DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Michael Tee on October 07, 2008, 03:53:00 PM
-
But they're not structured the way I wanted them. Schmucks. I had the perfect ending for the ads and tried to e-mail the campaign but the only contact portals were ones that facilitated submission of funds. They are totally closed to the submission of new ideas unaccompanied by money. I would have made a donation just to get my ideas through the door, but that would have been illegal.
If any of you Obama supporters have access to the campaign, give'em my ideas for the K5 ad, I don't give a shit if I ever get credit for it or not, but it's a guaranteed knock-out punch.
Three Parts:
1. Elderly Americans who lost their life savings. Better yet their sons and daughters , telling how ol' Pa slaved away his life for some company (BEST BET! - some company associated with Cindy's family or Bush's) AND THEN the last years of his LIFE were ruined when McCain's best buddy Chuck made off with the life savings. How Pa never got over it. How the retirement home in Clearwater Beach was lost to the Bank and he died in poverty. [photos of McCain and Chuck living the good life together]
2. Chuck & McCain - backed up with more photos of their trips on Keating's private jet, on his private island, private golf course, etc. THEN what McCain did for Keating: FIVE TIMES met with government regulators, FIVE TIMES pleaded with them to cut Chuck more slack, etc.
3. Conclusions: Is THIS MAN (photo: Chuck & McCain) the man you want to rein in the financial industry for you? (sudden sardonic mocking laughter in background) Is THIS man someone you'd trust with your life savings? (background: Huh? TRUST him? What?)
The U.S. Senate Ethics Committee (sneering emphasis on word "Ethics") thinks he showed bad judgment [use exact wording, sneer voice when actual Ethics Committee words are used] What do YOU think about his conduct?
I bet this could KILL the little weasel. Kill him daid.
-
Finally, we can show the electorate that
A) McCain was cleared of impropriety but simply criticized for poor judgment
B) McCain publically proclaimed that all those many years ago, he did show poor judgement and learned from his mistake, 20+ years ago
Now, remind us again, when was Obama's last get together with Ayers again? Wright? Frank Raines?
-
Finally, we can show the electorate that
A) McCain was cleared of impropriety but simply criticized for poor judgment
B) McCain publically proclaimed that all those many years ago, he did show poor judgement and learned from his mistake, 20+ years ago
=================================================================
Hopefully Obama will do the ads right, show the victims and their stories first, then the close association with Keating, and then ask the audience themselves if they think the Senate "Ethics" Committee "cleared" or "whitewashed" McCain. Let THEM decide for themselves, not the "Ethics" Committee of the Senate (which has what, 20% approval rating?) if McCain was whitewashed of more serious crimes.
-
The gloves do seem to be coming off.
I don't think that the candidates should be responsible for what an audience member might say.
But making it all meaner is done consciously.
Be aware of what you have wished for when you wind up getting it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/mccain-does-nothing-as-cr_n_132366.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/mccain-does-nothing-as-cr_n_132366.html)
The Washington Post reported on a similar moment at a Palin rally on Monday:
"Now it turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers," Palin said.
"Boooo!" said the crowd.
"And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,'" she continued.
"Boooo!" the crowd repeated.
"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/07/mccain-on-tuesday-preside_n_132653.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/07/mccain-on-tuesday-preside_n_132653.html)
Everyone expects tonight's debate to be a slug-fest since John McCain and Sarah Palin turned up the heat in the last couple of days with nasty, personal attacks aimed at Barack Obama. Governor Palin 'advised' Senator McCain to "take the gloves off" during a conversation with NY Times columnist William Kristol. McCain predicted that the gloves would come off during an event last week:
With just four weeks left until Election Day, Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain are preparing to face off in Tuesday night's high-stakes presidential debate.
-
Finally, we can show the electorate that
A) McCain was cleared of impropriety, simply criticized for poor judgment
B) McCain publically proclaimed that all those many years ago, he did show poor judgement and learned from his mistake, 20+ years ago
=================================================================
Hopefully Obama will do the ads right
If he did them "right", it'd demonstrate the above 2 points If he wants to completely pervert and distort the facts & truth, in order for the ads to accomplish what you want, then he can look forward to reinforcing his position, as just being like every other DC poilitician
I notice the ommission of Obama's last meetings with messers Ayers, Wright, and Raines. Not surprising
-
Now, remind us again, when was Obama's last get together with Ayers again? Wright? Frank Raines?
