Attack on "the real elitist"

Rich
Member Offline
In case you have not seen this atack on McCain's wealth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek3jAkx9m10

I admit that if he were my candidate, I'd say it's irrelevant, but considering the stupid things the McCain campaign has attacked Obama for, I'd say it's a reasonable counterpunch. But it's not from the Obama campaign, so I wonder if the MSM will pick it up the way they did the Paris/Britney ad.

Does it seem out of bounds to the McCain supporters on this list?
Anonymous
It is an Obama ad, I believe, Rich. Everyone I know in the MSM is reporting it as one, and marveling at the swift response. It's aimed at McCain not being able to remember how many houses he owns in a conversation with Politico staff yesterday.

It's fine for Obama to say he owns only one house, but he's not exactly a middle-class guy with earnings over $4 million last year alone and two more books coming out. I wish neither candidate would go down this road. It's irrelevant and, of course, everyone who wins the presidential nomination these days is a millionaire. Bill Clinton was not, but everyone since then has been.
Rich
Member Offline
Anonymous wrote:It is an Obama ad, I believe, Rich. Everyone I know in the MSM is reporting it as one, and marveling at the swift response. It's aimed at McCain not being able to remember how many houses he owns in a conversation with Politico staff yesterday.

I saw the Obama ad after I saw the one I was referring to, which is much longer and more detailed than the Obama spot.
Here is the Obama ad:
http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=vpmFd25tRqo&rel=1&eurl=&iurl=http%3A//i3.ytimg.com/vi/vpmFd25tRqo/default.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskKWfwfu7ypfaNfHKk8TNwlG&use_get_video_info=1&load_modules=1&fs=1&hl=en
The one I was referring to is this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek3jAkx9m10

Ironic that the longer video has the shorter URL!
Rich
Member Offline
Speaking of McCain's houses, the two blogs by Josh Marshall at http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ are fun reading on the difficulty of counting houses.
Anonymous
Thanks for pointing out the difference, Rich. My error; I didn't have time to watch either.
Anonymous
Rich, did you see this?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0808/Obama_campaign_to_deploy_surrogates_to_hit_McCains_houses.html

Barack Obama's campaign, moving rapidly to exploit what they see as a major opportunity, is deploying high-profile surrogates in 16 states across the country today to highlight John McCain's uncertainty yesterday about how many houses he owns, the Democrat's campaign tells Politico.

Governors, members of Congress and state legislators will hold conference calls and press conferences in front of homes to draw attention to the issue. Party leaders such as Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, on the stump in Ohio and Iowa respectively, wil move to incorporate the matter into their remarks on the campaign trail today in an effort to draw local media attention to the story.

Further, some state parties will hold contests in which Democrats seek out real voters who don't know how many houses they own.

And in other states, ordinary citizens who have been victim of the mortgage crunch will hold press availabilities to contrast their plight with McCain's wealth.

The aggressive move on Obama's part is in keeping with a shift in campaign tactics since his vacation. Obama and his campaign aides have both ramped up their rhetoric in recent days. This latest effort reflects a willingness to hit McCain much harder and to veer from conventional issue-based attacks to the sort of character assaults that have marked the GOP's campaign against Obama as well as their effort against John Kerry in 2004.


You asked what McCain supporters thought of this in your original post. I'm not a McCain supporter, but this strikes me as overkill.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It's fine for Obama to say he owns only one house, but he's not exactly a middle-class guy with earnings over $4 million last year alone and two more books coming out. I wish neither candidate would go down this road. It's irrelevant and, of course, everyone who wins the presidential nomination these days is a millionaire. Bill Clinton was not, but everyone since then has been.


ITA. Neither party should go there. Remember what happened to Fred "I Can Out Po' Boy Anyone" Thompson? Honestly it seems like the Britney-Paris smackdown was more relevant. At Ms. Hilton talked about actual platform issues.

Although it is kind of funny that McCranky defined rich as $5 million. Better luck next year Barack!
Anonymous
McCain was being tongue and cheek about five million being wealthy and even said he was sure the Obama people would make something of it and of course they did. Who cares how many homes or condos someone has. The reality was that he might have been confused because some were investment properties and his wife (who is really wealthy) may have had additional real estate as part of her trust. I loved the McCain response that Obama who bought a house with help from a soon to be felon shouldn't go there. Not to mention that Obama himself is rich and good for him on that-wealth is a good thing and not something to be embarrassed about.
Rich
Member Offline
Anonymous wrote:McCain was being tongue and cheek about five million being wealthy and even said he was sure the Obama people would make something of it and of course they did. Who cares how many homes or condos someone has. The reality was that he might have been confused because some were investment properties and his wife (who is really wealthy) may have had additional real estate as part of her trust. I loved the McCain response that Obama who bought a house with help from a soon to be felon shouldn't go there. Not to mention that Obama himself is rich and good for him on that-wealth is a good thing and not something to be embarrassed about.

I think the don't-throw-bricks-if-you-live-in-a-glass-house argument applies much more to McCain, who fired first. The ad works because it fits in with the argument that Republicans measure the economy by how the corporations and the wealthy are affected. The criterion the press uses for the ads is effectiveness, not purity, so I doubt Obama will go back to purely positive campaigning, even if some of us like purity.

By the way, forgive me for nitpicking, but that's "tongue in cheek".
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: