All about life, liberty and the pursuit of hopeiness.
| NY Mag. | 0 | |
| Wash Wire | 0 | |
| NYT | 0 | |
| WaPo | Calif. insurer’s rate increases draw attention of federal government |
0 |
| Red State | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Spinsational:
"We were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values."
-Obama, explaining recent Democrat losses, 1/20/10
Velvet Lair- The sexiness of winning the battle of good versus evil January 26, 2010
- Ever wonder why? January 12, 2010
- The decision to bench Peyton Manning: Right or wrong? December 28, 2009
- Is my dad turning into a metrosexual? November 24, 2009
- My “Things To Do For Christmas” list November 23, 2009
McCain campaign releases new web ad called “Ayers” (UPDATE: DID OBAMA KNOW AYERS BEFORE 1995?)
The fit’s gonna hit the shan over this one today …
Update – 8:56 AM: Did Barack Obama know Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn before 1995? Hmmm.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
12 Responses to “McCain campaign releases new web ad called “Ayers” (UPDATE: DID OBAMA KNOW AYERS BEFORE 1995?)”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
“just some guy from the neighborhood” doesn’t mean a whole lot if he actually moved there to live near the guy.
Candor and Judgement are root issues, without which everything else is just hot air.
The less people know about Obama, the better it is for him.
The MSM will see to it that ‘guilt by association’ only works when linking McCain to the Bush administration.
It all comes down to character. One candidate has it and can be trusted, the other doesn’t.
I don’t always agree with McCain, but I know that when he takes a position it isn’t because he’s been influenced from his childhood and beyond by people who openly hate America.
Big Mac goes nuclear — finally!
Even the MSM is starting to question the Obama campaign’s serial evasions over the Ayers relationship: witness the report recently on Anderson Cooper’s “360″ show and Mark Halperin’s cornering of the Obama spokesman.
Elections are about character as much as policy, and we need more ads like these (and on Rezko, Fannie and Freddie, Daley) to hammer home the issue of Obama’s weak character. And McCain has to hit him on this at the last debate.
Keep it up, Maverick. Both barrels.
Also, Jim Geraghty has a powerful column at the Campaign Spot on this. His closing tag line is brilliant:
Is there an issue here? Maybe. Is it one that’s going to win the election for McCain? No, for two reasons.
First, the MSM has effectively neutered concerns by running dismissive pieces (and constant commentary trivializing the associations). One or two ads will not overcome that conditioning.
Second, look around – we’re in the midst of a major economic crisis. What people want is leadership and vision. Time and effort spent on negative campaigning deliver neither. Yes, it might be infuriating to people on the right that our presumptive-president-to-be pals around with unrepentant terrorists. And maybe in calmer times it might matter to the populace at large. But right now, given the economic problems facing the country, it simply not a significant concern to the vast majority of Americans.
Uncommon, I’ll agree with you that McCain needs to talk about the economy and hit Obama over the head with the Democratic fiasco involving Fannie and Freddie.
However, I beg to differ on the Ayers-Obama issue. It is very relevant, because it cuts to the heart of Obama’s character and judgement, things that The One has made central to his campaign. Campaigns are about character as much as policy, and people will notice if the questions are laid before them.
That said, this is also an economic issue. If Obama is comfortable with social democrats and socialists, it hints at the kinds of policies he might favor as president. And, if his judgment is so bad that he thinks palling around with a proud ex-terrorist is acceptable, then that leaves me concerned about the judgment he would show when appointing his economic team.
Why is pointing out factual un and undereportage of these same facts labeled as negative?
Why isn’t the Democratic led foundation of corruption, greed and ineptitude largely responsible for the current fiasco, languishing on the front pages of every fishwrapper pretending to be a *Newpaper*?
I don’t know what Americans you refer to but, the ones I know to a man, woman and savvy child, sure as hell are concerned!
Contrary to what Uncommon Sense says, this is important because when you vote in a presidential election, you’re not just voting for the two names on the ticket; you’re voting for a particular administration. What kind of people would Obama have in his administration, and what kind of people would McCain have in his? In Obama’s case, this is very worrisome because we’re not just talking about one or two people who floated into and out of Obama’s life — apparently, Obama and Ayers have worked very closely together for a long time, as the ad shows. (There’s even a case to be made that maybe, just maybe, Ayers wrote major portions of Obama’s autobiography Dreams From My Father.)
I don’t know about you, but I suspect that Obama would fill his administration with hardcore Chicago politicians, ACORN operatives, and maybe even people like Ayers and Dohrn.
“What do Obama and Osama have in common?
They both have friends who bombed the Pentagon.”
-Rush Limbaugh