Negative Payback, Obama to use Keating Five Scandal on McCain

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/14302

Finally. Some payback for the smears and lies that killed our parties chances since 2000, Palin wants to link Obama to terrorists? Well here is some karma for that claim.

Perfect time to reveal this to the public, especially during the financial crisis.

I keep telling my Republican friends that Obama is not like typical Democrats. He's not afraid to take the gloves off.

I can't believe it took this long. This last month is going to be fucking ugly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

I can't believe it took this long. This last month is going to be fucking ugly.

---

My best bet is that they wanted to spring it as an October surprise. Would be perfect for it...

Obama has had Keating 5 in his back pocket this entire time. Now that the economy is front and center it only makes sense for him to use it if McCain is going to go down the Ayers path. The end result of this will be that both attacks will cancel each other out and the race will end up exactly where it is today, Obama in the lead.

Keating 5 is a lot more damning than the Ayers association. Yeah, McCain was found not guilty by his peers, but so was OJ.

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

---

Poor right wingers get a taste of their own medicine. Republicans are every bit the cocksuckers Democrats are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

---

If you didn't know the campaign was going to turn into this, you must be new here.
I don't think Obamatards are crying foul on the negative ads, I just think it's a very desperate move from the McCain camp, considering the skeletons he has in his closet also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

---

Had McCain NOT went to the "Obama is a terrorist" card we would never have seen these ads. That is the difference.

Unfortunately in politics today it is not enough to just dismiss what the critics say. You need to defend yourself and more importantly go after the attackers with your own attacks. We saw what happened to Kerry when he got swift boated. It's unfortunate that so many low information voters are swayed by negative attack ads, but the fact remains that negative campaigning does work.

What McCain and the GOP did not realize about Obama is that he isn't your traditional Democrat. He's one tough SOB and he's always 3-4 steps ahead of his opponent. He outwitted Hilary and he's made McCain look like a complete fool. The Chicago style politics that the GOP criticizes him for being a part of are what has made him able to withstand their attacks today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

---

Laughing out louded.


F I N A L L Y

F I NA L LY

in case you did not get what I am trying to say

Quote:

---

FINALLY

---

Like I said, this was always Obama's Ace....I wanted him to pull it in the debate but he played the tin man.......This may just go down as one of the ultimate scoffs in the history of campaigning mankind for a democrat if it works.


I was calling for McCain to get scoffed for this shit back in the primary seasons and have been eagerly waiting and waiting for Obama to take the gauntlets off and start BURNING McCain with this shit now that we are in a financial meltdown.

L--O--L

omg

the more i read about this the more i am convinced that the Obama Campaign always intended to use this against McCain, but was biding the time until the time was right.


If only Mouse had not sold out and still had his nuclear explosion photoshops.....McCain's campaign is

(insert mouse nuclear explosion pic here)

OVER.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads?

Got it. Gotta love partisanship.

---

You don't think Democrats remember the swiftboat ads? You don't think that Democrats remember Kerry sitting on his hands hoping they'd go away and taking hit after hit after hit in the polls?

I personally wish the campaign hadn't gone int his direction for either side. I think its pointless and sad that it comes down to this, but that being said I think there is a lot more to McCain's mess than there is to Obama's.

In the end I don't care one way or another. McCain's not going to win by going negative and I'm glad Obama isn't going to take it lying down. Its not enough to point out how full of shit the other side is. At this point, when you get punched in the mouth it doesn't do you any good to try to point out the other guy is an asshole. Dont' bother and just throw punches of your own.

In any event, you'll always see the hard line supporters of each side love these ads. But while the base will go rah rah over them, they do not really do much to convince the undecideds. The undecideds are the ones that want to love everyone and thats why they have a hard time picking a side. These kind of ads just turn them off.

In any event its clear McCain is reaching desperation.

It's like when timvp plays basketball and keeps locking down every single player he goes against and busting constant threes in their faces. Eventually those players will at least attempt to play D and hit threes of their own.


Welllllllp. I always knew eventually Obama would take the gloves off, and kill this notion he stood for a different kind of politics. Looks like, yet again, Manny was (you guessed it)


W-R-O-N-G.

The repubs, like their fellowman TPark, are the type who can dish it first and dish it fast but once it's thrown back at them they call foul and ask for the adults to stop it or they're taking their ball and leaving!

tpark is like that fat guy from abbott and costello meet the mummy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

The undecideds are the ones that want to love everyone and thats why they have a hard time picking a side.

---

I liked your entire post until here. Most independents I know are the ones trying to pick a side they hate least, when each party keeps giving convincing arguments as to why they're the ones the voter should despise.

I'm still independent cuz Jive couldn't afford me.

I say in any event too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Poor right wingers get a taste of their own medicine. Republicans are every bit the cocksuckers Democrats are.

