pitch of self-caricature. Now, about 60 percent of the electorate doubts her honesty. The image has hardened.

With the kind of negatives that Hillary Clinton has, with 60% of Americans thinking she is dishonest, a vote for her is not a vote for her, it's a vote against Obama.   Hillary Clinton is no longer Hillary Clinton, she is simply the unObama.

In November, there will be a much more convincing unObama in the race.

The RCP polls have Hillary Clinton about 6 points ahead of Obama. With the negatives she has, she should have been out of the race ages ago... Those 6 points, if the PA vote finally goes that way, are Obama's tombstone in November.
http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/