|
|
Rank: Fuckstick
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/9/2006
Posts: 775
Points: 381
|
McCain campaign accuses L.A. Times of 'suppressing' Obama video
The Times says its promise to a source prevents the paper from posting the video, which shows Barack Obama praising Palestinian activist Rashid Khalidi at a 2003 banquet. The story first appeared in April.
By a Times staff writer
6:01 PM PDT, October 28, 2008
John McCain's presidential campaign today accused the Los Angeles Times of "intentionally suppressing" a videotape it obtained of a 2003 banquet where then-state Sen. Barack Obama spoke of his friendship with Rashid Khalidi, a leading Palestinian scholar and activist. The Times first reported on the videotape in an April 2008 story about Obama's ties with Palestinians and Jews as he navigated the politics of Chicago.
The report included a detailed description of the tape, but the newspaper did not make the video public.
"A major news organization is intentionally suppressing information that could provide a clearer link between Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi," said McCain campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb. " . . . The election is one week away, and it's unfortunate that the press so obviously favors Barack Obama that this campaign must publicly request that the Los Angeles Times do its job -- make information public."
The Times today issued a statement about its decision not to post the tape.
"The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it," said the newspaper's editor, Russ Stanton. "The Times keeps its promises to sources."
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
An October surprise implies that the person breaking the story has been sitting on it to maximize the impact so close to the election. How does the LA Times having and just now refusing to release a videotape qualify as a calculated move to hurt Obama? The 2001 radio interview, that absolutely was an October surprise in the classic sense. HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
Last I saw they backed off of this within about two hours when they realized that McCain had directly approved funding for Rashid Khalidi. It was a stupid attack to begin with, but now it just makes them look extra clumsy to make it half-assed and have it blow up in their face. Funny stuff. I can't help but wonder if the McCain campaign is some kind of elaborate practical joke. They can't really be this incompetent. Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.  
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
The McCain campaign just called for the release of the tape. But now the whole thing creates a Catch-22 for anyone wanting to defend either campaign. If McCain's distributing funds to a foundation co-founded by Khalidi links him inextricably to Khalidi's views, then the same could be said about Obama and his connection with Ayres (though you could point out that McCain has probably taken part in the distribution of funds dozens if not hundreds of times, while Obama actually sat on boards with and had parties in the home of Ayres). And if Khalidi's views on the Israel/Palestine conflict are so horrible and radical that they deserve condemnation, then Obama's in the same boat for his connection via the tape held by the LA Times. This story is meaningless because it either proves that both candidates are hypocritical politicians quickly willing to twist their pasts to best attack the other side, or neither has actually done anything wrong here, and they again show their hypocrisy by making issues of it anyway. IMO Obama gets the 1up on this for not loudly denouncing McCain's part in the whole story, but when you're all but guaranteed victory you don't have to stoop to that stuff as much. It'd be interesting to see if it were a few more months out or if the polls were more even whether the same would hold true. *sigh* Oh, what I wouldn't give for some other option besides these two.... HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
It's a stupid attack precisely because there is no there there. The guy has a terrorist name, that's it. The fact that McCain gave the guy $500,000 or whatever means jack shit. It's yet another disingenuous attack from McCain, except this one never got off the ground because McCain is in it just as deep. The guy's views on Palestine aren't particularly radical either, although they are different from Obama's, which may explain why he is critical of Obama's foreign policy. But whatever, this whole incident is more pathetic than anything else. McCain should sue his idiotic campaign managers for fucking malpractice when this thing is done with. They are either actively trying to fuck him over or they're the worst political consultants in America (excluding Bob Shrum of course, that fucker is in a class of his own). Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
Honestly, though, even if Rashid Khalidi had been Osama Bin Laden, do you think the LA Times would release the tape, the Obama campaign wouldn't be able to dismiss it, or that it would seriously jeopardize Obama's chances at this point? People have made up their minds at this point. It's time to crown our Next American Idol! </Ryan_Seacrest_Voice> I'll be so goddamn happy next wednesday... HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Fuckstick
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/9/2006
Posts: 775
Points: 381
|
In all honesty, the details of who gave what to whom really doesn't matter right now. What does matter, is gives some credibility to the argument that the media is covering for Obama, whether true or not. An October surprise places the other candidate on their heals and is intended to cast doubt for a short period of time. From what I hear, tomorrow it will be released that Obama's campaign has accepted donations by the way of pre-paid untraceable credit cards. Also in the rumor mill(I can't even tell how close to true these are), an AIP phone interview with Mrs. Obama and of course if it exists the Mrs. Obama "Whitey" tape.