================================================================
THis assumes that Obama meeting with any of these people was as unethical as McCain's meeting with Keating. I dont see that this is the case. If you do, please explain how. Do you think Obama was going out to lob bombs with Ayers? A preachathon with Wright?
-
Finally, we can show the electorate that
A) McCain was cleared of impropriety but simply criticized for poor judgment
B) McCain publically proclaimed that all those many years ago, he did show poor judgement and learned from his mistake, 20+ years ago
=================================================================
Hopefully Obama will do the ads right, show the victims and their stories first, then the close association with Keating, and then ask the audience themselves if they think the Senate "Ethics" Committee "cleared" or "whitewashed" McCain. Let THEM decide for themselves, not the "Ethics" Committee of the Senate (which has what, 20% approval rating?) if McCain was whitewashed of more serious crimes.
The Ethics committee that was chaired by the majority Democrats?
The same committee that censured some Democrats involved much more strongly?
Yes lets examine that publicly!
You have mistaken a strength for a weakness.
It would be very good for McCain to have the Keating affair fully aired.
-
Now, remind us again, when was Obama's last get together with Ayers again? Wright? Frank Raines?
================================================================
THis assumes that Obama meeting with any of these people was as unethical as McCain's meeting with Keating. I dont see that this is the case. If you do, please explain how. Do you think Obama was going out to lob bombs with Ayers? A preachathon with Wright?
I would have to guess it was more recent than the last time that McCain had lunch with Keating. Rezco was the one to mention because that was more unethical than the McCain ,Keating relationship . The relationship with Wright and Ayers is not so much unethical as examples of poor judgement.
-
<<The Ethics committee that was chaired by the majority Democrats?
<<The same committee that censured some Democrats involved much more strongly?>>
Simple question for the viewers: The Ethics Ctee. [sneer in voice as "ethics" is pronounced] says McCain was only guilty of poor judgment. [second sneer at "poor judgment"] What do YOU think he was guilty of?
plane, that would fucking kill him.
-
Now, remind us again, when was Obama's last get together with Ayers again? Wright? Frank Raines?
================================================================
THis assumes that Obama meeting with any of these people was as unethical as McCain's meeting with Keating.
No, it assumes Obama's meetings with these people were FAR more recent, than McCain's with Keating. Raines is Obama's chief economic advisor, for goodness sake. If this were McCain, and his chief economic advisor were the CEO of AIG, he'd be 24/7 MSM toast. But yea, they'd be just as unethical as well, multiplied 3x. And this doesn't even include Rezco
-
<<The Ethics committee that was chaired by the majority Democrats?
<<The same committee that censured some Democrats involved much more strongly?>>
Simple question for the viewers: The Ethics Ctee. [sneer in voice as "ethics" is pronounced] says McCain was only guilty of poor judgment. [second sneer at "poor judgment"] What do YOU think he was guilty of?
plane, that would fucking kill him.
You are knifing Obama in the back.
I love it.
Being cleared by the ETHICS COMMITTEE chaired and composed of DEMOCRATS?
This would be like Giap saying Westmorland is honest.
This would be like Pope Leo saying Atilla is honest.
This would be like Tojo saying MacArthur is honest.
That is what it is , and I don't mind it.
It would be excellent to have this noised abroad , you are hitting him where McCain is strong and OBAMA is weak.
-
What illegal activities do you accuse Obama of doing with Ayers? Ayers has not thrown a bomb in decades.
What illegal activities did he commit with Raines or Wright? I have not seen that any of them has been accused of doing anything illegal.
-
Touche', Plane 8)
-
What illegal activities do you accuse Obama of doing with Ayers? Ayers has not thrown a bomb in decades.
What illegal activities did he commit with Raines or Wright? I have not seen that any of them has been accused of doing anything illegal.
You are getting mixed up , McCain is not even accused of anything illegal.
Ayers is not off the hook because of a statute of limitations , but because the prosecution was clumsy , he admits guilt but is protected from double jeopardy.
It is Rezco who is in jail, and Obama who took his graft, Raines and Wright are not illegal in any respect , merely foolish.
-
plane, do you get that the approval rating of Congress (both houses) is down to about 20%?
Do you think this is going to translate into great respect for the decisions of Congress or any of its committees, including its "Ethics" Ctee.?