---

True. Actually, even more so. Although that's why the Democrats haven't won a 1 v 1 first term election in over 30 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

If you didn't know the campaign was going to turn into this, you must be new here.

---

Obviously it was. The Democrats weren't going to sit idly by and watch another choke job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I don't think Obamatards are crying foul on the negative ads

---

Go read the other thread about McCain going to all attack ads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomBrady

Had McCain NOT went to the "Obama is a terrorist" card we would never have seen these ads. That is the difference.

---

LOL. The kindergarten "he started it" take?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomBrady

Unfortunately in politics today it is not enough to just dismiss what the critics say.

---

True. Which is why I've been advocating for the Obama camp to remain crafty and not go into choke mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

Like I said, this was always Obama's Ace....I wanted him to pull it in the debate but he played the tin man

---

Yeah, I'm not sure if waiting was the right move or if he should have gone for the kill earlier. We'll find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

the more i read about this the more i am convinced that the Obama Campaign always intended to use this against McCain

---

Yeah I'm pretty sure this was planned. Although you'll have Obamatards saying that it's only in retaliation or whatever their excuse is.

Obamatards like to turn emo when Obama is getting attacked and when hardball is being played. My issue is that if you are going to be emo about hardball, it can't just be one-sided emo. No wiping off the makeup and going for the bandaids when hardball is played in your favor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

Welllllllp. I always knew eventually Obama would take the gloves off, and kill this notion he stood for a different kind of politics. Looks like, yet again, Manny was (you guessed it)

---

As someone who will be voting for Obama, the only aspect of this I don't like is that it shows a smidgen of desperation. If Obama was coasting to an easy victory like Obamatards would have you believe, he wouldn't need to change his tune.

That said, I believe it was the correct move. McCain has a whole host of skeletons in his closet that should be exposed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

The repubs are the type who can dish it first and dish it fast but once it's thrown back at them they call foul and ask for the adults to stop it or they're taking their ball and leaving!

---

Link to a repub in this thread whining about attack ads? Link to a thread of a dem not whining about attack ads?

Thanks in advance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

I'm still independent cuz Jive couldn't afford me.

---

A+ for the content, C- that it belonged to Lil Flip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

You don't think Democrats remember the swiftboat ads? You don't think that Democrats remember Kerry sitting on his hands hoping they'd go away and taking hit after hit after hit in the polls?

---

Yeah, the Democrats better remember. I'm tired of the Democrats whining about how unfair they've been treated. Man up and fight back.

Which is what Obama looks like he's doing :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

I personally wish the campaign hadn't gone int his direction for either side. I think its pointless and sad that it comes down to this, but that being said I think there is a lot more to McCain's mess than there is to Obama's.

---

Has their been an election in history that hasn't used negative ads? Politics is a dirty game. You can't be afraid to have get a little dirt under the fingernails. Perot isn't always going to be available to save the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

In the end I don't care one way or another. McCain's not going to win by going negative and I'm glad Obama isn't going to take it lying down. Its not enough to point out how full of shit the other side is. At this point, when you get punched in the mouth it doesn't do you any good to try to point out the other guy is an asshole. Dont' bother and just throw punches of your own.

---

Exactly. But why be against it in the first place? You wanted Obama to win a clean fight? When was the last clean presidential election?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

In any event, you'll always see the hard line supporters of each side love these ads. But while the base will go rah rah over them, they do not really do much to convince the undecideds. The undecideds are the ones that want to love everyone and thats why they have a hard time picking a side. These kind of ads just turn them off.

---

I'm going to have to disagree. Neither side would be running attack ads if their focus groups didn't indicate that they could affect the undecideds. Targeting ads solely to your hardcore supporters makes no sense and I'm going to trust that these billion dollar operations know what they are doing ... at least to some degree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

In any event its clear McCain is reaching desperation.

---

True but how is that a take in a thread about Obama starting a payback negative ad campaign? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

As someone who will be voting for Obama, the only aspect of this I don't like is that it shows a smidgen of desperation. If Obama was coasting to an easy victory like Obamatards would have you believe, he wouldn't need to change his tune.

---

I disagree at this point. And you better not label me as an obama jizz guzzler because that I am not. I think its a simple tit-for-tat strategy.
If McCain drops the negative by tuesday, Obama will drop it. If McCain keeps calling Obama a terrorist supporter, Obama's McCain ads will all but call McCain an insider involved in our current financial crisis.

But

I can totally envision a scenario where the democrats use this Ace wrongly, and end up alienating more people than they would like.


AND
I don't get it are you scoffing me for stealing lil flip or scoffing lil flip himself? I posted that in full confidence someone would recognize it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

I disagree at this point. And you better not label me as an obama jizz guzzler because that I am not. I think its a simple tit-for-tat strategy.
If McCain drops the negative by tuesday, Obama will drop it. If McCain keeps calling Obama a terrorist supporter, Obama's McCain ads will all but call McCain an insider involved in our current financial crisis.