Whatever you think of this sort of tactic, it seems to be working(If you believe the polls). Gallup +2 for Obama as of last night. That's a 6 point swing since the "Socialist" tag was laid on Obama.
|
|
|
Rank: You're gonna stick that where?
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 12/28/2007
Posts: 317
Points: 78
Location: Eastern Coast U.S.
|
The identification of Rashid Khalidi as a terrorist is just complete and utter nonsense. I've read several of the books the man wrote, and while I find some of his views distasteful, his support of Palestine is by no means a "terrorist" tie. Suffers from the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush
AKA
Bush Derangement Syndrome
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
tpractice wrote:
In all honesty, the details of who gave what to whom really doesn't matter right now. What does matter, is gives some credibility to the argument that the media is covering for Obama, whether true or not. An October surprise places the other candidate on their heals and is intended to cast doubt for a short period of time. From what I hear, tomorrow it will be released that Obama's campaign has accepted donations by the way of pre-paid untraceable credit cards. Also in the rumor mill(I can't even tell how close to true these are), an AIP phone interview with Mrs. Obama and of course if it exists the Mrs. Obama "Whitey" tape.
Whatever you think of this sort of tactic, it seems to be working(If you believe the polls). Gallup +2 for Obama as of last night. That's a 6 point swing since the "Socialist" tag was laid on Obama.
How does it give any credibility to the argument that the media is covering for Obama? Re: Donation stuff about Obama, assuming that was true - what does it matter exactly? If you can't figure out who is trying to influence you then how exactly can they influence you? Re: AIP, why did the Palin's anti-American sessionist movement interview Michelle Obama? The "Whitey" tape does not exist. The fact that you even say "if" really makes me concerned. Do you honestly believe that Michelle is some kind of black power radical? This tactic is not working at all, it's not designed to win the election. At this point they are just setting up their narrative to explain why Obama beat them and we will get to hear about it for the next 8 years. They're trying to turn him into a bogeyman for people like you and make you doubt the legitmacy of his presidency. It's the same shit they always do, it's incredibly transparent and so obviously disengenous, but alas most people are unable to think critically. Gallup sucks by the way, and national polls are meaningless, and you cherry-picked the outlier from the most recent polls. If you'd like I could pick the other outlier and say that Obama is +15, doesn't mean anything. Go look at the polling for the battleground states. Go look at where the GOP is wasting money (they're fucking on defense in Montana of all places!). Or even better, go look at early voting returns. McCain can pump out all the bullshit in the world for the next week and it isn't going to change the dynamics of the race. Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
McCain lost because of McCain himself. Obama's run an excellent campaign, but it's tempered by some significant negatives that a more competent opposing candidate might have been able to capitalize on. Prediction: the moment the news networks call the election for Obama, the Republicans will consume McCain in barbaric display of blood and gore that would shock even Hillary supporters. And since McCain burned his independent and liberal bridges (remember how much they loved him in 2000? Jon Stewart practically fawned on him), he and Joe Lieberman will become political pariahs and age into obsolence. Maybe they can get adjoining villas at The Villages, lord knows they're both old enough to make the move... HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
endyss wrote:McCain lost because of McCain himself. Obama's run an excellent campaign, but it's tempered by some significant negatives that a more competent opposing candidate might have been able to capitalize on.
