Fox News joins the RNC/McCain campaign's "Guilt by association" strategy

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: loki8481
the economy? iraq? bail-outs?

anyone? or are we just going to spend the next month ignoring important things and talking about various associations that the candidates may have had in their lifetimes?

the leader of the republican party has a 20% approval rating, Obama doesn't need these BS non-issues to win.

Well then again I guess Obama can let these charges go unanswered.

We know how well that worked out for Kerry eh?

what does Keating have to do with the "charges"?

all it does is diminish Obama as yet another politician doing the same things he's criticizing McCain for now and criticized Hillary for in the primaries.

For Obama, the Keating story is 'offense' to the Ayers story which is 'defense'

As a politician you can't expect to win if you are constantly on 'defense' If all we were talking about was Ayers then Obama would be in trouble, because simply denouncing the stories or "charges" as untrue isn't enough, obviously. Again look back at Kerry who was too slow to respond to the attacks.

Obama is damned if he doesn't respond, he is damned if he does. That is what happens when you have an opponent that is throwing everything AND the kitchen sink at you. Obama's camp is doing the smart thing by playing the political games with McCain. No one ever gives a politician credit for rising above the mud slinging because America likes it's mud wrestling.

In a perfect world I would Love for Obama and his camp to take the high road. But historically speaking that is a riskier move than getting down and dirty with one's opponent.

imho.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Obama had an ingrown toenail.

Katie Couric would be there to sooth it much to the chagrin of Mrs Obama.
Remember when it was reported Obama doesnt sweat while shooting perfect hoops? Hard hitting stuff in the MSM I tell ya!

Well the MSM spent weeks reporting John Edwards' $300 haircut or whatever.

Strange, didn't hear a peep about McCain's $6000 hollywood make-up job.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Obama had an ingrown toenail.

Katie Couric would be there to sooth it much to the chagrin of Mrs Obama.
Remember when it was reported Obama doesnt sweat while shooting perfect hoops? Hard hitting stuff in the MSM I tell ya!

Well the MSM spent weeks reporting John Edwards' $300 haircut or whatever.

Strange, didn't hear a peep about McCain's $6000 hollywood make-up job.

I don't believe McCain is running a campaign that paints him as a champion of the poor and impoverish unwashed masses.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Obama had an ingrown toenail.

Katie Couric would be there to sooth it much to the chagrin of Mrs Obama.
Remember when it was reported Obama doesnt sweat while shooting perfect hoops? Hard hitting stuff in the MSM I tell ya!

Well the MSM spent weeks reporting John Edwards' $300 haircut or whatever.

Strange, didn't hear a peep about McCain's $6000 hollywood make-up job.

I don't believe McCain is running a campaign that paints him as a champion of the poor and impoverish unwashed masses.

Right, they just paint Obama as an elitist.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What if Obama had an ingrown toenail.

Katie Couric would be there to sooth it much to the chagrin of Mrs Obama.
Remember when it was reported Obama doesnt sweat while shooting perfect hoops? Hard hitting stuff in the MSM I tell ya!

Well the MSM spent weeks reporting John Edwards' $300 haircut or whatever.

Strange, didn't hear a peep about McCain's $6000 hollywood make-up job.

I don't believe McCain is running a campaign that paints him as a champion of the poor and impoverish unwashed masses.

Right, they just paint Obama as an elitist.

damn them for holding a gun to Obama's head and forcing Barry to talk about how small towns cling to religion out of xenophobia...

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The McCain Keating comment is exactly the point. No matter what mud the republicans throw, the democrats have better documented attack material that shows McCain has the exact same record. And because the dems have learned the John Kerry lesson, they shoot back at swift boats immediately.

It may still be slime machine advantage GOP because they have right wing radio, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News, and the Dems lack those amplifiers, but much of the mud has been already slung so many times, that most undecided rational voters are now largely ignoring mud while they concentrate on the bread and butter issues that effect their lives.

And while the GOP throws mud while their Fans whoop n Holler, they may be losing the fact that they are only believed by their own choir. And the more mud slinging noise the GOP makes, the more deluded they become.

