Almost certainly. So if you want to clarify that Alice Palmer launched the Obama campaign at Ayers' house, I'd go along with that. But we are getting into a thread derail here.
BTW, does anybody know where all those old threads are hidden? I can't find them on the forum myself, and I was quite surprised to see that one that Daredelvis pointed to. I only appear to see threads where a comment was posted on July 22 or later. Is this some setting I can change?
BTW, does anybody know where all those old threads are hidden? I can't find them on the forum myself, and I was quite surprised to see that one that Daredelvis pointed to. I only appear to see threads where a comment was posted on July 22 or later. Is this some setting I can change?
When you look at the thread listing, scroll down and look at "Display Options." You should find what you need there. Alternatively, use one of the search options.
Great stuff, chipmunk, but maybe I should lay down some ground rules.
I was thinking about restricting this to campaign-approved ads only, but let's face it: some 527s out there are going to be putting out some killer ads. The Brave New Films piece, though, is about 4 minutes long.
How about, say, trying to keep it to campaign-approved ads only (with exceptions, of course) and definitely keeping them to a minute or less? I have no powers to enforce this, of course, but that will keep the focus on discussing ads, their basic trustiworthiness, and their overall effectiveness.
For example, this ad in support of McCain by American Issues Project is extremely well-made and a minute long.
As far as facts, it's almost scrupulously correct, but extremely slanted for the reasons we've been discussing. It's a brutal smear on Obama for a casual working relationship that would have been unavoidable in Chicago politics. It will likely be very effective, though.
Almost certainly. So if you want to clarify that Alice Palmer launched the Obama campaign at Ayers' house, I'd go along with that. But we are getting into a thread derail here.
Possible, but the whole launched his campaign idea comes from one cherry picked quote. I will end my derail here.
BTW, does anybody know where all those old threads are hidden? I can't find them on the forum myself, and I was quite surprised to see that one that Daredelvis pointed to. I only appear to see threads where a comment was posted on July 22 or later. Is this some setting I can change?
If you click the little red arrow in the white box next to the name in the quote box it will take you to that thread.
I do think that McCain's inability to remember how many houses he owns might have some legs at last. It should at least put to the rest the idea that Obama is the out of tough elitist. I read somewhere else the suggestion that the next time Obama brings it up he should start asking people in the audience if they know how many houses they own. That would make a good sound bite.
You're right, as I acknowledged, but you're missing the point. It doesn't matter what a jury did or would hear. Public opinion is not a court of law, and just because evidence isn't admissible in court doesn't mean that it is irrelevant to public perception or politics. Do you think OJ was innocent?
That is probably going to be effective, Bolo. I kind of thought that when they went with that "Flight 93 never hit the Capitol on 9/11" that we were headed into Troofer territory, but I guess they just really wanted to push that button along with everything else. I do think it's somewhat unfair to tie in the Nanuet Mall armored car robbery; that was Boudin and Graham acting in concert with some black militants long after the Weatherman faction had gone their separate ways (although there is the Broadway Baby connection).
The McCain campaign has announced it's coming back at Obama with a Rezko ad. Things are heating up nicely.
The Obama campaign and its allies are taking advantage of McCain's recent gaffes, framing McCain as super-rich and out of touch with the average person's economic hardships.
The second video is unlikely to be viewed by people who are not already committed to Obama. But the "how many houses ad" gets to the point quickly and should be effective.
Obama needs to run against John McCain as he is now. Not the returning POW of the Vietnam war, or the Maverick McCain we knew 8 years ago. They can't let McCain frame himself as the guy who is going to shake things up in Washington. Portraying him as an out of touch elitist helps in that regard, but doesn't confront the issue directly.
I expect Obama's team will produce other ads that show McCain as a Washington insider, supporting Bush programs and policies for the last seven years.
And the new web-only ad from McCain, "The One - The Road To Denver".
This is the sequel to "The One", complete with the same footage from The Ten Commandments.
McCain seems to be flirting with the racial code language here. The theme of the Exodus has been a staple of the African-American church for over 150 years. A nice choir (not traditional AA gospel to be sure, but it's been influenced by it). They are walking up to the line, just seeing how far they can push it.
Mocking Obama with The Ten Commandments is just plain silly. After all, if Barack is Moses, that makes McCain Pharoah, and someone so able to blind their eyes to reality isn't the frame I think McCain would want. But, part of McCain's strategy appears to be provocation. The way that they go ballistic themselves on the slightest provocation shows that they are spoiling for this kind of fight.