---

My point is that if this election were as over as many Obama supporters would have us believe, there would be no need to even employ a tit-for-tat strategy. If McCain were simply desperate and had no chance of catching Obama, why even respond to his strategy shift?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

But

I can totally envision a scenario where the democrats use this Ace wrongly, and end up alienating more people than they would like.

---

Eh, doubt it. Attack ads work great against McCain ... just ask of W. Attack ads usually only backfire if it the audience starts feeling compassion for the one being attacked. McCain has been around the block too many times to get the compassion vote.

Palin, on the other hand, is the one not to attack. Although it seems the Democrats have figured that out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMarcus Bryant

AND
I don't get it are you scoffing me for stealing lil flip or scoffing lil flip himself? I posted that in full confidence someone would recognize it...

---

The scoff was aimed at Lil Flip. He's gone way down hill ever since his Lucky Charms days . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

My point is that if this election were as over as many Obama supporters would have us believe, there would be no need to even employ a tit-for-tat strategy. If McCain were simply desperate and had no chance of catching Obama, why even respond to his strategy shift?

---

Well its not over. I think that things are about as great as can be for Obama right now, but the fact is there is another month to go.

But more importantly, winning an election is important by how badly you win is also important. Remember Bush declaring his so called mandate in 04 when he barely carried the popular vote? It also allows you to make in roads to turning other regions for your party. I see a lot of that happening in Texas. Obama has offices here and is running a campaign here even though they have no realistic shot of winning this state, but thats because they're setting it up for future elections. And lets not forget about downticket elections also. Lots of GOP reps in MI are really pissed at McCain for pulling out because even if he wasn't going to carry the state his advertising and campaigning in their areas would help them out. Now with that gone they're pretty fucking scared.

So while if the election was held tomorrow Obama would win easily, there are reasons to keep the campaign going as strong as possible and to continue making the right decisions at every opportunity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Well its not over. I think that things are about as great as can be for Obama right now, but the fact is there is another month to go.

---

If you don't think the race is over, you can go ahead and pat yourself on the back and rest assured you are not an Obamatard.

:smokin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

But more importantly, winning an election is important by how badly you win is also important. Remember Bush declaring his so called mandate in 04 when he barely carried the popular vote? It also allows you to make in roads to turning other regions for your party. I see a lot of that happening in Texas. Obama has offices here and is running a campaign here even though they have no realistic shot of winning this state, but thats because they're setting it up for future elections. And lets not forget about downticket elections also. Lots of GOP reps in MI are really pissed at McCain for pulling out because even if he wasn't going to carry the state his advertising and campaigning in their areas would help them out. Now with that gone they're pretty fucking scared.

---

That reasoning is a stretch to justify attack ads. I agree with your point 100% in general but in the context of Obama opening up the attack ads vault, I don't think those two things connect.

Attack ads have a short shelf life. On top of that, it opens up the door for more attack ads from the opposition down the line. Winning clean and thus rallying the American people would be a better long-term strategy. But the Obama camp can't really worry about a long-term strategy right now. They have to get him elected by any means necessary.

Taking the gloves off is the absolute right move for Obama to win the election. That said, the Democrats should realize that the Republican response will be more powerful down the line. Especially because the Republicans are much more experienced and more accomplished when it comes to no holds barred fighting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

So while if the election was held tomorrow Obama would win easily, there are reasons to keep the campaign going as strong as possible and to continue making the right decisions at every opportunity.

---

So the attack ads are simply the "right decision"? I actually think that they are but if they can simply be regarded as the "right decision", how is it fair to label McCain's attack ads as something other than the "right decision"?

Both camps are doing what they have to do to get their guy elected. Supporters of both sides should recognize that. It's just lame that the Obamatards get all emo and call out McCain for attack ads and then turn around and celebrate when their man does the same thing while justifying his motives.

Oh I think McCain's ads are the right decision. What else does he have to fall back on right now? Nothing is working for him so he has to try something.

A Hail Mary pass at the end of a game is usually the right choice, but it doesn't make it any less desprate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

My point is that if this election were as over as many Obama supporters would have us believe, there would be no need to even employ a tit-for-tat strategy. If McCain were simply desperate and had no chance of catching Obama, why even respond to his strategy shift?

---

I don't think there is any realistic out there that thinks the race is over. There's a month left and anything can happen. Obama was smart for not showing his hand early and waiting for a moment just like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

A Hail Mary pass at the end of a game is usually the right choice, but it doesn't make it any less desprate.

---

A hail Mary pass is useless when you can't raise your arms above your shoulders. :downspin:

"So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads"

Hey, timvptard

McLoser's attack ads are egregious lies.

HUSSEIN's counter-attack ads are are based on public records.

