Barack Obama says John McCain has abandoned the integrity of his 2000 presidential run to engage in “slash-and-burn, say-anything, do-anything politics” in a last-ditch effort to get elected.
Speaking in Iowa, Obama sought Friday to hold his Republican rival’s negative ads against him, although the Democratic presidential candidate is running negative ads too.
Obama quoted McCain as saying two elections ago that he would not take the low road to the highest office in the land.
Said Obama: “The high road didn’t lead him to the White House then, so this time, he decided to take a different route.”
The Illinois senator said his campaign will “respond swiftly and forcefully with the truth to whatever falsehoods they throw our way.”
Has Senator Obama EVER not been engaged in negative attacks during this whole campaign season? Attack Bush…attack McCain….McCain = Bush…..what a downer his Obamamercial was….nothing but violins playing. Let’s talk about the issues, Senator. Quit distracting the American public.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjY9HOMbb0c
I suppose you call these positive ads?
Most of negative ads came from the McCain Palin campaign.
want more samples???
You really are getting desperate knowing McCain is will lose…
@ Real American patriot.
Thank you!
Most negative ads DO COME FROM MCAIN!
Just becuz Obama talks about the failers of the Bush’s polices and how Mcain has suported those polices and plans to continue them.
Doesn’t mean he’s being negative.
All he is doing is telling the truth.
Obama/Biden 08!
Really? Obama hasn’t released negative ads AT ALL? Try the $200 mil spent by Obama on negative ads in September alone.
“Just [because] Obama talks about the [failures] of the Bush’s [policies] and how [McCain] has [supported] those [policies] and plans to continue them [comma] doesn’t mean he’s being negative. All he is doing is telling the truth.”
Can you prove any one of McCain’s ads to be a distortion of the truth? Can you prove that those ads are claiming lies as facts? Because I see a great difference between McCain’s ads shedding light on Obama’s foreign policy and Obama’s making fun of McCain’s limited mobility due to his war injuries.
Lol….I thought those would be links to actual negative attack ads. What you linked to were negative attacks against McCain. Good going!
Interesting how the first one cites WaPo’s opinions as facts; then the talking points memo claiming 100% going negative? C’mon…. must be why Obama made the ridiculous assertion in the third debate.
Interesting how the second video includes McCain actually honorably defending Obama. Interspersed with the McCain ad that asks, “Who is Barack Obama?” It’s just a simple question.
So…tell me, who is he? Has he been forthcoming about his past associations and history? Or has he masked some of his true nature and feelings, due to political calculation?
Perhaps, so; depends on how you define negative. Let’s not forget that according to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, in September 56% of the McCain campaign ads were negative, while 77% of Obama’s ads were negative between Sept. 6-13. Again, it depends on what’s considered negative.
It goes beyond the campaign ads, though. It goes to speeches and statements given- falsely spinning what was actually said by McCain (both sides do this); to the lawyers sent to Alaska to drum up as many smears as they could on Sarah Palin. It goes to the veracity of claims made, such as scaremongering voters about “McCain wants us to spend 100 years in Iraq”.
What amuses me, is Senator Obama is the one who, more so than McCain- especially at pulling statements he made for a specific election, two election cycles ago- has promoted himself as the candidate who will set a new tone in Washington and rise above the partisan bickering that divides us. While he speaks of unity, he hyperbolizes and spins the last 8 years to make his future seem brighter. Then he seeks to tie McCain to the Bush Administration…as if that should truly be a negative. McCain has a history of breaking Party ranks and taking on his own party members, as does Sarah Palin. They’ve crossed Party lines. Where is the evidence that Obama has ever done this beyond rhetoric? “Mere words”, as he so indignantly said over and over, in a speech.
He speaks of hope and optimism but can’t do so without negativity. A true gentleman of change and unity would downplay badmouthing President Bush; he can tell us how he would do things better, without distorting and insulting Bush. All it does is divides us all over again.
He whines constantly about how McCain is not talking about the issues…then proceeds on a five minute diatribe about how bad McCain is, and how he is like Bush and more of the same. That’s negativity, and getting down in the dirt with McCain, rather than keeping his hands clean and rising above “dirty politics”. Obama says he’s being positive and McCain is negative, and a fawning press just laps it all up and pushes the perception (more negative coverage of McCain than Obama, according to new Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism study), giving Obama a pass and looking the other way when he participates with the negative smears.
I covered some other points in a previous post.
Obama’s managers are slick, they have been excellent at keeping him under control, only had a few slip ups where the candidate revealed himself as what he is.
All these accusations of the “low road” that Obama’s camp is leveling at McCain is but a distraction, it’s the “look over there” trick that they play on the mesmerized followers time and time again. McCain-bad, Obama-good.
The Wisconsin Advertising Project has noted, through the studies that come out every couple of weeks, that negative ads in this campaign season has ebbed and flowed. Obama was running the majority of negative ads in Sept, when all the Palin phenomenon was going strong. McCain hit back for a couple of weeks boosting his percentages of negative ads. The bottom line is that McCain has to fight that way because he accepted public financing and doesn’t have the money to average his ads out like Obama’s camp. They put out about half & half, negative/positive. But, McCain kept his word with the public financing, Obama didn’t.
Stump speeches are another story. Obama’s camp can not claim the high road, his speeches have had a fair amount of unnecessary McCain bashing from the very beginning. McCain has been criticized by frustrated Repubs all along for not fighting back or answering the charges on a timely basis.
And the other problem is “objective” media has failed the American public in vetting one of the two candidates:
A lot of truth in that cartoon.
And I’m not laughing.
Obama’s support is falling fast. The polls have him BEHIND McCain and Obama is DOWN from one to several points.
All McCain ads are FULL STEAM AHEAD: Check-out the new ads from LET FREEDOM RING at
http://www.letfreedomringusa.com/pages/election-2008-tv-spots.
Let’s ELECT John McCain … PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
@AdrianS:
Adrian,
While we all appreciate the information that you are conveying, is it really necessary to post the same stuff to eight different threads?
That is coming mighty close to SPAMMING as far as I am concerned.
I approved the one above and trashed the rest.
Obama’s problem is that there is a wealth of topics to run negative ads about him and very few topics that Obama can run against McCain. So he runs idiotic things like not e=mail ready, his scars from skin cancer and how many planes he crashed during training. Obama seems to think telling the truth is negative. His trouble is the media has wrapped him in cotton batting and he doesn’t know what to do when tough questions are asked or presented to the public.
I see the trolls jumped right in first thing with their talking points. I wonder, do they get paid by the piece or by the hour?
It’s simply for the reason that there’s nothing to attack when it comes to McCain. They’re going crazy because they can’t find a single thing about him. They know he’s right. They know he’s cleaner than Obama. He’s got no shady connections, no lack of experience, no inconsistencies in his policies…whereas Obama’s chock-full of ’em.
First of all, I’m not saying Obama has not made any negative ads.
If you read my post I said that :
“Most negative ads DO COME FROM MCAIN”
^^^So obviously I wasn’t saying Obama doesn’t have any negaitve ads.
All I was saying was MOST of the negative ads come form Mcain.
Now to Leah’s questions YES, I can prove Mcains ads as lies and distortion of the truth.
Example #1: Mcain made an ad about Obama voting to Not fund the troops in Iraq.
When in reality, Obama only voted to not fund the troops becuz there was no time-line to bring the trops in Iraq home, in the bill.
What also wasn’t said in the ad, is that Mcain 2 months later voted to not fund the troops ON THE SAME BILL becuz, there WAS a time-line to bring the troops home.
Example #2:
Mcain has ads LIYING about Obama’s tax plan.
Mcain has had ads saying that Obama wants to raise EVERYONE’S tax’s and that Obama’s tax plan would tax small businesses.
And that is simply NOT the case.
If you go to Obama’s website and look at his tax plan, it says that he will CUT taxes for 95% of working family’s who make under 250,000 dollars a year, which in clueds 98% of small businesses.
Example #3:
Mcain has also had ads about how joe Biden’s comment about there will be a crisis when Obama is elected.
They did’nt play the WHOLE ENTIRE audio from the comment which he also said.
“This guys got steal in his spine”
And went on to say that Obama would be able to handle any crisis if it were to happen.
I could go on and on about Mcains negative ads that LIE about not only Obama’s plans but, his record as well.
But, the bottem line is that MCAIN HAS THE MOST NEGATIVE ADS out of the 2 campaigns.
