Originally Posted By mawnck From a different dimension than the one we're living in currently comes this two minute candidate-talks-straight-to-the-camera-about-the-issues-that-are-important-to-the-voters campaign ad. Nope, it ain't Palin. Picture a campaign where all the ads are like this. Voter turnout would be negligible, but at least the people who DID vote would understand what they were voting for. As it is, this is such a refreshing change from everything else they've been running recently, that it should get some people's attention. Two minute ads are tres expensive. Wonder when and where they're running it? <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/17/obama-takes-on-economy-pa_n_127021.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...021.html</a>
Originally Posted By mawnck Meanwhile, at McCain campaign HQ: >>McCain aides are now decrying Obama for not being inclusive enough in his treatment of celebrities, actually calling out the Democratic nominee for reportedly turning down a fundraising event with Lindsay Lohan. Per TMZ.com: "So let me get this straight," said Tucker Bounds, a spokesman for the McCain campaign. "They turned away Lindsay Lohan, but Barack Obama has friends like unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and convicted felon Tony Rezko? Maybe LiLo is just too upstanding for Barack Obama."<< <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/17/during-economic-crisis-mc_n_127191.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...191.html</a>
Originally Posted By Skellington88 Honestly I think this is the best campaign ad so far and its not from either canidates: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQobIUE1zTU" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...bIUE1zTU</a> What do you folks think of it?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***"So let me get this straight," said Tucker Bounds, a spokesman for the McCain campaign. "They turned away Lindsay Lohan, but Barack Obama has friends like unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and convicted felon Tony Rezko? Maybe LiLo is just too upstanding for Barack Obama."*** Baghdad Bob strikes again. I love that guy. And the NAME..classic. I'd bet money he's a Yale legacy!
Originally Posted By Mr X Excellent link, Maw. All the right wingers who claim he has no plan will be seeing this link from me, often.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Meh... It's a cultural thing. I don't hunt, but in some areas, Alaska and Minnesota among them, hunting is a major part of the culture. As for the airplane shooting... if a breed is overpopulating an area, the Department of Natural Resources (at least that is what it is called in Minnesota) attempts to thin it out. Methods are employed that would normally not be allowed in other times. We really don't have the area in Minnesota that would require airplanes. But when the deer population becomes excessive hunters are allowed to take more does and expert marksmen are hired to kill deer in urban areas where hunting would normally not be allowed. The bloody wolf in the ad makes a riveting picture all in all. On the other hand, if a Republican ad showed a bloody fetus being pulled out of a woman’s vagina the Democrats would go ape-shit about how the ad was totally disgusting and a new low in campaigning. I guess it all depends on whose ox is being gored... or wolf... or fetus. :-\
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan It would be interesting to hear from hunters about that ad. Is it an unethical way to hunt? I have no idea. But people get crazy about guns and hunting, and I can't imagine most hunters seeing the ad as anything but a backdoor liberal attack on their God-given right to firearms and to shoot any damn animal they want. On the other hand, non-hunters would likely buy into the overall message that Sarah Palin is mean to beautiful animals. So, it's probably a wash. While I feel bad for the wolves, I don't know what the issue up there is really all about, I don't hunt, so to me there are a LOT more important reasons to be concerned about the possibility of President Palin. I'm not real big on these third-party sorts of ads no matter what.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Is it an unethical way to hunt? I have no idea.>> What is an ethical way to hunt? Either it is OK or it is not OK. The only truly fair way to hunt deer would be to hide in a tree, jump on a deer when it comes along, wrestle it to the ground and break its neck using nothing but your hands. I don’t hear about many hunters using that method. Any other type of hunting and you are just talking about how much advantage you want to give the hunter. Bow hunting, the deer has a decent chance. High power rifle with a scope? Advantage: hunter. No doubt about that. If nothing else, it is harder to shoot and kill something from a plane flying 80 mph a hundred feet over the ground than from a stationary deer stand perched 8 feet over the ground. Sounds to me like shooting from the plane would be at least as sporting as most hunting is.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Are there really that many avid hunters in America?>> Yes, indeed there are.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Oh yeah, there are. On the way back from visiting relatives in Nevada, we stopped at what I thought was a sporting goods store. My wife and I joined a bowling league this year (yes, we're livin' the dream) and we needed to purchase new bowling balls, shoes, etc. Turns out this place just a little west of Reno is an ENORMOUS hunter's superstore. It's quite a beautiful store, very "themed" with timber roof supports and so forth, Disney-quality "sets" with mountain goats, rocks, etc. You could fit a WalMart or two inside. But bowling balls? Ha! No way, this place is totally dedicated to hunting and fishing. The place was absolutely packed with shoppers! <a href="http://www.cabelas.com/retail-2/retailStores_reno--reno_h.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.cabelas.com/retail-..._h.shtml</a>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>What is an ethical way to hunt? Either it is OK or it is not OK. The only truly fair way to hunt deer would be to hide in a tree, jump on a deer when it comes along, wrestle it to the ground and break its neck using nothing but your hands. I don’t hear about many hunters using that method.<<" Oh, I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying that every "sport" has rules. Fisherman won't catch EVERY fish -- some get thrown back because they are too small, deep sea fisherman have limited fishing seasons, hunters won't usually shoot does and so forth. Perhaps the wolves present some problem to livestock or to the populace, so extreme measures are necessary? I don't know. I'm giving Palin the benefit of the doubt on this one, RT, (which kills me, by the way ; ) until I know the whole story. But for now, the questions I have about her have nothing to do with hunting.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Hiding behind a tree or in a blind, then shooting a loose moose or a dangerous deer or a really mean duck dead with a high powered rifle, gee, what a cool, neato way to prove how macho one is.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Hiding behind a tree or in a blind, then shooting a loose moose or a dangerous deer or a really mean duck dead with a high powered rifle, gee, what a cool, neato way to prove how macho one is. >> Exactly why I've never done it. I'd far rather prove my masculinity by making slightly risqué posts on LP. ;-) ;-)
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy It is a GOOD campaign ad. Much better than the garbage that has been clobbering the airwaves the past few weeks. Hopefully, something like this has the power to change the tone of the rhetoric going forward.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip You bet. Pictures of bloody wolves ALWAYS determine who I will vote for!! Do you really think anyone who would vote for McCain/Palin in the first place would really give a rat's ass? Kind of like the wackos who go on about Obama being a Muslim. Why do they bother? No one supporting Obama is stupid enough to believe it, and even if they did; most of them wouldn't care.
Originally Posted By Mr X Did you really think he was talking about the wolf ad, RoadTrip? If so, how would THAT "change the tone of the rhetoric going forward"? I believe he was referring to the other ad, with Obama telling us what his views are on the economy in a calm way without insulting his opponent directly.
Originally Posted By mawnck I see McCain has something sort of kind of similar airing now. <a href="http://www.johnmccain.com/" target="_blank">http://www.johnmccain.com/</a> Not quite the same thing, huh.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Did you really think he was talking about the wolf ad, RoadTrip?>> I would hope not, but he didn't make it clear. The wolf ad was the one most recently talked about in this thread. <<If so, how would THAT "change the tone of the rhetoric going forward"?>> Damn good question.
