Jump to content

For Dems only.


Texsox
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 08:04 PM)
The media just played the ads, they didn't say any of it was true. Oh well, hopefully baby Alex will be safe from the evil kidnapping John McCain. Kerry can come out and stab McCain in the back again too, "yes, John McCain steals little babies and sends them to Iraq. He must be stopped". Or maybe General Betrayus will chime in and defend John McSame.

 

ah yes, good old politics.

lol, that MoveOn ad is so stupid. It's an insult to our intelligence, and I wonder if it even works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 07:32 PM)
lol, that MoveOn ad is so stupid. It's an insult to our intelligence, and I wonder if it even works?

 

I liked Stewart's line on it last night (paraphrasing): "MoveOn.org: making even those who agree with you cringe for over 10 years."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 10:18 PM)
I liked Stewart's line on it last night (paraphrasing): "MoveOn.org: making even those who agree with you cringe for over 10 years."

Stewart's take on Obama backing out of public financing was hilarious too. First "well duh" and then he said he should change his campaign slogan to "I'm rich, b****!"

 

If Obama did that I would support it wholeheartedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Democrat "outside organization" is closing its doors....

The Fund For America, a Democratic-aligned group organized to disburse contributions from wealthy individuals to progressive organizations, will close its doors Thursday.

 

The announcement is expected to be made tomorrow; the decision will be attributed to the difficult environment for soliciting major contributions. That environment was largely created by Barack Obama, who publicly declared he was did not want his donors funding outside organizations; instead, the presumptive Democratic nominee said he wants donors spending all of their time collecting cash for his campaign.

 

The Fund is the latest independent organization aligned with Democrats to fold. In the days following Obama's announcement regarding outside giving, Progressive Media USA, which was designed to run television ads across the country in the presidential contest, dropped that part of its mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who might want to think Fox News is a real news organization, check this out....

http://mediamatters.org/items/200807020002

During a segment in which Fox & Friends co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade labeled New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and editor Steven Reddicliffe "attack dogs," Fox News featured photos of Steinberg and Reddicliffe that appeared to have been digitally altered -- the journalists' teeth had been yellowed, their facial features exaggerated, and portions of Reddicliffe's hair moved further back on his head.

 

 

fox-20080702-steinberg.jpg

fox-20080702-redicliffe.jpg

 

I am sure it was just an "accident" by a staffer and they have since been fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This smells MORE than a little fishy:

RNC creates independent expenditure arm

 

The Republican National Committee has tapped a GOP media consultant to run an independent expenditure campaign set up to target Barack Obama, according to a source familiar with the plan.

 

Brad Todd will run the new arm of the RNC, broadcasting ads and sending mailers with committee money.

 

The new entity is barred by law from any coordination with either McCain's campaign or the RNC, but some of the cash they use to air the spots will have been raised by the GOP nominee.

 

As first reported by Ben Smith, the RNC has reserved substantial advertising time in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. RNC officials wouldn't comment on the move -- a clear signal that the purchase was made by Todd and the new independent group.

 

Todd didn't immediately return a call.

 

For months, McCain has been raising money for a number of entities, including a joint Victory fund set up between the campaign and committee. The new group can use the portion of that money that had been allocated to the committee.

 

The decision to set up a separate arm was driven by the financial freedom such an entity offers. While the RNC is restricted by law to spend just $19.1 million in coordination with McCain's campaign, there is no limit on what an independent expenditure can spend.

 

Todd is a principal at On Message Inc., where he worked with partner Curt Anderson to help craft ads for Mitt Romney during the presidential campaign. A Tennessean, Todd did a stint running the Volunteer State GOP before working in House, Senate and gubernatorial campaigns as a media consultant.

 

Talk about taking a loop-hole, ripping it wide open and running through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 02:04 PM)
This smells MORE than a little fishy:

RNC creates independent expenditure arm

 

 

 

Talk about taking a loop-hole, ripping it wide open and running through.

Obama responds:

"It has been reported that the Republican National Committee will begin running television ads in a number of battleground states this weekend. As John McCain's own advisors have noted, the RNC and the McCain campaign operate as one unit. And since these ads will likely be attack ads that contradict McCain's pledge to run a respectful campaign, he can, and should, immediately reverse his plan to air them. In fact, a few months ago, McCain urged GOP state party committees to run a respectful campaign, stating, 'I have pledged to conduct a respectful campaign. And I have urged, time after time, various entities within the Republican Party to also do that.' Clearly, the RNC should adhere to the same standard."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McCain Supporters Find Way to Skirt the McCain-Feingold Act

 

A story in today's Wall Street Journal reports on new Republican efforts to circumvent the landmark campaign finance laws named after their top candidate -- the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002. The McCain camp is also trying out some other tactics to get around McCain's 2002 law and rake in more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 09:17 AM)
McCain Supporters Find Way to Skirt the McCain-Feingold Act

 

A story in today's Wall Street Journal reports on new Republican efforts to circumvent the landmark campaign finance laws named after their top candidate -- the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002. The McCain camp is also trying out some other tactics to get around McCain's 2002 law and rake in more money.

The law stinks and is bad for both parties. I don't give a micros*** who's name is on it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 01:12 PM)
The law stinks and is bad for both parties. I don't give a micros*** who's name is on it.

I'm hoping that Obama wrecks it and they have to start over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 5, 2008 -> 04:01 AM)
I'm hoping that Obama wrecks it and they have to start over.

 

I'm about to begin a course on public policy on Monday, and I'm excited for it if just to give me a better idea of how public financing could work. So the problem right now with M-F act is the 527's and groups of unregulated political groups that forum outside the DNC or RNC or Candidates and raise millions and wreak havoc with many false ads. Now, in the next legislation, knowing that this was a problem with the first, how can you stop these? Beyond the fact that it would likely be a free speech issue, if that was not the case, merely saying you can't have these has never worked. Look at acts such as Gramm-Ruddman, who had many stipulations on things congress couldn't do in spending without necessary punishments, so there was no incentive to stop. And I suppose in my mind the only way to stop this is to punish the candidates. If a 527 group forms with neg. ads on the other candidate, the candidate it would inherently support should get punished, even if they had nothing to do with it. Financial punishment with the limited funds that this candidate would have should be a sufficient deterrent.

 

Then again, with calculated risk, the candidate could find that they'd rather just get punished over and over with their campaign funds so they can have these 527's unlimited funds for advertising.

 

These decisions would be bigger than me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...