Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 27072
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#1 Post by Bob Juch » Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:51 pm

Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 9133
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#2 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:50 pm

Bob Juch wrote:Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.

User avatar
minimetoo26
Royal Pain In Everyone's Ass
Posts: 7874
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:51 am
Location: No Fixed Address

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#3 Post by minimetoo26 » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:31 pm

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.
*SNORT!!!!*

Oh, the irony...

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#4 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:20 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.
And this differs from the conservatives' propagandizing how?

User avatar
peacock2121
Posts: 18451
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:58 am

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#5 Post by peacock2121 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:00 am

minimetoo26 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.
*SNORT!!!!*

Oh, the irony...
tee hee

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3208
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#6 Post by Weyoun » Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:00 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:Talk about the pot calling the kettle blacker!

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/14 ... r-the-top/
I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.
And this differs from the conservatives' propagandizing how?
It's not in front of me twelve times a day. Conservative propagandizing doesn't seeth with quite as much contempt, either. So, yeah.

User avatar
peacock2121
Posts: 18451
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:58 am

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#7 Post by peacock2121 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:03 am

Weyoun wrote:
NellyLunatic1980 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote: I'm pretty much staying out of this election discussion, because I don't think either candidate is worth a hoot, but I must say, Bob, your constant propagandizing is very annoying.
And this differs from the conservatives' propagandizing how?
It's not in front of me twelve times a day. Conservative propagandizing doesn't seeth with quite as much contempt, either. So, yeah.
Wow.

Perspective is everything.

User avatar
gsabc
Posts: 6493
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Federal Bureaucracy City
Contact:

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#8 Post by gsabc » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:15 am

Weyoun wrote:Conservative propagandizing doesn't seeth with quite as much contempt, either.
Merely with more volume.
I just ordered chicken and an egg from Amazon. I'll let you know.

User avatar
Rexer25
It's all his fault. That'll be $10.
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:57 am
Location: Just this side of nowhere

Re: Rove: Both Campaigns' Ads Are Over the Top

#9 Post by Rexer25 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:23 am

Erased because I didn't see Pea's reply.
Enough already. It's my fault! Get over it!

That'll be $10, please.

User avatar
Appa23
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm

#10 Post by Appa23 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:28 am

I wonder if someone compiled the posts by Juch and Nelly (for the left) and BiT and Flock (for the right) over the past month, which side has posted the most political posts and used the most "hate-filled" language?

Seeing that Juch has posted links everyday to every scurrilous rumor dreamed up by liberal bloggers like Daily Kos and Huffington, and Nelly is Nelly, I have my perpsective, but I wonder what the concrete facts are?
Last edited by Appa23 on Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rexer25
It's all his fault. That'll be $10.
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:57 am
Location: Just this side of nowhere

#11 Post by Rexer25 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:30 am

Appa23 wrote:I wonder if someone compiled the posts by Juch and Nelly (for the left) and BiT and Spock (for the right) over the past month, which side has posted the most political posts and used the most "hate-filled" language?

Seeing that Juch has posted links everyday to every scurrilous rumor dreamed up by liberal bloggers like Daily Kos and Huffington, and Nelly is Nelly, I have my perpsective, but I wonder what the concrete facts are?
You should include SSS as well, prolly instead of BiT, for including links to rumors.
Enough already. It's my fault! Get over it!

That'll be $10, please.

User avatar
flockofseagulls104
Posts: 9133
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

#12 Post by flockofseagulls104 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:30 am

I don't see anyone posting anti-Obama or Biden talking point posts several times a day. Do you? (SNORT).

But we can be sure we know every little thing that the DNC wants to disseminate from Bob.

User avatar
Appa23
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm

#13 Post by Appa23 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:38 am

Rexer25 wrote:
Appa23 wrote:I wonder if someone compiled the posts by Juch and Nelly (for the left) and BiT and Spock (for the right) over the past month, which side has posted the most political posts and used the most "hate-filled" language?

