Maybe......if you recall McCain said he would not allow some stuff to be used in his campaign.

I have an existing thread on here about how Obama's team offered Rev Wright $150,000.00 to just shut up...how Obama met with him right before the election in Nov 2008 and said to the pastor......paraphrasing....your problem Rev is that you have to tell the truth all the time....a very very telling thing for the President to say, especially to his mentor.

NOw this...

"A conservative super PAC is considering an advertising plan to attack President Obama's ties to Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., his controversial former spiritual advisor, and "do what what John McCain would not let us do" during the 2008 presidential campaign"

Super PAC plans to attack Obama

The Obama campaign has said it would "kill" Romney and refeferred to anyone campaigning against the President as "contract killers".....

Now Romney himself, at least publicly, is opposed to this..but we shall see.

I am now to the point where we do what we have to do within the law to get this guy out of the WH, and then address those issues that VK posts about...you know things like the economy, spending, etc.

In the last week or so I have completely lost respect for the President...I always was opposed to his policies and his direction but it is further than that now.

The link below is to the NY Times on the same story...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us...pagewanted=all

i think if senator mccain had not been such a sweet guy last time, we might have won the election by pointing out all these radical ties...i hope romney is not going to be a weak candidate by not using fire to fight fire....you can be sure the dems will use every little thing at their disposal, and we should , too.
we cannot depend on those who listen to talk radio or fox to tell all their friends what they hear....romney must get the word out himself. he spent millions to attack the conservatives, so i hope he will do the same for the incumbent.

Originally Posted by chachacha

i think if senator mccain had not been such a sweet guy last time, we might have won the election by pointing out all these radical ties...i hope romney is not going to be a weak candidate by not using fire to fight fire....you can be sure the dems will use every little thing at their disposal, and we should , too.
we cannot depend on those who listen to talk radio or fox to tell all their friends what they hear....romney must get the word out himself. he spent millions to attack the conservatives, so i hope he will do the same for the incument.

McCain would have won if he would have left Palin in Alaska.

McCain would hve lost by a much larger margin if he hadn't picked Palin.

The political money running this campaign, just like in 2008, have partisans on both sides enraged and incented to mount personal attacks the other candidate. Understanding and discussing the issues and knowing where each of the candidates stands? No way. We're willing to be influenced as the result of being flogged continually by mean-spirited advertising by super PAC's which the candidates claim to have nothing to do with.

What BS! We'll wind up with a POTUS that no one will trust and will begin hating even before inauguration day.

What a way to pick a leader of this country.

Two comments on this!

First, polls have shown that American voters think that Mitt Romney is completely out of touch with Americans in general by around 20 points in back of Pres. Obama. If their Super Pac does run such an offensive ad on television, it will truly be the kiss of death for their campaign. Voters do not want to see such negativity - but if that is all you have to campaign with it just might happen.

Start living in the present and not what happened in 1991 or 2007.

Stop the namecalling and focus on issues.

if the truth is negative, don't shoot the messenger....the dem campaign is already trying to paint romney as a ruthless businessman and brings up losses by bain capital which did not happen while he was with them...i think outright lies are more offensive to voters than pointing out true questionable ties and actions of the president. the genius of the Rev Wright discussion was that the PAC did not have to spend a penny to mount the campaign, but people again were talking about this issue just by breathing a leak of it! that is good, save the money for even more blatant and important issues.

Originally Posted by chachacha

if the truth is negative, don't shoot the messenger....the dem campaign is already trying to paint romney as a ruthless businessman and brings up losses by bain capital which did not happen while he was with them...i think outright lies are more offensive to voters than pointing out true questionable ties and actions of the president. the genius of the Rev Wright discussion was that the PAC did not have to spend a penny to mount the campaign, but people again were talking about this issue just by breathing a leak of it! that is good, save the money for even more blatant and important issues.

Oh goodie!!