Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Let The Candidates Decide
Published on September 16, 2008 By Dr Guy In Democrat

In any election, since media became a factor, political campaigns have had negative ads.  Some worse than others (the Daisy Ad), and some just funny.  Most are just designed to show the shortcomings of the opponent, figuring (rightly or wrongly) that voters will not see the shortcomings without being lead to them.

So who is the king of negative ads in this campaign?  If we ask the media, or the pundits, or the emotional "Wanna-bee" reporters, or even blogdom, I am sure we are going to get many answers.  But when it comes right down to it, who would know more about what ads their campaign is running?  The Candidates.

So let's allow one to speak for himself:

"If we're going to ask questions about, you know, who has been promulgating negative ads that are completely unrelated to the issues at hand, I think I win that contest pretty handily," Obama said.

I guess the messiah has spoken.  So for all the foreigners thinking that McCain is the bad guy, who are you going to believe?  Some biased media pundit?  A blog?  Or the candidate himself.

I wonder if Obama is going to run this ad in all 57 states?


Comments (Page 6)
7 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 
on Sep 24, 2008

You do know that the concept was the presidents but it was written by Senator Kennedy?

That's what I just said.  And it goes to what I said was Bush's biggest mistake.  Not standing up to the democrats in the first place. (But in all fairness, Bush would have done no better on this as it is based on a flawed premise).

 

on Sep 24, 2008

That's what I just said. And it goes to what I said was Bush's biggest mistake. Not standing up to the democrats in the first place. (But in all fairness, Bush would have done no better on this as it is based on a flawed premise).

I have to agree with you here. it was a good idea and a good effort at working with the enemy.

on Sep 24, 2008

I am unaware of this. Please enlighten me, show me what you are writing about.

Keating 5  I say that is worse than Plagerism

on Sep 24, 2008

Keating 5 I say that is worse than Plagerism

Refresh my memory on this i was living out of the country when that happned.

on Sep 25, 2008

Keating 5 I say that is worse than Plagerism

So innocence is worse than guilt?  Thi sis Newspeak, right?  Up is down and down is up?

Now I see!  4 legs good, 2 legs better!

on Sep 25, 2008

I have to agree with you here. it was a good idea and a good effort at working with the enemy.

I will qualify that - it seemed like a good idea at the time, however as we see, it was a bad idea.

on Sep 25, 2008

Paladin77

Keating 5 I say that is worse than Plagerism


Refresh my memory on this i was living out of the country when that happned.

S&L failure - 5 congressman took money (campaign stuff of course) from a shady character who basically tanked a large S&L by improper accounting methods that inflated assets (sounds like Enron, eh?)

on Sep 25, 2008

Refresh my memory on this i was living out of the country when that happned.

I think their might be some bait here but ok......it was 1987 Charles Keating(a devolper)  needed help with regulators and stalling regulation.  So McCain and other senators first stalled the regulation that would help prevent risky investments(kinda like we need now) to help keating out.  He also was involved in several meetings where it was discussed how to get the fed off of keatings back with regards to a business venture he had that was under some type of investigation.  Keating had already donated 112,000 to McCain and wanted he return favor for this.  So basically McCain sold his soul kinda thing.

on Sep 25, 2008

So innocence is worse than guilt? Thi sis Newspeak, right? Up is down and down is up?

Now I see! 4 legs good, 2 legs better!

He wasnt innocent he was there and did some actions.  At any rate it shows a good history of who McCain really works for and its not "Country First"

on Sep 25, 2008

He wasnt innocent he was there and did some actions.

He was there - he did no actions, as the investigation found.  But nice try!  I am sure the dirt diggers at Obama are trying the same spin.  But regardless of spin, facts still get in the way.

on Sep 25, 2008

He wasnt innocent he was there and did some actions.

So he was tried and convicted but still remains a senator? I am confused on this one. Thanks for bringing me up to speed on the keeting 5, like I said I was not in the country when that happened, I think I was in North Korea or China that year.

on Sep 25, 2008

He was there - he did no actions, as the investigation found. But nice try! I am sure the dirt diggers at Obama are trying the same spin. But regardless of spin, facts still get in the way.

he did actions delaying regulation that is an action.  And surprisingly no he didnt go to jail....lucky him I guess...but needless to say he was way LESS than honest here.

on Sep 26, 2008

He wasnt innocent he was there and did some actions. At any rate it shows a good history of who McCain really works for and its not "Country First"

I think it'd be dangrous to simply discount the results of a federal investigation. I mean these guys spend months talking to people and asking questions, trying to find the truth of what happened. Compared to someone like me who only hears about the thing on the news maybe for a week?

Not to say we shouldn't question authority (because they do get it wrong), but I think there has to some pretty solid proof otherwise in order to denounce the guy as guilty when they find him innocent. I mean whatever happened to innocent till proven guilty?

on Sep 26, 2008

Of course there may be a way to spin this...maybe something along the lines of.

McCain's inability to notice what was happening around him during the Keating 5 fiasco puts into question his ability to think fast and lead the county during this time of financial crisis, when so much is at stake do you really want a guy who reacted slowly and did nothing to stop it in his younger years to be put in charge of things now that he's even older and slower?

 

Something along those line I think.

on Sep 26, 2008

he did actions delaying regulation that is an action

That is smart politics!  And consistent with his philosophy and votes.  And that is why there is no there there.  If they found him acting out of character, they may have, but as he did nothing out of character or philosophy, there was only innuendo.

But you are right in one respect.  Yes, the left would very much like to make conservative philosophy illegal.  They try every day

7 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7