My bet is that when Joe Six-Pack is asked, "The Senate "Ethics" Committee gave McCain a "pass," what would YOU give him?" that the answer will be something sterner than the "Ethics" Committee had in mind.
People are a lot more pissed off about politicians cozying up to big-time white-collar criminals than you might imagine. Keating ripped off a lot of Americans of their life savings. He's a much bigger crook than Rezco.
-
plane, do you get that the approval rating of Congress (both houses) is down to about 20%?
Do you think this is going to translate into great respect for the decisions of Congress or any of its committees, including its "Ethics" Ctee.?
My bet is that when Joe Six-Pack is asked, "The Senate "Ethics" Committee gave McCain a "pass," what would YOU give him?" that the answer will be something sterner than the "Ethics" Committee had in mind.
People are a lot more pissed off about politicians cozying up to big-time white-collar criminals than you might imagine. Keating ripped off a lot of Americans of their life savings. He's a much bigger crook than Rezco.
Yes people think that the Republicans and Democrats alike fight dirty to gain power.
So that the DEMOCRATS CLEARED McCain counts for even more , if they are crooked, because they would have gained so much if they could have hung him.
Keating was the exact same sort of Crook as Rezco , but Rezco was much more important to Obamas career than Keating was to McCains , if Keating had never met McCain , that would have been good luck for McCain , but if Obama had not had Rezco's support he would have had to search up someone elese just like him to advance.
But please do not let me dissuade you , lobby for a complete vetting and airing , Obama still has a lead and we need something like this to cut him down.
Smears that have been proven false may be bad , but smears that have been proven true are a whole nother animal.
-
<<Yes people think that the Republicans and Democrats alike fight dirty to gain power.>>
People think that the Senate "Ethics" Committee is not very much concerned with ethics, but it's a bunch of crooks protecting its own, and notwithstanding which party holds the chair, McCain is as much one of the Senate's own as any Democrat ever was.
<<So that the DEMOCRATS CLEARED McCain counts for even more , if they are crooked, because they would have gained so much if they could have hung him.>>
They would have gained precisely nothing. Another Republican would have taken his place in the Senate and the balance of power would remain as before.
In a nutshell, I think the public would know that bipartisanship is and always has been alive and well on the Ethics Committee. There are too many crooks and liars on both sides of the Senate aisle for anything to be gained by partisanship on that committee. Both sides have more to lose from an energetic pursuit of corruption in either party than they do from partisan politics of personal destruction, which is really what an ethics committee is really all about.
So I say let the viewers decide: The Ctee gave him a pass, what would YOU give him? I personally don't think that in answering that question, Joe Six-Pack would give a shit WHO or WHAT the Committee Chairman was. He would assume it was some crooked complacent old pol from either party, who's a lot more concerned about good ole John Insane than he is about Joe Six-Pack and his problems. The Chairman, it would be assumed, was either a friend of Chuck's or of bigger crooks with bigger jets and bigger islands.
In short, a Democratic head of the Whitewash Committee would make absolutely no difference at all.
-
<<Yes people think that the Republicans and Democrats alike fight dirty to gain power.>>
People think that the Senate "Ethics" Committee is not very much concerned with ethics, but it's a bunch of crooks protecting its own, and notwithstanding which party holds the chair, McCain is as much one of the Senate's own as any Democrat ever was.
<<So that the DEMOCRATS CLEARED McCain counts for even more , if they are crooked, because they would have gained so much if they could have hung him.>>
They would have gained precisely nothing. Another Republican would have taken his place in the Senate and the balance of power would remain as before.
In a nutshell, I think the public would know that bipartisanship is and always has been alive and well on the Ethics Committee. There are too many crooks and liars on both sides of the Senate aisle for anything to be gained by partisanship on that committee. Both sides have more to lose from an energetic pursuit of corruption in either party than they do from partisan politics of personal destruction, which is really what an ethics committee is really all about.
So I say let the viewers decide: The Ctee gave him a pass, what would YOU give him? I personally don't think that in answering that question, Joe Six-Pack would give a shit WHO or WHAT the Committee Chairman was. He would assume it was some crooked complacent old pol from either party, who's a lot more concerned about good ole John Insane than he is about Joe Six-Pack and his problems. The Chairman, it would be assumed, was either a friend of Chuck's or of bigger crooks with bigger jets and bigger islands.
In short, a Democratic head of the Whitewash Committee would make absolutely no difference at all.