Besides McLame-Keating, HUSSEIN still has available terrorist-ex-con-loving McMeFirstLastAlways-GordonLiddy and be-hatin-on-America pitbull bitch-AIP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Link to a repub in this thread whining about attack ads? Link to a thread of a dem not whining about attack ads?

---

Off the top of my head:

O'Reilly berating Jamie Lynn Spears and her parents BUT then getting offended and uptight when people berating Palin and her girl.

Dick Morris being sexist to Hillary Clinton BUT then crying sexism when Palin was treated unfairly in his eyes.

FOX News trying to assert that a fist bump is a terrorist fist jab BUT getting pissy when some group releases an ad asserting McCain is in bad health.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

I can't believe it took this long. This last month is going to be fucking ugly.

---

They should wait on using the Keating Five stuff until two weeks before election day. By going to it now, it will be digested and out of the news cycle sooner.

Attack ads based on McCain's public record is fair game. Going into private family stuff is off-limits, or should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

I don't think there is any realistic out there that thinks the race is over. There's a month left and anything can happen. Obama was smart for not showing his hand early and waiting for a moment just like this.

---

Yet you were just whining in the McCain thread about his attack ads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

A hail Mary pass is useless when you can't raise your arms above your shoulders. :downspin:

---

Buddy Holly, all class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_

"So Obamatards cry when McCain runs negative ads and celebrate when Obama runs negative ads"

Hey, timvptard

McLoser's attack ads are egregious lies.

HUSSEIN's counter-attack ads are are based on public records.

Besides McLame-Keating, HUSSEIN still has available terrorist-ex-con-loving McMeFirstLastAlways-GordonLiddy and be-hatin-on-America pitbull bitch-AIP

---

:lol @ timvptard. That was a good one :tu

Attack ads are attack ads. No one really cares how much is fact and how much is twisted. Maybe those who read the internet Fact Checks, but that's a minuscule number compared to who actual view the ads.

Hypothetically speaking, would boutons_ rather have Obama win by using attack ads filled with lies or have Obama lose using attack ads filled with truths.

Answer the question so I can see where your true priorities lie . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

Off the top of my head:

O'Reilly berating Jamie Lynn Spears and her parents BUT then getting offended and uptight when people berating Palin and her girl.

Dick Morris being sexist to Hillary Clinton BUT then crying sexism when Palin was treated unfairly in his eyes.

FOX News trying to assert that a fist bump is a terrorist fist jab BUT getting pissy when some group releases an ad asserting McCain is in bad health.

---

What question did that answer? Read what you quoted again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

Attack ads based on McCain's public record is fair game. Going into private family stuff is off-limits, or should be.

---

Since you stole boutons_ take, answer the same question.

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Since you stole boutons_ take, answer the same question.

Thanks.

---

Is this the question?

Quote:

---

have Obama win by using attack ads filled with lies or have Obama lose using attack ads filled with truths

---

That's a false dilemma. Obama can hammer his ass on the Keating Five stuff, which is true and relevant to the current financial crisis. I think Obama is going to win and he doesn't have to get dirty to do it. The Keating Five stuff is not below the belt.

Typical dodge :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Yet you were just whining in the McCain thread about his attack ads.

---

I was whining? In what fashion? I argued the validity of the attacks. It's a shitty thing to do but when it's done you have no other option but to fight fire with fire.

Quote:

---

Buddy Holly, all class.

---

It was a joke, lighten up. Don't go the Sean Penn route on us LJ.

Quote:

---

What question did that answer? Read what you quoted again.

---

You're right. But in fairness, my post was about republicans in general not anyone on this board, other than TPark who was used as the archetype for my comparison, specifically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Typical dodge :rolleyes

---

What's the point of your stupid hypothetical? Obama has a 90% chance of winning, and he doesn't have to resort to sleaze to do it. But, for the record, if it came to it, hell yes I would want Obama to get dirty if that's what it takes, if he was in the same tactically desperate situation McCain finds himself in. What McCain is doing with the sleaze is like an onsides kick...it probably won't work, but it's the correct strategy. I'm proud that Obama ran such a good campaign that he doesn't have to resort to it himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

My point is that if this election were as over as many Obama supporters would have us believe, there would be no need to even employ a tit-for-tat strategy. If McCain were simply desperate and had no chance of catching Obama, why even respond to his strategy shift?

---

Yeah, it would be a great strategy to allow himself to get Swiftboated on the Ayers stuff. :rolleyes It worked out so well for Kerry, didn't it?

There's a chance this stuff could work, that's why they have to aggressively rebut it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

There's a chance this stuff could work, that's why they have to aggressively rebut it.

---

In my breakroom at work I constantly have to hear:


1. Obama is a muslim
2. Obama scares me
3. If he's on tv, the next comment is generally look at him you can tell he's lying
4. He hates America
5. He is a terrorist
6. His wife is a militant
7. His best friend is a terrorist

And it's from a handful of people. Granted I do live in Nebraska and work in South Dakota which are traditionally red states.