It also goes on too long. The attention to each element of the satire becomes a little too much. I was rolling my eyes at the beginning, of course, but as it went on, I found myself wondering if such skewering might start seeming like they are mocking the biblical story as well. That wouldn't go over too well.
I'm also trying to figure out where I've seen that style of title card before. The closest I could get so far was the cover art of the "Left Behind" series. But there's a closer match, I know it.
So, target audience is evangelicals and young people. It's trying to knock the glamour off of Barack, but this one is more muddled, too long, and ends on a lame note. When it's combined with the shots of the enthusiastic Obama followers...
Hang on. More than Obama, that's who the ad is targeted against. But the Obama supporters they show are that worked up. They're just enthusiastic about their candidate.
This reveals more about the McCain campaign than Obama. I give this one 2 stars out of five.
That's not the only distancing they are doing in that ad. Listen to the legal "I approve this message" statement. There's a clear lag in time between the narrator of the evil Obama story and McCain's statement. I believe the evil sound effects end right before the cheery Apple-sounding McCain music.
If that 30-second spot was played right before another McCain spot, a more positive one with its legalese at the end, it would sound like the legalese belonged to the second ad.
I haven't seen them do that, yet, of course, but that gap between the narration and McCain's voice seems like an eternity in editing time.
That's not the only distancing they are doing in that ad. Listen to the legal "I approve this message" statement. There's a clear lag in time between the narrator of the evil Obama story and McCain's statement. I believe the evil sound effects end right before the cheery Apple-sounding McCain music.
If that 30-second spot was played right before another McCain spot, a more positive one with its legalese at the end, it would sound like the legalese belonged to the second ad.
I haven't seen them do that, yet, of course, but that gap between the narration and McCain's voice seems like an eternity in editing time.
I noticed that too. I figured the timing was awkward, i.e. not enough time left to say more, but what they had didn't quite fill the time. I thought the ad could have been much more powerful than it was. It was not very hard-hitting.
Obama responds to the Ayers ad. Of course, John McCain is not talking about the sixties; the ad is being run by an independent group. And pointing out that Barack was 8 years old when Ayers was blowing things up doesn't change the fact that he associated with the guy when they were both much older, despite the fact that Ayers has shown not an ounce of repentance.
In addition, Obama has complained to the Justice Department that the ad is a violation of campaign finance laws:
Obama not only aired a response ad to the spot linking him to William Ayers, but he sought to block stations the commercial by warning station managers and asking the Justice Department to intervene. The campaign also planned to compel advertisers to pressure stations that continue to air the anti-Obama commercial.
Ayers was a founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a school-reform group. Obama chaired its board from 1995-99. National Review reported last week that UIC said records detailing meetings and other business were public, then reversed itself. UIC said Friday there was a misunderstanding.
Obama and Ayers, now a professor and author, live a few blocks apart in this city's Hyde Park neighborhood. Conservative activists say their relationship is evidence that Ayers' radical politics helped mold Obama's views.
The release of the ad, first reported on Time.com's "The Page", could have the unintended consequence of reminding voters that Obama has in the past been friendly with William Ayers, a Chicago law professor who to this day remains unrepentant about his work with the violent Weather Underground group in the 1960s and 70s.
Obama has denounced Ayers' actions with the radical group, but has also referred to Ayers as "mainstream" and "respectable," a point that conservatives continue to pound the soon-to-be Democratic nominee about.
The campaign's aggressive tactics could draw more attention to a subject the campaign wants to go away. On Tuesday, the University of Illinois at Chicago will make available records of Obama's service on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The group was set up to improve the city's schools. The documents could shed further light on whether Obama and Ayers had a relationship.
That they've made a strategic decision to air a commercial about William Ayers is perplexing. I don't understand it, but put that aside. The ad is misleading. It states the McCain campaign is running an ad on the issue and it's not. This a pattern of attacking from a platform of disingenuousness when Obama accuses his opponent of attacking when he's not, in an attempt to disqualify the issue from the debate.
I sometimes roll my eyes at campaign ads, but I saw one that tonight made me genuinely angry. It was the one where McCain "complains" that Hilary wasn't on the ticket, and says it was because "she told the truth".
Ugggh! Could it get any more phony or insincere than that ad? If she really deserved to be on a VP ticket, maybe McCain will pick her!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
