Originally Posted By Mr X Can somebody ring the bell, please. McCain has been down for what, a 30 count by now?? As if things couldn't get any worse, now Chris Wallace is on the attack! My esteem for that guy just went up another 30% (he got 20% earlier in the year defending Obama from the rest of them guys).
Originally Posted By Mr X <a href="http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nsLocenvNB0&feature=user" target="_blank">http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=...ure=user</a>
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Yeah, its truly sad X. The reporter clearly showed a quote where McCain said he would never stoop that low to doing that specific tactic and what does McCain do? Brush it off. That was 8 years ago, he was playing fairly then and lost because of it. Playing dirty now is the only way to go in McCains world I guess. If he wins this, he know he will have won it with a piece of his soul missing.
Originally Posted By dshyates I agree with mcCain that these Robocalls are NOT the same kind of tactic that used against him in 2000. What was used against him in 2000 were flat out lies. McCain ads are true in that Obama does have a relationship with William Ayers, and that relationship is a valid concern with regards to this election. BUT, McCain has played that card, Obama has explained the relationship. End of story. Now, McCain is beating a dead horse in efforts to sway the simpletons. I hope McCain keeps going with the Ayers angle all the way to the election. Obama hangs with a guy that was a domestic terrorists 38 years ago. McCain hangs with current war criminals.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^Yeah, but I still dont buy it. This is the problem I have with McCain and his socalled 'truthful' words. On the surface he keeps saying its all true, but when you read between the lines, the message is clear: Obama is a friendly loving to terrorists and their ideologies, period. When you got Palin saying 'Obama pals around with terrorists' how else is that message suppose to be interpreted? The guy is trying to have it both ways, again, nothing new to politicians lol, but it really stinks in my book!
Originally Posted By mele After a week with tons of publicity about some of the racist, disgusting behavior of people at McCain/Palin appearances, we have Palin talking about how great the people attending them are, how the cities she visits are pro-America (implying that other areas are not pro-America.) They're loving the fact that some of the people who support them think that Obama is a terrorist lovin' Muslim Arab.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I agree with mcCain that these Robocalls are NOT the same kind of tactic that used against him in 2000." Then why is the co-chair of his campaign in Maine asking him to stop using this tactic? "What was used against him in 2000 were flat out lies." And it's a lie that Obama has a close relationship with Ayers. McCain said that he doesn't care about a "washed up terrorist" and Obama has explained the extent of their relationship. So why is does he continue to bring it up?
Originally Posted By dshyates "And it's a lie that Obama has a close relationship with Ayers." Its not a lie, but it is irrelevant. Obama has served on 2 boards with Ayers, and did hold a community meeting when oranizing his run for State Senate at Bill Ayers house. I would say it is a close relationship, but none the less a relationship. Obama has said that when he held the meetuing at his house he was unaware of Ayers past, and Obama denounces Ayers tactics of the 60s. So its pretty much a non-story. "So why is does he continue to bring it up?" Its all he's got.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I would say it is a close relationship, but none the less a relationship." It has been reported several times from various sources exactly what the relationship was. There is no evidence that their relationship can be defined as "close".
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< So why is does he continue to bring it up? >>> It's quite clear that the stances on the issues by McCain/Palin campaign are not enough to win the election. They may be enough to get the far right fired up or at least to the polls, but not enough to convince a majority of Americans to vote for them. This is just another item in the continuum we've seen since the morning after the VP debate, and I expect it to continue: the focus will be on anything and everything except the actual issues at hand or the McCain/Palin stances on them.
Originally Posted By gadzuux That dreamy David Gergen makes a valid point that at this home stretch of the campaign it's too late to bring up more old issues. As he puts it "the table is already set". If McCain tried to start making a case about rev. wright, or rezko, flag pins or any of those long ago exhausted topics, it would reek of last-minute desperation. And of course it's pointless and even harmful to continue banging away on Ayers. Anyone who's paying the least bit of attention knows that Ayers has nothing to do with the Obama campaign or Obama's philosophies - there's just nothing there. What McCain is actually doing is playing on irrational fears and using inference to suggest that Obama's a secret terrorist. This is a preposterous idea and a ridiculous tactic to take. McCain makes it even moreso by hammering it daily for weeks, even through all the criticism he's taking - even from fox! But remember, McCain made hay back in the primaries by unfairly tagging Romney as supporting timetables. And even back then he was criticized for misrepresenting his opponent's statements. As Superdry said, he has to - he loses on his record and his positions on the issues.
Originally Posted By Skellington88 Don't get cocky folks. Don't even insinuate this is in the bag for Obama. Remember these words: "It's not over till its over" - Rocky Balboa
Originally Posted By chickendumpling I think WD has a thread about not counting your chickens before they hatch or something like that. While I of course agree with dreamy David Gergen - sigh - that it would reek of last-minute desperation, that doesn't mean it won't work.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Don't get cocky folks.*** So, who thinks Obama gets all fifty plus Puerto Rico? ***Don't even insinuate this is in the bag for Obama.*** Who's insinuating? It is totally in the bag for OBAMA! ***"It's not over till its over" - Rocky Balboa*** Didn't he lose?
Originally Posted By DAR Rocky he lost by decision Rocky II he knocked out Apollo Creed to win the heavyweight title in a dramatic knockdown where both fighters hit the canvas. Rocky III he knocked out Clubber Lang in about the third round. Rocky IV(the best of the Rocky films) he knocked Ivan Drago in the fifteenth round and destroyed Communism in the process. Rocky V didn't happen. Rocky Balboa it was a draw since it was just an exhibition fight.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Rocky III he knocked out Clubber Lang in about the third round.*** Clubber kicked him to the curb before that though. Not to mention getting kicked around by Thunderlips. ***Rocky V didn't happen.*** lol. Don't we wish!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan It is interesting that an exchange that hasn't gotten a lot of attention plays DIRECTLY into McCain flailing away at Bill Ayers. On Letterman the other night, Letterman asked McCain if he wasn't pals with G. Gordon Liddy, convicted Watergate co-conspirator who wanted to kill an American journalist among other terroristic things. McCain's reaction, after a little sputter: blink, blink, "Wha, well, we've met." Eventually, after he found his footing again, he said Liddy had served his time and he was proud to call him a friend. But that initial reaction was a LIE. And, of course, he tried to sweep the whole thing under the rug. Liddy is a nut, dishonorable, and a beloved right-wing radio host. Isn't it funny how McCain's involvement with him is no biggie, but they'll keep beating the Ayers dead horse. It isn't a legitimate issue anymore, especially since McCain called him, numerous times, a washed up terrorist. It's smear, and nothing more, designed to attract the ignorant voter. Mr McCain, you are acting in a disgraceful manner.
Originally Posted By dshyates "designed to attract the ignorant voter" They call that playing to the base.