:bang

So yes the ads serve to feed the beast and as hoped by the party launching them to sway the guys who haven't picked a side.

McCain-Palin spokesman Brian Rogers said: "The difference here is clear. John McCain has been open and honest about the Keating matter, and even the Democratic special counsel in charge recommended that Senator McCain be completely exonerated. By contrast, Barack Obama has been fundamentally dishonest about his friendship and work with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, whose radical group bombed the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. Nor has Barack Obama come clean on his close friendship with Tony Rezko, a felon convicted on bribery charges who subsidized the purchase of Barack Obama’s home. It's obvious that Barack Obama is frantically attacking because he knows that most voters find these kinds of friendships, and the failed judgment they expose, to be unacceptable for our next president."http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/14302

Ducks for the fail save!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

Ducks for the fail save!

---

so that is how obama has a house
he took a bribe since he went to law school and had no money to buy a house

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ducks

so that is how obama has a house
he took a bribe since he went to law school and had no money to buy a house

---

Dude, I don't even think you're intelligent enough to know what a house, a bribe or even money is.

Refuel for win!!

Obama has an 8pt lead in Rasmussen's polls today. He's polling at 52%. A black man, polling at 52% in this country is simply remarkable. We are witnessing what could be a potential landside if things don't turn for McCain.

This is why Obama is going Keating 5 now. It's time to go in for the kill and end this thing. I keep telling my friends that Obama is much smarter than he looks, he's always 2-3 steps ahead. In the primaries he completely outwitted Hilary by locking up super delegates in southern and rural states while Hilary was out campaigning in the traditional big blue states. He's made McCain look like an erratic and bumbling fool as well. His ground game is the best in our history. There is still a lot of time left, but I think we are headed towards a major landslide victory for Obama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ducks

so that is how obama has a house
he took a bribe since he went to law school and had no money to buy a house

---

I'm sure the McCain campaign would love to see the evidence you have of this.
Oh wait, you have none... never mind!

look at them oohhh and ahhhh as both sides display their beautiful smoke and mirrors act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomBrady

Obama has an 8pt lead in Rasmussen's polls today. He's polling at 52%. A black man, polling at 52% in this country is simply remarkable. We are witnessing what could be a potential landside if things don't turn for McCain.

This is why Obama is going Keating 5 now. It's time to go in for the kill and end this thing. I keep telling my friends that Obama is much smarter than he looks, he's always 2-3 steps ahead. In the primaries he completely outwitted Hilary by locking up super delegates in southern and rural states while Hilary was out campaigning in the traditional big blue states. He's made McCain look like an erratic and bumbling fool as well. His ground game is the best in our history. There is still a lot of time left, but I think we are headed towards a major landslide victory for Obama.

---

Get off your knees son. He's just a man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anti.Hero

look at them oohhh and ahhhh as both sides display their beautiful smoke and mirrors act.

---

Agreed. What I question is if that's what McCain wants to really get into. If this is an attempt to distract people from the economy, he picked a really bad time. I might be wrong on this, but I think his vote for the bailout might have been the nail in the coffin for his campaign.

It's funny. Topics like amnesty, social security, etc come into the spot light for maybe 2 weeks...nothing gets solved...then everyone moves back to the smoke and mirrors.


Obama has been able to dodge all this stuff for 20 months. McCain thinks magically people will listen now? McCain you fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Link to a repub in this thread whining about attack ads? Link to a thread of a dem not whining about attack ads?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

Off the top of my head:

O'Reilly berating Jamie Lynn Spears and her parents BUT then getting offended and uptight when people berating Palin and her girl.

Dick Morris being sexist to Hillary Clinton BUT then crying sexism when Palin was treated unfairly in his eyes.

FOX News trying to assert that a fist bump is a terrorist fist jab BUT getting pissy when some group releases an ad asserting McCain is in bad health.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

What question did that answer? Read what you quoted again.

---

He did indeed not answer your question.

BUT

We all know that somewhere, somehow, someone on this board has probably made similar complaints.

Both sides bitch about them, then go right out and do it.

As I said in the other thread, Democrats are pissed.

You rightly noted that that will serve to rile up the Republicans down the road, and they are more experienced at the slime, but I would hazard a guess that the Dems are waaay more organized than you might think they are.

McCarelessKlutz as The Navy Pilot Who Couldn't Fly Straight

===============
http://rawstory.com/images/LogoAFPsmall.jpg
McCain prone to mishaps as Navy pilot: report
Published: Monday October 6, 2008

US presidential hopeful John McCain was prone to mistakes during his time as a Navy pilot, and if today's standards were applied, his career may have ended in a hard landing, according to a report Monday by The Los Angeles Times.

