Can a man who clearly believes in suppression of free speech, a right guaranteed by the First Amendment, really be trusted to hold the office of President?
Earlier today I posted a piece, Obama’s Lies: Another Attempt To Smear McCain, in which I related my receipt of an e-mail soliciting aid for Obama, based on false representations, in order to suppress an independently-produced ad that was critical of him. I didn’t know which ad the Obama toady was referring to, and really didn’t care; my focus was on the dishonest attempt to attribute it to John McCain.
More recently, I stumbled across a reference to the ad itself – - a rather mild video, in my opinion, which focuses on the provable links between Barack Obama and radical bomber William Ayers. I also found a copy of a thinly-veiled threatening letter from an Obama campaign lawyer to television outlets which claimed that the ad’s sponsor, American Issues Project, is a “shadowy front group.” Images of masked figures in trench coats skulking through an alleyway!
My curiosity aroused, I found the Web site for American Issues Project. You can make you own judgment as to how “shadowy” this organization is. The “shadowy” folks were written up in Newsday, which gave information on the organization behind the vid. The Newsday writeup included this paragraph:
Obama’s campaign accused McCain of having a hand in the ad, saying he “dispatched his paid consultant to launch this despicable ad from a so-called ‘independent’ committee.” Federal Election Commission records show the last payment from McCain’s campaign to Failor’s consulting firm, Targeted Consulting, was July 2, 2007.
Right: Targeted Consulting got the boot when McCain shook up his primary campaign in the summer of 2007; the relationship ended more than a year ago. Obama’s attack dogs know this, of course; they’re simply following Barack’s example and lying through their teeth.
Here’s the video:
Question: is there anything in this video which is not factual? As far as I know, the answer is, “no.” Is using Obama’s own words against him “Swiftboating?” Yes, of course it is – - and it is perfectly legitimate.
If this ad sends the Obama campaign into a tizzy, what will happen when it really gets rough?
RECOMMENDED LINKS:
My Favorite Headlines Of The Day 8/23/2008
No, Barack Obama, I Won’t Help You Tell Those Lies
The “How Many Houses” and Ralph Reed Attacks: Bring It, Barack
August 23, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I am glad this is at YouTube now, it was just at their site.
I am hearing networks won’t air it????
August 23, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Well, I guess if you’re a total retard unable to do any research at all beyond watching this ad, you might believe it.
This is kind of like calling Mickey Mouse a gay prostitute who ate children for dinner. I can make a video about it and some people would believe that too.
August 23, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Bobby: In your own special way, you get the point. We shouldn’t let any kind of advertising do our thinking for us. On the other hand, we shouldn’t have someone bullying news outlets to keep us from watching things that are critical of a political candidate. Isn’t it implicit in the Obama campaign’s reaction to this ad that they believe voters DON’T do any research . . . i.e., that their supporters might be, as you so delicately put it, “total retards?” If they don’t think that, why not simply respond, let Obama speak his piece on the matter, and move on?
August 23, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Better get the Prozac factory working overtime. The libtards are going to need it Nov. 5th.
August 23, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Bobby, Bobby, Bobby,
It seems you are not doing your research…I am so glad those papers are being released on Tue. in Ill. I just hope they haven’t been scrubbed.
August 23, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Thanks for posting that video. I am sure it is just one of many that will be coming over the airwaves. I am sure there will be a few more using his pastors and connections in Chicago.
August 24, 2008 at 1:15 am
So are you saying John McCain is the one to elect? Bring out the reasons why. I’m sorry to see all of the negative campaigning. But, your post, in turn, tells me nothing positive, only a negative which I don’t believe can be used to characterize Obama. I think it’s unlikely that he wears a Weather Underground t-shirt to bed.
August 24, 2008 at 5:19 am
The reason there’s an attempt to squash is that this matter -has- been responded to numerous times, but it keeps coming up because people… perhaps like you, perhaps not… are more interested in scoring cheap politcal points than substantive debate. I can’t even begin to list the reasons the ad is not only disingenuous, but intentionally so… but I’ll give it a shot.
While I personally think Ayers should be rotting in prison, or at least have served a sizeable amount of time there by now, it’s beyond the pale in attempting to establish a connection where none exists between Obama and Ayers by inserting the word “friend” without a basis in the record.