Seeing that Juch has posted links everyday to every scurrilous rumor dreamed up by liberal bloggers like Daily Kos and Huffington, and Nelly is Nelly, I have my perpsective, but I wonder what the concrete facts are?
You should include SSS as well, prolly instead of BiT, for including links to rumors.
First, one would have to be a serious "Kool Aid drinker" to call SSS a conservative. Second, what rumors? I know that SSS consistently raises Rezko, Ayers, and Wright, but those are not rumors.

User avatar
peacock2121
Posts: 18451
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:58 am

#14 Post by peacock2121 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:41 am

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I don't see anyone posting anti-Obama or Biden talking point posts several times a day. Do you? (SNORT).

But we can be sure we know every little thing that the DNC wants to disseminate from Bob.
Truth is, I don't pay attention to such stuff, I just read the stuff people have to say about the stuff.

I think I still have prejudice from previous messes where it felt to me like the right side was way louder and meaner.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 27072
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

#15 Post by Bob Juch » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:44 am

Appa23 wrote:
Rexer25 wrote:
Appa23 wrote:I wonder if someone compiled the posts by Juch and Nelly (for the left) and BiT and Spock (for the right) over the past month, which side has posted the most political posts and used the most "hate-filled" language?

Seeing that Juch has posted links everyday to every scurrilous rumor dreamed up by liberal bloggers like Daily Kos and Huffington, and Nelly is Nelly, I have my perpsective, but I wonder what the concrete facts are?
You should include SSS as well, prolly instead of BiT, for including links to rumors.
First, one would have to be a serious "Kool Aid drinker" to call SSS a conservative. Second, what rumors? I know that SSS consistently raises Rezko, Ayers, and Wright, but those are not rumors.
No, that's scurrilous garbage.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Rexer25
It's all his fault. That'll be $10.
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:57 am
Location: Just this side of nowhere

#16 Post by Rexer25 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:59 am

Appa23 wrote:
Rexer25 wrote:
Appa23 wrote:I wonder if someone compiled the posts by Juch and Nelly (for the left) and BiT and Spock (for the right) over the past month, which side has posted the most political posts and used the most "hate-filled" language?

Seeing that Juch has posted links everyday to every scurrilous rumor dreamed up by liberal bloggers like Daily Kos and Huffington, and Nelly is Nelly, I have my perpsective, but I wonder what the concrete facts are?
You should include SSS as well, prolly instead of BiT, for including links to rumors.
First, one would have to be a serious "Kool Aid drinker" to call SSS a conservative. Second, what rumors? I know that SSS consistently raises Rezko, Ayers, and Wright, but those are not rumors.
I didn't mean as a conservative, but as a critic of Obama. He posted the original link to the "Whitey" video, and a video of some junkie who made slanderous remarks about what the junkie and Obama allegedly did together. Neither of which have been proven true, but in SSS's eyes have just been covered up, or worse.

and not all the "allegations" about the 3 prior mentioned men have been proven.
Enough already. It's my fault! Get over it!

That'll be $10, please.

User avatar
MarleysGh0st
Posts: 27966
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Elsewhere

#17 Post by MarleysGh0st » Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:03 am

Appa23 wrote: First, one would have to be a serious "Kool Aid drinker" to call SSS a conservative.
No, but he appears to believe strongly in the old adage that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so he's a fellow traveler, now.

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#18 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:27 am

It's one thing if Republicans have an argument against Sen. Obama that is based on the truth. It's another thing if Republicans have an argument against Sen. Obama that is based on opinions, rumors, insinuations, and obvious lies that they or some media bobblehead pass off as the truth.

I don't have problems with people in the former group... but unfortunately, not many of those kinds of Republicans exist in this country anymore. Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Bob Lafollette, and Everett Dirksen are all dead... and if they were alive today, they would be pissed at how low the Republican Party has stooped over the last 7 years in order to win elections.