You might want to look a little deeper at the Keating five thing as it relates to McCain. The Prosecutor of the case (Bill Bennet, I believe, also of "Bill Clinton's Lawyer" fame) completely dismisses any real involvement by McCain (he even tried to get McCain's name removed fromt eh list). McCain had one benign meeting, and was included because the other four primary suspects were democrats; John Glenn was one of them, and was ultimately cleared of any charges, exactly the same as John McCain.

SO, the Dems can bring up the K5 if they want, but any stain they affix to McCain would automatically carry to John Gelnn (D - OH).

Don't hold your breath.

hey if we are going to do the "Guilt By Association" thing then McCain being friends with Keating holds as much weight if not moreso than Obama's connection with Ayers.

charges or not.

Sounds good, let's do it. It'll be fun.

I've heard the Bill Bennett audio, he completely absolves McCain.

 

[chrisho]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
This is classic Rovian politics. First, you put Obama's name in the headline because most people will subliminally make that link (even though they mention in the story that Obama had zero to do with the trial).

I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

You must be smelling Obama's campaigns attempt to make the Keating issue something it never was, that is the only desperation occurring now.

Frankly, you are defined by the people you associate with and Obama has some serious baggage here, I really think Hillary had less baggage. His is absolutely acidic to him. So, if anyone needs to hide from the truth it is him. He dealt with Rezko when it was well know he was trouble.

Plus, it is the job of the news to investigate accusations made by both sides and all are doing it. CNN did a big bang up job on Ayers that I have heard from my black friends was simply an example of Clinton News Network trying to make him lose.

IOW - if you doesn't support your case it must be wrong, eh?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: OrByte
-snip-
hey if we are going to do the "Guilt By Association" thing then McCain being friends with Keating holds as much weight if not moreso than Obama's connection with Ayers.

charges or not.

I agree.

Though I think Obama has a problem if he pushed legislation as a state senator for Rezko that ended up being shady.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: chrisho

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
This is classic Rovian politics. First, you put Obama's name in the headline because most people will subliminally make that link (even though they mention in the story that Obama had zero to do with the trial).

I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

You must be smelling Obama's campaigns attempt to make the Keating issue something it never was, that is the only desperation occurring now.

Frankly, you are defined by the people you associate with and Obama has some serious baggage here, I really think Hillary had less baggage. His is absolutely acidic to him. So, if anyone needs to hide from the truth it is him. He dealt with Rezko when it was well know he was trouble.

Plus, it is the job of the news to investigate accusations made by both sides and all are doing it. CNN did a big bang up job on Ayers that I have heard from my black friends was simply an example of Clinton News Network trying to make him lose.

IOW - if you doesn't support your case it must be wrong, eh?

Why would someone who was up in the polls by numbers approaching double digits be desperate?

I think McCain's role in the whole Keating affair is much more smoke than heat, but then again the same thing is true for the Ayers bit with Obama. McCain was cleared of wrongdoing, and Obama's relation to Ayers was on a board designed to reduce freaking poverty. They are both non-issues.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: chrisho
Frankly, you are defined by the people you associate with...

McCain seriously doesn't want to go down that road.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The McCain Keating comment is exactly the point. No matter what mud the republicans throw, the democrats have better documented attack material that shows McCain has the exact same record. And because the dems have learned the John Kerry lesson, they shoot back at swift boats immediately.

It may still be slime machine advantage GOP because they have right wing radio, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News, and the Dems lack those amplifiers, but much of the mud has been already slung so many times, that most undecided rational voters are now largely ignoring mud while they concentrate on the bread and butter issues that effect their lives.

And while the GOP throws mud while their Fans whoop n Holler, they may be losing the fact that they are only believed by their own choir. And the more mud slinging noise the GOP makes, the more deluded they become.

You might want to look a little deeper at the Keating five thing as it relates to McCain. The Prosecutor of the case (Bill Bennet, I believe, also of "Bill Clinton's Lawyer" fame) completely dismisses any real involvement by McCain (he even tried to get McCain's name removed fromt eh list). McCain had one benign meeting, and was included because the other four primary suspects were democrats; John Glenn was one of them, and was ultimately cleared of any charges, exactly the same as John McCain.

SO, the Dems can bring up the K5 if they want, but any stain they affix to McCain would automatically carry to John Gelnn (D - OH).