Prediction: the moment the news networks call the election for Obama, the Republicans will consume McCain in barbaric display of blood and gore that would shock even Hillary supporters. And since McCain burned his independent and liberal bridges (remember how much they loved him in 2000? Jon Stewart practically fawned on him), he and Joe Lieberman will become political pariahs and age into obsolence. Maybe they can get adjoining villas at The Villages, lord knows they're both old enough to make the move... I agree completely. You can already see the knives coming out for McCain. Crist in FL has fucked him. Palin is semi-rogue already. Mittens is getting all up in his shit, and all of Mittens people who work for McCain are badmouthing Palin and the campaign every chance they get. If McCain really wants to be a badass he'll quit the GOP and join Liberman's "Connecticut for Lieberman" party that he formed during the 2006 cycle, they can caucus together and talk about how their old parties are a bunch of meanies who won't let them sit on any committees. The days of a unified GOP marching lockstep are over. The 2012 GOP primary is going to be epic. What Obama negatives do you think McCain failed to exploit? I think he went after all of them, he just did it in such a clumsy way and mixed in so much lying and hypocritical attacks that it destroyed his reputation. Obama wanted a campaign focusing on policy and largely fought on that ground. McCain brings up the Ayers BS and the entire time Obama is talking about the economy and healthcare. I think that for whatever reason McCain didn't want to really engage in a genuine debate about policy so he effectively ceded that arena to Obama, instead he went all Rovian with idiotic shit about Obama being a celebrity and whatnot, which you would think would work out considering the past few elections, but the Obama campaign was completely ready for it. I don't remember the precise sequence of events, but at one point relatively early in the campaign McCain started one of their first really vicious attack over something related to the economy, something totally BS (of course) and literally within hours the Obama campaign pulled out an entire pre-packaged counter attack that rebutted the entire thing and pushed McCain's Keating5 scandal back at him. It was clear they had walked through what the GOP playbook said to do and had built up an arsenal to counter it and were just sitting on it waiting to fire back. The McCain campaign pulled back immediately and shifted into a new attack, which is all they kept doing the entire campaign because the Obama campaign has been ready for them every step of the way. They definitely landed some blows, but they missed so much who could really tell with all the wild swinging? The Obama campaign was largely defensive everywhere except in the policy arena, but they were always ready to push back hard and fast. If you read reports from people inside their HQ, it's nothing like the crazy war-room style you normally see in a campaign. Everyone is calm and focused, there isn't a bunch of people screaming and running around and freaking out. They don't get rattled. Supposedly Obama himself is very much the same way, he's always playing it cool. It really has been an impressive and innovative campaign, they are just an amazingly competent bunch of people. Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Newsie, Registered User, Server Admin
Joined: 11/6/2007
Posts: 987
Points: 783
|
Dick Cheney's Mechanical Heart wrote:What Obama negatives do you think McCain failed to exploit? I think he went after all of them, he just did it in such a clumsy way and mixed in so much lying and hypocritical attacks that it destroyed his reputation. Obama wanted a campaign focusing on policy and largely fought on that ground. McCain brings up the Ayers BS and the entire time Obama is talking about the economy and healthcare. I think that for whatever reason McCain didn't want to really engage in a genuine debate about policy so he effectively ceded that arena to Obama, instead he went all Rovian with idiotic shit about Obama being a celebrity and whatnot, which you would think would work out considering the past few elections, but the Obama campaign was completely ready for it. I don't remember the precise sequence of events, but at one point relatively early in the campaign McCain started one of their first really vicious attack over something related to the economy, something totally BS (of course) and literally within hours the Obama campaign pulled out an entire pre-packaged counter attack that rebutted the entire thing and pushed McCain's Keating5 scandal back at him. It was clear they had walked through what the GOP playbook said to do and had built up an arsenal to counter it and were just sitting on it waiting to fire back. The McCain campaign pulled back immediately and shifted into a new attack, which is all they kept doing the entire campaign because the Obama campaign has been ready for them every step of the way. They definitely landed some blows, but they missed so much who could really tell with all the wild swinging? You just answered your own question (I didn't mean specific issues he failed to exploit so much as the failed "exploitation" itself). Some credit goes to the Obama campaign and mainstream news outlets for helping frame whatever issue McCain raised in the poorest and most ineffective light possible, but McCain certainly didn't do himself any favors. HolyJaw wrote:In the end, everything Endyss said.
|
|
|
Rank: Coathanger Abortion
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/17/2006
Posts: 3,487
Points: 1,990
Location: Undisclosed Location
|
endyss wrote: Some credit goes to the [...] mainstream news outlets for helping frame whatever issue McCain raised in the poorest and most ineffective light possible [...] orly? Razor wrote:Killing people is good therapy.
|
|
|
Rank: Fuckstick
Groups: {pDs} Member, Server Admin
Joined: 5/9/2006
Posts: 775
Points: 381
|
[/quote]
How does it give any credibility to the argument that the media is covering for Obama?