The newspaper said that when McCain was training in his AD-6 Skyraider in Texas in 1960, he slammed into Corpus Christi Bay and sheared the skin off his plane's wings.

In his autobiography, McCain said the crash had occurred because "the engine quit," but an investigation board at the Naval Aviation Safety Center found no evidence of engine failure, the report said.

( :lol McLiar's been lying his entire life.)

Instead investigators concluded that the 23-year-old junior lieutenant was not paying attention and erred in using "a power setting too low to maintain level flight in a turn."

The crash was one of three early in McCain's aviation career in which his flying skills and judgment were faulted or questioned by Navy officials, The Times said.

In another incident, McCain was "clowning" around in a Skyraider over southern Spain about December 1961 and flew into electrical wires, causing a blackout in the area, the paper noted.

In 1965, McCain crashed a T-2 trainer jet in Virginia, and after he was sent to Vietnam, his plane was destroyed in an explosion on the deck of an aircraft carrier in 1967, the report said.

Three months later, he was shot down during a bombing mission over Hanoi and taken prisoner.

( I read that McBottomGun admitted he should have taken SAM-evasive action rather than continuing his bombing run. So, he, by his own BAD DECISIONS, became a POW )

The Times said it had interviewed men who served with McCain and located the 1960s-era accident reports and professional evaluations.
"This examination of his record revealed a pilot who early in his career was cocky, occasionally cavalier and prone to testing limits," the paper concluded.

It reminded that in today's military, a lapse in judgment that causes a crash can end a pilot's career.

==============

McSame is fatally dangerous, US-taxpayer-wasteful as The Decider. And he can decide 24-hours/day, not only at oh-three-hundred-hours! :lol

Somehow or someway this will all benefit Palin's popularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

But, for the record, if it came to it, hell yes I would want Obama to get dirty if that's what it takes

---

Good deal. Then I better not see you complain if McCain goes down the same road you'd approve for Obama.

And where is boutons_ answer . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

Yeah, it would be a great strategy to allow himself to get Swiftboated on the Ayers stuff. :rolleyes It worked out so well for Kerry, didn't it?

There's a chance this stuff could work, that's why they have to aggressively rebut it.

---

Thanks for agreeing with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Good deal. Then I better not see you complain if McCain goes down the same road you'd approve for Obama.

---

I don't like it, but I'm glad it hasn't come to that for Obama. If we were living in an age of peace and prosperity, I would be less tolerant of either side going into the gutter. Times are desperate, I think Obama is the lesser of two evils, and too much is at stake for McCain to win.

There's a corollary here as well: Democrats just don't pull off gutter politics as well as the GOP does. For some reason when the Dems go this route, it just blows up in their faces and backfires. It wouldn't be smart politics for Obama to get dirty.

I'm just saying, in timvp's hypothetical, if that was the ONLY way Obama could win, and it WOULD work, yes I would support gutter politics. I just don't think timvp's hypothetical bears any resemblance to reality, if the Democrats went after McCain's war record using 527s, they'd be roasted over the coals.

What McCain is doing is akin to an onsides kick in football - it's the correct strategy at this point, but it's his only play left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

He did indeed not answer your question.

BUT

We all know that somewhere, somehow, someone on this board has probably made similar complaints.

Both sides bitch about them, then go right out and do it.

---

Of course. That's the nature of politics. Republicans do more than their fair share of whining and double talk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

As I said in the other thread, Democrats are pissed.

You rightly noted that that will serve to rile up the Republicans down the road, and they are more experienced at the slime, but I would hazard a guess that the Dems are waaay more organized than you might think they are.

---

What have I said to lead you to believe I think Democracts are disorganized? I believe they are highly organized at this point. But that doesn't make the Republicans any less experienced at playing dirty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AZLouis

In my breakroom at work I constantly have to hear:


1. Obama is a muslim
2. Obama scares me
3. If he's on tv, the next comment is generally look at him you can tell he's lying
4. He hates America
5. He is a terrorist
6. His wife is a militant
7. His best friend is a terrorist

And it's from a handful of people. Granted I do live in Nebraska and work in South Dakota which are traditionally red states.

:bang

So yes the ads serve to feed the beast and as hoped by the party launching them to sway the guys who haven't picked a side.

---

Back in the spring I went out with this girl on a date. We ended up back at her place and were fooling around. At some point during the pillow talk, I don't know how the conversation turned to politics, but she went there, and of course it was all about how Obama is a secret muslim sleeper agent conspiring with our enemies. So, yeah, I got a bj out of the deal, but I never called her again after that.

I'd love USA to flatter itself by electing a non-attacking HUSSEIN over ineffective, scorched-earth attacking McBottomGun.

But USA isn't at that high level, but rather sucks up slime, swiftboating, lying as The Truth.