User avatar
nitrah55
Posts: 1613
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:46 am
Location: Section 239, Yankee Stadium

#19 Post by nitrah55 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:49 am

To get back to the original topic of this thread, I just want to quote my friend, comedian John Fugelsang, who said that having Karl Rove say your ads are dishonest is like having Amy Winehouse stage your intervention.
I am about 25% sure of this.

User avatar
minimetoo26
Royal Pain In Everyone's Ass
Posts: 7874
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:51 am
Location: No Fixed Address

#20 Post by minimetoo26 » Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:50 am

nitrah55 wrote:To get back to the original topic of this thread, I just want to quote my friend, comedian John Fugelsang, who said that having Karl Rove say your ads are dishonest is like having Amy Winehouse stage your intervention.
That was part of the delicious irony!

User avatar
Sir_Galahad
Posts: 1516
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: In The Heartland

#21 Post by Sir_Galahad » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:05 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:It's one thing if Republicans have an argument against Sen. Obama that is based on the truth.
TRUTH? You can't handle the truth!

http://teapottantrums.typepad.com/index ... obama.html
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke

Perhaps the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about...

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24398
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

#22 Post by silverscreenselect » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:12 am

Rexer25 wrote:
Appa23 wrote:
Rexer25 wrote: You should include SSS as well, prolly instead of BiT, for including links to rumors.
First, one would have to be a serious "Kool Aid drinker" to call SSS a conservative. Second, what rumors? I know that SSS consistently raises Rezko, Ayers, and Wright, but those are not rumors.
I didn't mean as a conservative, but as a critic of Obama. He posted the original link to the "Whitey" video, and a video of some junkie who made slanderous remarks about what the junkie and Obama allegedly did together. Neither of which have been proven true, but in SSS's eyes have just been covered up, or worse.

and not all the "allegations" about the 3 prior mentioned men have been proven.
My mention of the "Whitey" video gave my opinion that based on the person who brought up the subject, it probably existed. This is the same as if I said that I believed UFO's have landed here. Obviously, I can't prove it, but I might sincerely believe it and state my opinion. I do feel that there are a lot of things about Obama that the Republicans will bring up at the right time, which may be coming in the next week or two. I always said that when they do bring things up, some may be true and others may not but that he will be hard pressed to deal with them when they do hit the mainstream.

After what Obama and the press has done to Palin, he's not going to be able to stonewall any inquiry into new allegations about his own history and background, and the press is going to be forced into covering them as well.

Obama's connections to Rezko, Wright, Ayers, and others are proven, but the press refuses to dig deeper or to adequately publicize them and is always eager to drop any inquiry when Obama cries foul.

The latest story about Obama, reported in today's New York Post and on Fox News is that he tried to get Iraqi leaders during his July trip to delay an agreement about drawing down US troops until after the elections and his administration took over. These are right wing media outlets, but the article quotes Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as a source by name.

Wonder when Charlie Gibson will be asking Obama about this one.

http://tinyurl.com/6htsb6

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3208
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

#23 Post by Weyoun » Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:21 pm

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:It's one thing if Republicans have an argument against Sen. Obama that is based on the truth. It's another thing if Republicans have an argument against Sen. Obama that is based on opinions, rumors, insinuations, and obvious lies that they or some media bobblehead pass off as the truth.

I don't have problems with people in the former group... but unfortunately, not many of those kinds of Republicans exist in this country anymore. Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Bob Lafollette, and Everett Dirksen are all dead... and if they were alive today, they would be pissed at how low the Republican Party has stooped over the last 7 years in order to win elections.
I don't think it is anything the Republicans have done. In 2000 and in 2008, the Dems should have won in a cakewalk. But they keep letting out the dirty little secret of their party: they view the vast majority of voters with great contempt. Maybe it's deserved. But, guess what? That approach doesn't exactly win elections.

Post Reply