Don't hold your breath.

hey if we are going to do the "Guilt By Association" thing then McCain being friends with Keating holds as much weight if not moreso than Obama's connection with Ayers.

charges or not.

Sounds good, let's do it. It'll be fun.

I've heard the Bill Bennett audio, he completely absolves McCain.

You're mixed up a bit on the facts here. Robert Bennett was the special prosecutor of the Keating 5 investigation. Yes, McCain was absolved, but not of all wrongdoing. He was held to have exercised "poor judgment" in having been an unknowing pawn for Keating.
His brother, Bill Bennett, was the drug czar under Reagan and is now a conservative talk show pundit, and is the one you're citing as an authority here. So you're like 1 step above a lefty citing Keith Olbermann of absolving Obama for anything, but not more than.

Finally, you're making a big deal that the Keating 5 issue doesn't apply with these guilts-by-association being thrown back and forth because McCain was absolved of wrongdoing in the end. However, I was unaware that Obama has ever been charged with any wrongdoing in connection with Ayers or Rezko.

As to a comment by another poster that Hillary had less baggage... sorry, but if Hillary had been nominated we'd be living Whitewater all over again right now.
Plus, the Keating 5 was a big deal when happened. Front pages everywhere. One can't make the S&L crisis more than it was because it was the biggest thing going on at that time, with the possible exception of Iran-Contra.

My opinion is that all this mud distracts from the issues, and just makes McCain look desperate in the eyes of most of the public. IMO he might knock a couple points off Obama's polling numbers, but only at the expense of even more points of his own.

 

[fskimospy]

Here's a good article on the whole Ayers thing by NPR:

Like I said, pretty much a non-issue.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Here's a good article on the whole Ayers thing by NPR:

Like I said, pretty much a non-issue.

I read it and agree with their assertion that Obama has "underplayed" his association with Ayers.

I do have a problem with that. I also have a problem with most of the MSM downplaying it as well. I do not they believe they should do anything but provide full disclosure, just brushing it aside by saying they served on the same Board is dishonest. It's clear that their relationship is more than just so informal as to be accidental as many would have us believe.

What people make of it is up to them. But they at least should be aware of accurate info if they so wish. Limiting other people's info because we decide that they don't need it is not a path that we should go down.

BTW: The article omitted the fact that Obama was chief officier and thus responsibly for over-seeing the proper disbursement of the $50M Ayers is credited with raising.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Here's a good article on the whole Ayers thing by NPR:

Like I said, pretty much a non-issue.

I read it and agree with their assertion that Obama has "underplayed" his association with Ayers.

I do have a problem with that. I also have a problem with most of the MSM downplaying it as well. I do not they believe they should do anything but provide full disclosure, just brushing it aside by saying they served on the same Board is dishonest. It's clear that their relationship is more than just so informal as to be accidental as many would have us believe.

What people make of it is up to them. But they at least should be aware of accurate info if they so wish. Limiting other people's info because we decide that they don't need it is not a path they we should go down.

BTW: The article omitted the fact that Obama was chief officier and thus responsibly for over-seeing the proper disbursement of the $50M Ayers is credited with raising.

Fern

The article's thrust as far as I saw was not that they had no relationship, but that Obama's relationship with Ayers was nothing special, and that he didn't really deal with him any differently than any of the other people on the board did, men from all political stripes and backgrounds.

I haven't heard anyone make the claim that Obama's contact with Ayers was akin to them running into one another at the grocery store and just saying hi, but I haven't seen any evidence that Obama worked with the man in anything other than a professional matter as part of a board trying to fight poverty, a laudable goal no matter what your previous crimes were, and one that I hope people would not reject help with no matter who the offer came from so long as it was genuine.

If there's evidence of a significant personal relationship, one that extends beyond professional and political dealings, one that suggests a sense of shared values, then sure that could be a problem. I haven't seen anything to suggest this though.

 

[Jhhnn]

Repeat after Me- Wright! Rezko! Ayers! Wright! Rezko! Ayers! Wright! Rezko! Ayers!- until you *Believe!*, Boy!