So, USA being what is, HUSSEIN must counter-attack (which is different from attacking, in the same way actively initiating an Iraq invasion or $700B bail out is different from just voting for it )

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ducks

McCain-Palin spokesman Brian Rogers said: "The difference here is clear. John McCain has been open and honest about the Keating matter, and even the Democratic special counsel in charge recommended that Senator McCain be completely exonerated. By contrast, Barack Obama has been fundamentally dishonest about his friendship and work with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, whose radical group bombed the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. Nor has Barack Obama come clean on his close friendship with Tony Rezko, a felon convicted on bribery charges who subsidized the purchase of Barack Obama’s home. It's obvious that Barack Obama is frantically attacking because he knows that most voters find these kinds of friendships, and the failed judgment they expose, to be unacceptable for our next president."http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/14302

---

I just heard some information on this that I find quite interesting.

The lawyer who investigated the Keating Five said that he found John McCain and John Glenn innocent of any wrongdoing and said they shouldn't be included in the hearings. However, his findings were ignored because they didn't want the hearings to be just about democrats.

Now - for those of you who might question this lawyer's loyalties
1. He's a lifelong democrat
2. He's represented Bill Clinton

So this Keating Five crap is just a weak attempt at a diversion by the Obama camp!

Diversion from what?

Being ahead in the polls?

I agree there is as little to the Keating business as there is to the Ayers business, but that won't stop either campaign from trying.

intersting
hope Obama brings it up in the debate and john bitch slaps him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Diversion from what?

Being ahead in the polls?

---

He wants to divert attention away from him winning better or something like that.

"just a weak attempt at a diversion by the Obama camp"

not weak at all.

McBottomGun himself said he screwed up badly in the Keating affair, and it made him "born again" to be completely be honest and ethical in politics after Keating.

And we can see in the current campaign how honest and ethical McBottomGun is now.

I'm gonna have to agree with giant boy detective on this one.

McCain And Keating…An Old Pile Of Not Much

For those who don’t remember this very old scandal (it dates back to 1987) Charles Keating ran a savings and loan that eventually collapsed, along with many others. Keating was politically connected (though that didn't save him from going to jail) and five Senators were brought up on ethics charges for improperly pressuring regulators on his behalf.

One of them was John McCain. The other four were…Democrats.

McCain was pretty much exonerated, with the committee saying only that he exercised ‘poor judgment’ by attending a meeting with regulators. McCain was never found to have exerted any influence on behalf of Keating.

In fact, it’s likely that McCain was only kept in the case because to have removed him from it would have meant only Democrats would have been involved. That's not McCain spin, that's from Bob Bennett, the Senate’s own investigator and noted Democrat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Bennett

"It was clear that McCain should not have been at the table nor should Glenn," Bennett said. "I felt it was unfair for McCain to be included as part of the Keating Five." Bennett stressed that he was not speaking as part of the campaign, though he noted he also represented McCain in his recent battles with the New York Times.

---

No less an authority than the NY Times agreed. Of course, that was back in 1995 when McCain was still their favorite Republican.

I'm not saying that Keating was a good guy or that the collapse of his S&L didn't cost a lot of money, I'm just saying he and McCain don't equal Obama and the terrorist Bill "We Didn't Bomb Enough" Ayers.

Strangely, if Obama weren't such a leftist tool I’d enjoy seeing McCain getting slammed for this. After all, it was his involvement in the Keating Five that gave him such an interest in reworking the First Amendment campaign finance reform. So even though we are all paying for his ‘sins’, there are bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Oh and for the Obamabots who say, "Ayers is a big pile of not much and Obama was only 8"...Shut up. The Weather Underground (Weathermen) committed their last crimes when Obama was in his 20's and earning his stripes in the kind of activist environment that worshipped at the feet of the Ayers, Dorhns, and Alinksys of the world.

Obama knew who Ayers was, what he had done and what he believed and still believes in and yet as an adult decided he was the kind of man he wanted to do business with.

Even if you accept the worst interpretation of Keating, unlike Ayers he never tried to kill people...or lamented his failure to do so. I hope like Hell the next debate is about Keating/Ayers-Dorhn.

So how many bombs has Obama made?

McBottomGun as palling around with Keating at the same time Keating was committing his felony and corrupting Senator McBottomGun.

HUSSEIN didn't encounter Ayers until a couple decades AFTER Ayers was a Weatherman, at which point Ayers had been living an lawful, productive life.

There's really no comparison.

OJ was found completely innocent too, Yoni.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_

McBottomGun as palling around with Keating at the same time Keating was committing his felony and corrupting Senator McBottomGun.

---

Not to mention his "palling around" with Anne Hathaway's ex-bf while said ex-bf was committing fraud.

I guess John McShame likes to hang around with people who eventually end up in prison. :wow

If McShame wants to have people question Obama's "judgment" with those ads, Obama needs to counter with those examples of his "palling around" because now more than ever, the financial well being of the US is on every Americans mind.