That same cte burned the other four worse , all four of them Democrats.
Americans know what Democrats are willing to do to Republicans , this is exactly like getting a clean honesty chit from your opposition team.
Lets see Obama do so well with his Rezco relationship , did he ever give the house back?
-
<<That same cte burned the other four worse , all four of them Democrats.>>
plane, I just don't think Joe Six-Pack gives a shit about the other four or the Chairman, this all happened in the Mesozoic Era. The only reason Joe's concerned is that one of the dinosaurs is still around and running for President.
<<Americans know what Democrats are willing to do to Republicans , this is exactly like getting a clean honesty chit from your opposition team.>>
Not when McCain is always boasting about his famous "bipartisanship," how many friends he has on the other side of the aisle. And it didn't hurt that he was caught with his pants down in the presence of four other Democrats. It was obviously not the Committee Chairman's desire to damage four of his own party just to crucify McCain. So whattaya gonna do? Let the four Democrats walk and crucify the sole Republican? They took the obvious way out - - a slap on the wrist for everyone, with some minor distinctions between the offenders just to show it wasn't a big rubber stamp.
But honestly, plane, I really don't think that Joe Six-Pack is gonna analyze it all that closely. Tell him that the Senate Ethics Ctee. gave McCain a pass, and the likeliest response would be along the lines of fuck the ethics committee, WTF do they know, buncha fuckin crooks, OF COURSE they give the guy a pass, he just was unlucky enought to get caught and they've all done worse themselves.
<<Lets see Obama do so well with his Rezco relationship , did he ever give the house back?>>
Rezco and Keating are a wash, even though Keating was a much bigger crook and ruined a lot more people. IMHO, people don't give a shit about Rezko but Keating and the Keating Five are famous. Everyone can understand what Keating did, Rezko's narrative is more complicated and evidence of wrongdoing not so dramatic. He wasn't - - as far as I know - - stealing people's life savings on a massive scale. He did not have five U.S. Senators on his payroll.
-
<<That same cte burned the other four worse , all four of them Democrats.>>
plane, I just don't think Joe Six-Pack gives a shit about the other four or the Chairman, this all happened in the Mesozoic Era. The only reason Joe's concerned is that one of the dinosaurs is still around and running for President.
As I swig my beer , I realise that you are depending on Joe Six pack to be pretty dumb.
If he is smarter than you expect , he will vote for McCain.
-
Two things Joe Six Pack abhors.
He doesn't like to see people railroaded.
And he doesn't like being looked down upon.
Your ad accomplishes both.
-
<<Two things Joe Six Pack abhors.
<<He doesn't like to see people railroaded.>>
He doesn't like to see HIS representative, the guy he pays to go to Washington and represent HIM, go palling around drinking champagne and playing golf with billionaire criminals who are defrauding hard-working middle class Americans of their life savings. And trying to help them by stalling Federal regulatory action so they can stay in business longer. And he doesn't give a shit if the Senate "ETHICS" Committee thinks McCain did nothing wrong. That's because he has very little regard for the Senate or for its "ETHICS" Committee.
<<And he doesn't like being looked down upon.>>
Looked DOWN on? The ad is not even gonna tell him what to think, it's just gonna present the facts, all the facts, including the "ETHICS" Committee's decision, and invite him to come to his own conclusions. Who's looking down on anyone?
Your ad accomplishes both.
-
And trying to help them by stalling Federal regulatory action so they can stay in business longer.
Well, I'm glad that you're all for getting the truth out there.
Part of that truth is that McCain was probably more responsible for increasing the speed at which regulatory action was taken against Keating, right?
-
He doesn't like to see HIS representative, the guy he pays to go to Washington and represent HIM, go palling around drinking champagne and playing golf with billionaire criminals who are defrauding hard-working middle class Americans of their life savings. And trying to help them by stalling Federal regulatory action so they can stay in business longer. And he doesn't give a shit if the Senate "ETHICS" Committee thinks McCain did nothing wrong. That's because he has very little regard for the Senate or for its "ETHICS" Committee.
Joe SixPack didn't lose a dime in the Keating Scandal. He doesn't have 100k sitting in savings, so he was covered. He doesn't care who his rep pals around with off the clock and he expects his rep to go to bat for him if he needs him. Constituent services is the best way to get re-elected. Joe Six Pack doesn't like witchhunts and he will take the ethics committees word that McCain did nothing more than make an error in judgment.