Then you'll be ready for *The Truth*, the truth about the sekrit black mooslim TERRARIST plot to destroy our freedoms and take all the white women for themselves!

USA!USA!USA!USA!USA!USA!USA!

Pitbull! Lipstick! One of Us! POW! Terrar! Taxcut! Values! Moose!

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: ScottMac

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The McCain Keating comment is exactly the point. No matter what mud the republicans throw, the democrats have better documented attack material that shows McCain has the exact same record. And because the dems have learned the John Kerry lesson, they shoot back at swift boats immediately.

It may still be slime machine advantage GOP because they have right wing radio, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News, and the Dems lack those amplifiers, but much of the mud has been already slung so many times, that most undecided rational voters are now largely ignoring mud while they concentrate on the bread and butter issues that effect their lives.

And while the GOP throws mud while their Fans whoop n Holler, they may be losing the fact that they are only believed by their own choir. And the more mud slinging noise the GOP makes, the more deluded they become.

You might want to look a little deeper at the Keating five thing as it relates to McCain. The Prosecutor of the case (Bill Bennet, I believe, also of "Bill Clinton's Lawyer" fame) completely dismisses any real involvement by McCain (he even tried to get McCain's name removed fromt eh list). McCain had one benign meeting, and was included because the other four primary suspects were democrats; John Glenn was one of them, and was ultimately cleared of any charges, exactly the same as John McCain.

SO, the Dems can bring up the K5 if they want, but any stain they affix to McCain would automatically carry to John Gelnn (D - OH).

Don't hold your breath.

hey if we are going to do the "Guilt By Association" thing then McCain being friends with Keating holds as much weight if not moreso than Obama's connection with Ayers.

charges or not.

Sounds good, let's do it. It'll be fun.

I've heard the Bill Bennett audio, he completely absolves McCain.

You're mixed up a bit on the facts here. Robert Bennett was the special prosecutor of the Keating 5 investigation. Yes, McCain was absolved, but not of all wrongdoing. He was held to have exercised "poor judgment" in having been an unknowing pawn for Keating.
His brother, Bill Bennett, was the drug czar under Reagan and is now a conservative talk show pundit, and is the one you're citing as an authority here. So you're like 1 step above a lefty citing Keith Olbermann of absolving Obama for anything, but not more than.

Finally, you're making a big deal that the Keating 5 issue doesn't apply with these guilts-by-association being thrown back and forth because McCain was absolved of wrongdoing in the end. However, I was unaware that Obama has ever been charged with any wrongdoing in connection with Ayers or Rezko.

As to a comment by another poster that Hillary had less baggage... sorry, but if Hillary had been nominated we'd be living Whitewater all over again right now.
Plus, the Keating 5 was a big deal when happened. Front pages everywhere. One can't make the S&L crisis more than it was because it was the biggest thing going on at that time, with the possible exception of Iran-Contra.

My opinion is that all this mud distracts from the issues, and just makes McCain look desperate in the eyes of most of the public. IMO he might knock a couple points off Obama's polling numbers, but only at the expense of even more points of his own.

Bob vs Bill, thanks for the correction.

I'm still for bringing the whole thing out and pounding it senseless. IMO, the Dems et al have more at stake (to lose) chatting about the K5 than McCain or the Republicans.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm still for bringing the whole thing out and pounding it senseless. IMO, the Dems et al have more at stake (to lose) chatting about the K5 than McCain or the Republicans.

Heh. You don't have to pound it for it to be senseless- it already is. Rezko bought the property because he already had a buyer for part of it in the Obamas, and then made even more reselling the remainder. The Obamas didn't care who made the deal to buy the adjacent property and sell them a 10ft strip- they'd have done the whole deal themselves if they'd had the means, and would have shown a profit, too. Rezko may have been attempting to curry favor with Obama at the same time, but there's no evidence to show that actually happened...

The Dems really have nothing to lose in the whole Keating 5 deal- Obama was ~28 years old at the time, totally out of the picture, Cranston and DeConcini are dead, Glenn and Riegle are retired, out of politics. The only one left in politics is McCain...

It's not "Party", anyway, it's "personal" wrt judgement and character, and it's "policy" wrt McCain's support for deregulated greed, even when he'd been embroiled in it firsthand...