1st Connection. Obama was -invited- to Ayers’ house by State Senator Alice Palmer for a get-together and discuss him potentially taking her spot when she left. There’s not even a reference or understanding the two spoke at any length of time, much less about any radical issues.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html
2nd Connection. Obama was on a nine-member board with Ayers for a charitable fund that had been founded in 1941, whose recent tasks have been welfare reform and affordable housing for disadvantaged people. Hearing the ad, you’d think it was a jihadist training camp.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/politics/17truth.html?ref=politics
3rd Connection. Obama called him “Respectable” and “Mainstream.” That’s because whether it’s fair or not, the FBI gained its evidence through illegal wiretapping and so Ayers was let off the hook. Thus, to Ayers’ minor credit, he was given the opportunity to integrate himself and work on actual issues that affected people’s lives in Barack Obama’s district for roughly a decade before Obama came into the picture. Eventually he did become mainstream and respectable in his area due to that work. Ayers was never charged with murder, and society looks much more kindly for a second chance on those who destroy property rather than people, even when it’s government property.
4th Connection. This is a quick one, but the comments about being unrepentant about the bombings were not his statements ON 9/11, but rather from an interview prior to the attacks. Still unrepentant of course, but the unspoken insinuation that he would say that the day the attacks occurred should be noted.
http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/04/17/fact_check_on_clinton_attacks.php
Context. Ayers was, for better or worse, a political figure of note in Obama’s soon-to-be district. In that situation you deal with them when you’re forced to, you don’t get too close, and you avoid them when you can. I don’t see how Obama did anything less than that. If you want to defend this ad on purely 1st Amendment grounds, be my guest. But from the tone of yours posts, it seems you truly think this drivel is something I need to take seriously, when even Fox News won’t run it. That’s what surprises me, especially since we went through all of this months ago.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/22/fox-news-refuses-to-run-r_n_120599.html
August 24, 2008 at 8:00 am
rationalpsychic: You ask, “are you saying John McCain is the one to elect?” Scroll up and read the name of the blog, pal! :>) Your critique is typically perverse: don’t say negative things about my guy . . . tell me why you support yours. Okay! One reason I support McCain is that he is honest and Obama is not. If that strikes you as being “negative” campaigning, it is because your guy is on the wrong end. If you care to read some of my pro-McCain stuff, here are some suggestions:
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/the-saddleback-forum-mccain-1-obama-0/
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/john-mccains-path-to-electoral-college-victory/
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/give-em-hell-john-mccains-trumanesque-campaign/
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/07/27/how-to-pick-a-president-in-one-easy-lesson/
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/07/08/the-price-of-gas-its-supply-and-demand-stupid/
http://jay1949.wordpress.com/2008/07/06/on-the-no-military-experience-needed-argument/
http://backcountrynotes.squarespace.com/politics/2008/6/26/landmark-supreme-court-second-amendment-opinion-and-why-the.html
August 24, 2008 at 8:09 am
avianic: Are you serious? Do you really think it’s okay to bully media outlets into not running an ad because there is a response to it? Why not simply make the response????? Have you ever read the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States? This is how it works: Group X has their say. If there is a response, Candidate Y has the freedom and opportunity to respond. What is wrong with that? Why not say – - hey, great, these jokers are wasting their money with stuff we can shoot down! If I were running a Presidential campaign, my attitude would be that of the actress who said “I don’t care what they say about me, as long as it’s not true.”
My issue is not whether the ad itself is justifiable. Rather, it is whether someone who is running for President of the United States should condone the tactic of suppression of freedom of speech when it is critical of him. My answer, obviously, is “no.”
August 24, 2008 at 9:36 am
I, and some other people were blogging on an official Democratic site, when on Sen Obama’s birthday, people were thrown off this blog, without recourse, although a blogger who called me an idiot, when i explained i had a brain injury from years ago, well, people like that are still on it! We have been officially told, there can be zero dissent against obama! Log in there and say you disagree with something as simple as his tie! You will go down! The lady who was thrown off, and whom I protested, disliked Hillary, and I suported her, so it’s about moral fairness. No one should be above criticism, unless you’re watching Hogan’s Heroes! Thank you!
