Obama Strikes Back With Own Smear Campaign

[ShakenStirred]

Originally Posted by mrbob

I don't think he had any choice.

Especially since McCain/Palin have gone negative with their endless 'guilt by association' speaches and tv ads. At least Obama is merely playing clips from that historical event, showing modern voters how corrupt McCain was back then, and inferring that he still is a disaster when it comes to issues of the economy.

Do I wish both candidates would just stick to the issues - YES...

But if one side goes completely negative for the last month of the campaign, what can the other side do?

Honestly, I don't buy into this "guilt by association" stuff. In my personal life, I choose who I associate with, and if I associate with people who are of unethical, criminal or otherwise questionable background, than I am going to be judged by the company I keep. And most likely, I am keeping that company for a reason, not because I just want to have to defend myself.

That being said, Obama is NOT "guilty" by association, but rather just plain guilty. He chose to associate with Ayers, Reverend Wright, the Acorn group and other highly questionable individuals, and therefore, he made choices in his life that now, in running for President of the United States, he must be made to answer for.

These are not just pick pockets or minor shoplifters he has chosen to associate with in his life, but rather some very devious and evil people who have no remorse for their actions. He CHOSE to associate with them, and now he must be made to defend his decisions. It's something every President elect should be made to do. I believe in the Keating 5 response that Obama is using, court hearings have occurred yeats ago, sentences were handed out, and the issue was aleady "Answered" in courts of law.

Obama has NOt answered for anything, probably because he has not had to face it from anyone, as the media constantaly coddles him.

If the Keating 5 answer isn't a desperate attempt to distract from associations that Obama needs to answer, I don't know what is.

[normie]

Originally Posted by BlueWillowPlate

I'm not happy about this.
IMHO, there are so many other reasons to vote for Obama, and it tarnishes his claim to be a different kind of candidate.

I agree, wish we could avoid the "silly season" as they call the last few weeks before an election. But, sadly, it's become a fact of life. There are voters who want a POTUS that is willing to get into a scrap or two. I guess the idea is it's better to have a few bits of tarnish than to remained untouched--and as a result, unelected.

[GregW]

This thread is an example of the two American cultures response to conflict. One wants Obama to “rise above this sort of thing” by ignoring the bully’s taunts and the other wants Obama to fight back. The first response of ignoring the insults is what cost John Kerry the last election. His Puritan/Quaker culture abhors conflict and shuns anyone that starts fights or fights back. I was appalled when Kerry did not respond to the Swift boat liars with an all out attack on their credibility. Obama cannot afford to do the same.

I want Obama to not only fight back but fight back with a fury that destroys the McCain/Palin bid for president by exposing all of the crooked and corrupt dealings from McCain’s deals with his Vietnamese captors to Palin’s deals with the Alaska energy barons. By fighting back ruthlessly and relentlessly during and after the campaign Obama will establish that he is willing to fight not only for his election but for himself and, by example, the rest of us. Politics is not a sport for gentlemen. It is not a sport at all.