Re: Donation stuff about Obama, assuming that was true - what does it matter exactly? If you can't figure out who is trying to influence you then how exactly can they influence you?
Re: AIP, why did the Palin's anti-American sessionist movement interview Michelle Obama?
The "Whitey" tape does not exist. The fact that you even say "if" really makes me concerned. Do you honestly believe that Michelle is some kind of black power radical?
This tactic is not working at all, it's not designed to win the election. At this point they are just setting up their narrative to explain why Obama beat them and we will get to hear about it for the next 8 years. They're trying to turn him into a bogeyman for people like you and make you doubt the legitmacy of his presidency. It's the same shit they always do, it's incredibly transparent and so obviously disengenous, but alas most people are unable to think critically.
Gallup sucks by the way, and national polls are meaningless, and you cherry-picked the outlier from the most recent polls. If you'd like I could pick the other outlier and say that Obama is +15, doesn't mean anything. Go look at the polling for the battleground states. Go look at where the GOP is wasting money (they're fucking on defense in Montana of all places!). Or even better, go look at early voting returns. McCain can pump out all the bullshit in the world for the next week and it isn't going to change the dynamics of the race.[/quote]
This tactic is not working at all, it's not designed to win the election.
Gallup sucks by the way, and national polls are meaningless, and you cherry-picked the outlier from the most recent polls. If you'd like I could pick the other outlier and say that Obama is +15, doesn't mean anything. Go look at the polling for the battleground states. Go look at where the GOP is wasting money (they're fucking on defense in Montana of all places!). Or even better, go look at early voting returns. McCain can pump out all the bullshit in the world for the next week and it isn't going to change the dynamics of the race.
Of course it's working, the real question is if it matters. And I do believe I said "if you believe the polls"
Rasmussen: +3 Obama. A 5 point drop.
Tipp: +3 Obama. A 4 point drop. 9.2% undecided
Gallup: Tied
At this point they are just setting up their narrative to explain why Obama beat them and we will get to hear about it for the next 8 years.
Actually the Democrats would have about two years to turn things around economically. If not, they could start losing seats in Congress. If that were to happen, then you could see another Jimmy Carter scenario. Remember, Republicans screw up, Jimmy Carter gets elected, Jimmy fails(or appears to), Ronald Reagan rules for 8 years.
They're trying to turn him into a bogeyman for people like you and make you doubt the legitimacy of his presidency. It's the same shit they always do, it's incredibly transparent and so obviously disingenuous, but alas most people are unable to think critically.
Are you new to politics? Both sides do this. I will agree with you on the most people unable to think critically statement and is why these tactics work to some degree.
How does it give any credibility to the argument that the media is covering for Obama?
Re: Donation stuff about Obama, assuming that was true - what does it matter exactly? If you can't figure out who is trying to influence you then how exactly can they influence you?
Re: AIP, why did the Palin's anti-American sessionist movement interview Michelle Obama?
The "Whitey" tape does not exist. The fact that you even say "if" really makes me concerned. Do you honestly believe that Michelle is some kind of black power radical?
This goes along with most people who for the most part read the headlines to make their decisions. I'm not saying their true, just out there as headlines.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: {pDs} Member, Registered User, Server Admin, Administration
Joined: 3/27/2008
Posts: 1,793
Points: 3,380
Location: Arizona
|
I really don't understand the McCain campaign. After 8 years of Bush, this election already lended credibility to whoever the democrats fronted. They simply had an inherent advantage - which is the perfect time to risk it by putting a black and/or female candidate out there. But even if the republicans had an inherent disadvantage... how they've played it out just really doesn't make sense to me. McCain had a lot going for him. Before the campaigns I was honestly not sure who I'd vote for. But not only did McCain make himself the sacrificial lamb by running despite the disadvantage, but he seemed to go out of his way to alienate the independent/liberal ties that actually, I think, gave him an advantage. Seeing what he's become or simply allowed others to make him... I honestly want his political career completely ended. McCain has not only hurt his reputation and chances at becoming president but has demonstrated exactly why he shouldn't be. And it doesn't help that Palin allowed herself to be a political tool - Yeah. Great way to represent women there; let a man pull you along when you're vastly under-qualified and then lose. Great role model.
|
|
|
| Users browsing this topic |
|
Guest
|