August 24, 2008 at 10:43 am
spiritedbrigader…many have been blocked for saying the tiniest thing against Obama.
About Obama and Ayers….
I have a feeling that when they release the papers in Ill. on Tue. that they will have removed things.
If people would look into Ayers and what he has been up to since…
Steve Diamond has some new info up..
http://globallabor.blogspot.com/
He has a lot of info at his site.
August 24, 2008 at 12:40 pm
As I mentioned in the last post, if you want to defend this on 1st Amendment grounds, not an issue. My concerns were your continual references to its “factual” nature and how “mild” it was, both of which I was claming were patently false statements.
I’ll defend to the death your right to say things, but don’t insult my intelligence in the process. We’ll see what the documents turn up, but at the end of the day Ayers was someone who had achieved respectability and status within his district as a promoter of educational reform when Obama arrived, and was seen as a necessary evil to deal with. Saying that implicates Obama in his crimes, which the ad does, is utterly irresponsible, misleading, and insulting to all of us. It’d be similar to a smear ad saying McCain believes that Hitler was sent by God to kill the Jews because of his prior association and praise of Rev. Hagee. It’s the lowest common denominator.
And just as a heads up, as you know, television stations are private. Which -does- allow them to be pressured into creating a blackout on any given issue. So you may want to direct your ire to the FCC as well.
August 24, 2008 at 12:58 pm
So Obama and the Dems are finally learning to do all the campaigning tricks the Repiglicans have done so well for the last 25 years. Jealous?
August 24, 2008 at 2:06 pm
unvarnishedtruth: Beats me, my friend; I’ve never met a Repiglican. But seriously, do you have any examples to cite?
August 24, 2008 at 2:13 pm
avianic: Let me get this straight. You take issue with my statement that this was “a rather mild video,” expressly stated to be “in my opinion,” and the statement that it “focuses on the provable links between Barack Obama and radical bomber William Ayers.” Right? But it’s okay for the Obama campaign to mis-state that the American Issues Campaign video is the work of John McCain and send threatening letters to the media in order to suppress it?
I stand on what I said in the article and on my response to your original comment.
August 24, 2008 at 4:10 pm
I absolutely do -not- think that it’s alright for them to mis-state that this is the work of John McCain’s campaign without proof. I’ve said twice now, my issue with the post was specifically with your endorsement of the ad itself. You’ve said it was factually accurate as far as you know, and I responded with ways it drew a conclusion which was not factually accurate by leaving out information. As for your “mild” comment being your opinion, you can say ducks are generally lazy, that’s your opinion but I’m still allowed to take issue with it. That’s the wonderful thing about opinions.
August 24, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Similar, a/k/a avianic: First, I didn’t make an “endorsement” of the ad. Second, I checked our your blog, which clarifies why you would say that. You give Barack Obama high marks for honesty and think his race speech was “absolutely one of the most honest and straightforward assessments of where we are right now.” I see where you’re coming from.
But isn’t it nice to know that someone has actually read your stuff?
August 24, 2008 at 5:13 pm
I have a blog to organize my thoughts mostly, I don’t generally have the copious amounts of free time required to post on a regular basis, today is a rare occasion that I felt needed to be addressed. I did feel it was necessary to to include the URL to see where I’m coming from, though, so I’m glad you took the time to browse it. For the record, I already sketched out McCain and gave him high marks for honesty as well, (he matches up fairly evenly in terms of pros and cons) but won’t be posting it until he picks his VP to keep things from being disjointed.
That said, when you call an ad that attempts to equate Ayers with the 9/11 attacks, and then Obama to Ayers “mild,” it’s no question where you’re coming from. I’m sure your response would be the same if an ad comes out with G. Gordon Libby’s statement to shoot ATF agents in the head and “kill the sons of bitches” with McCain’s relationship with him as well. If you’re fine with the race to the bottom, don’t let me stop you. I just think we can do better.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0504chapmanmay04,0,6061828.column
August 24, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Similar, a/k/a avianic: I make no secret of my preference for McCain, of course, since the name of the blog is “A McCain Democrat’s Journal.” I do have a point of view. I don’t care for G. Gordon Libby, by the way. The ad in question really is in the “mild” category; check back with me in mid-October and we can compare notes.
August 24, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Sounds like a plan to me, and my thanks for the debate.