McCain has literally destroyed his reputation in this campaign. I've never seen a POW war hero fall so far so fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomBrady

McCain has literally destroyed his reputation in this campaign. I've never seen a POW war hero fall so far so fast.

---

Perhaps he's trying to get down to Obama's level so they can communicate. But, I'm not sure McCain can bring himself to cavort with terrorists and solicit fake contributions over the internet.

Yoni's shit is getting weaker as McBottomGun and his flash-in-the-pan pitbull bitch stagnate and drop in the polls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dg7md

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/14302

Finally. Some payback for the smears and lies that killed our parties chances since 2000, Palin wants to link Obama to terrorists? Well here is some karma for that claim.

Perfect time to reveal this to the public, especially during the financial crisis.

---

My God. Don't you liberals keep up with the news?

McCain was 100% cleared of any wrongdoing when this was investigated way back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

My God. Don't you liberals keep up with the news?

McCain was 100% cleared of any wrongdoing when this was investigated way back.

---

My God Man!!!!

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element...icalticker.gif
October 6, 2008
Fact Check: Did McCain intervene on behalf of Charles Keating?
Posted: 06:01 PM ET
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/im...doc1006.yt.jpg Monday the Obama campaigned rolled out a Web site and online documentary about Sen. McCain and Charles Keating.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/...er_wire_BL.gif

The Statement: The campaign for Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama on Monday, Oct. 6, unveiled a Web site noting that Republican opponent Sen. John McCain played a key role in the Senate's "Keating Five" scandal of the 1980s. "McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating with federal regulators tasked with preventing banking fraud, and championed legislation to delay regulation of the savings and loan industry — actions that allowed Keating to continue his fraud at an incredible cost to taxpayers," the site says.


Get the facts!


The Facts: Keating was sentenced to prison and required to pay more than $1 billion in civil penalties after being convicted on fraud, racketeering and conspiracy charges centered around his running of Lincoln Savings and Loan, which he bought in 1984. On April 14, 1989, Lincoln was seized by the government at an eventual taxpayer cost of $3.4 billion, then the most expensive thrift bailout in history. Lincoln and Keating became national symbols of the savings-and-loans collapse of the '80s — much as lending firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have symbolized the current financial meltdown.


McCain had been friends with Keating since the early '80s — their families vacationed together several times, according to previous CNN reporting. Keating was an early financial supporter of McCain's political career and donated to his campaigns repeatedly over the years. Keating's first company, American Continental, was headquartered in Arizona, the state McCain represents. McCain became one of the so-called "Keating Five" — five U.S. senators investigated over accusations they tried to interfere in a federal investigation of Keating's role in the savings-and-loan's collapse.
In January 1985, while in the U.S. House, McCain co-sponsored a resolution that would have delayed the effective date of proposed government limits "on direct investment in real estate, service corporations, and equity securities by federally insured savings and loan associations." He was one of the early sponsors, although a majority of Congress eventually signed on to sponsor it. The legislation would have impacted Keating's business, but would have regulated the entire industry, not specifically Lincoln Savings and Loan.



McCain also wrote several letters to government regulators and other officials regarding the issue. One, dated Jan. 30, 1985, to White House chief of staff James Baker, called the proposed regulations "unwise," saying the effort "flys (sic) in the face of our recent efforts to remove the hand of government from the affairs of private enterprise."



On April 9, 1987, McCain and the other senators attended a meeting with federal regulators investigating Keating. McCain has since said he regrets doing so. "He asked me to help him," he said during an October 2002 interview with Chicago's WGN-AM radio station. "I said I wouldn't do certain things. He called me a wimp. I threw him out of my office, but I still went to a meeting with four other senators with a group of regulators."



McCain testified that he never asked for anything inappropriate during the meeting, and the Senate ethics committee found that, after regulators said the firm was being investigated not just for insolvency, but on criminal grounds, McCain took no further action on Keating's behalf. In the end, the committee recommended McCain and Sen. John Glenn be dropped from the probe — although McCain was rebuked by the Senate for using "poor judgment" in his relationship with the millionaire banker.



The Verdict: True. McCain did push to delay regulations that would have cracked down on savings-and-loans practices and intervened on Keating's behalf, although he was cleared of wrongdoing in the "Keating Five" case.

Quote:

---

McCain testified that he never asked for anything inappropriate during the meeting, and the Senate ethics committee found that, after regulators said the firm was being investigated not just for insolvency, but on criminal grounds, McCain took no further action on Keating's behalf. In the end, the committee recommended McCain and Sen. John Glenn be dropped from the probe — although McCain was rebuked by the Senate for using "poor judgment" in his relationship with the millionaire banker.

---

Good luck with this...

McCain avoided any further investigation because the alleged transgressions happened when he was a member of the House, so the Senate investigators said they had no jurisdiction and the House said they didn't either because he wasn't in the House anymore.