Obama/Biden 08!
As for you Leah saying:
“The reason is simply because there’s nothing to attack when it comes to Mcain.
They’re going crazy because they can’t find a single thing about him.
“They know he’s right”
^^^
LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Ok when you vote for George W. Bushes policies 90% of the time.
That have FAILED for the past 8 years and plan to continue them as well.
I think that is the most worst past history to have.
Becuase you can go all day long about Obama’s associations but, one thing you CAN’T say is that Obama’s decisions have run our Country into the ground.
Nor can you say his policies and or policies he has supported has cost this Country lives and its over all standing in the world.
I just find HILARIOUS that you say Mcain has no “shady connections”.
Well I don’t know what you Leah but, George W. Bush is the MOST SHADDEST PERSON IN THE WORLD and has dug this Country into a deep whole that could possibly take YEARS to get out of it!
With connections like the Bush Admid. makes connection with people like Bill ayers and Right look like pre-schoolers.
Obama/Biden 08!
@David101:
Oh goody.
Let’s look at what you have to offer.
Why yes. Yes, he did.
So you admit that BO did indeed vote against funding.
Seems that the ad was truthful by your own admission.
OK.
Let me get this straight.
You’re using info from BO’s website to support BO’s claims about his tax plan?
Is that right?
What a dullard you are.
How about something from the Wall Street Journal or the Tax Foundation?
They know a whole lot more about taxes and tax policy than you do.
What’s funny about this one, again, is that you’re totally clueless.
Biden made two speeches in which he said that there would be a crisis. One on Oct 18th. The other on Oct 19th.
The speech on the 18th contained the line about “steel in his spine”. The speech on the 19th did not.
Here’s what Biden said on October 19th:
Notice that there’s no “steel” in there.
Here’s a link to the full, unedited audio of Biden’s remarks. (The part you’re interested in is at the 10:13 mark.)
So, now we’re down to the question that matters….
Who’s lying?
Here’s the McCain ad followed by the Obama ad. You’ll notice that the Obama ad makes accusations against McCain that are blatantly false.
Roll the tape:
Fish in a barrel, Jasmine.
Fish in a barrel.
Thanks for sharing the tax links. I looked them over and have a somewhat better understanding of the proposals that Obama and McCain are making now.
Both increase the marginal tax rates for some people and decrease it for others (note that marginal tax rates are not the effective amount of taxes that you actually pay, but rather they refer to the change in the amount you pay as your income changes. It seems complicated and messy to me…)
Both candidates would decrease the tax base (the number of people who actually pay any taxes) and both would result in a large increase in the deficit (unless the cost was offset by their vague cost cutting proposals).
Both plans also increase the complexity of the already overly complex tax code (Obama’s plan more so). It appears that Obama’s plan might help those people who make the least, if these people can actually understand how to file their taxes under these even more complex rules…
I must say that I am disappointed in both candidates’ tax plans. I think it’s time to simplify the tax code, while still allowing for those who earn less to pay less in taxes (a progressive tax). I may be over simplifying, but I wonder why we couldn’t just use a non-linear mathematical equation that adjusts the tax rate continually based on income so that we don’t have any “marginal tax rates.” And as far as incentives, lets just pay these directly to the people rather than having them be part of the tax code (for example government funding for college education).
But as far as Obama’s association with Rev Wright and Ayers, I do think that these were mistakes in his judgment. However, I do not think that they imply that he harbors similar malicious intents himself. He is not a bigot and he is not a terrorist. He is a tolerant and just person who wants as much as we all do to live in a country that is safe and secure.
Similarly McCain exercised poor judgment in his involvement in the Keating scandal. But I do not think it implies that he is a corrupt person. He made a mistake and I have a lot of respect for his honesty in admitting that it was a mistake. He is a person of honor and integrity.
Yes, both campaigns have tried to make the other look bad in order to win votes and this is dishonorable. But I think that it is time that we forgave them and recognized that they are human and will, as all of us do, make mistakes. But though they are not perfect, they are both men who deserve our respect. And I have no doubts that each, as president, would try to do what is best for our country.
It is time that we Americans stop fighting each other, stop fearing each other, and start forgiving each other, start respecting each other and start working together to address the problems that we all face.