Posts Tagged ‘Political Ads’

Ron Paul Doesn’t Like “Etch-a-Sketch:” Why Not?

Sunday, March 25th, 2012

Will Paul Send Romney the Bill?

It’s hard to understand why a politician would run an ad that seeks to minimize the story that is doing the most political damage to one’s chief rival.  In my view, to hit Gingrich and Santorum while leaving Romney untouched hints at another motive.  Ron Paul’s camp is running an ad slamming the two non-Romneys for their focus on Romney Communications Direct Eric Fehrnstrom’s “Etch-a-Sketch” remark.  He apparently thinks it’s ridiculous to be focused on what he considers a sideshow, but I wonder if that’s his real objective.   After all, he’s been rather friendly with Mitt Romney, and at times it has seemed he was working on coordinating his attacks on the others with the former Massachusetts governor, who one would think would receive the most scrutiny from the Paul camp, since Romney is clearly the most liberal of the four.

Here’s the ad:

Not once in this ad are viewers informed about the nature of the controversy, although you do get a clip of Fehrnstrom’s remark,  but what viewers receive is a series of repeated iterations of Gingrich, Santorum, and media saying “Etch-a-Sketch,”  portrayed in such a way as to mock the subject.  Romney’s been playing damage control ever since his Communications Director’s remarks, and they’ve tried several approaches to change the subject.  I suppose if all else fails, you let Ron Paul’s campaign do your dirty-work, and try to downplay the meaning and impact of the “Etch-a-Sketch” remark.  Of course, this could be Paul’s way of trying to get a little attention, but whatever his motive, I think it’s dishonest to downplay the significance.  After all, if the Romney campaign will bear a resemblance to an etch-a-sketch if he secures the nomination, one would think this is information all of the other candidates would want voters to possess.  To me, this looks like an attempt to minimize the damage to Romney.  Is this part of a collusion between Paul and Romney?  Nobody’s certain but it’s odd that Paul’s campaign would posit a thesis that reduces the damage to an opponent.



Sarah Palin Responds to the Obama Attack With a Challenge

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

Putting It In Perspective

As I reported on Monday, Obama for America ran an ugly little ad designed to paint former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and “far-right” conservatives as “racist.”  In addition to simply lying and omitting much of the video clip from Hannity used in the ad, it was factually inaccurate in every way.  Worse, the ad itself seemed to support the actual case Governor Palin had made in the Hannity appearance, as Ben Shapiro on Breitbart makes plain.  Governor Palin responded on Tuesday via Facebook, challenging President Obama to a debate since he’s made her the focus of his attacks.  While many conservatives wish Sarah Palin was running, the fact is that she’s not, and we ought to ask what sort of president goes after private citizens rather than his opponents in making his attacks.  In part, Gov. Palin responded by reminding readers that this is a typical leftist diversionary tactic:

“The far Left continues to believe American voters are not smart enough to grasp the diversionary tactics it employs to distract us from the issues our President just doesn’t want to talk about – issues that affect us all every day and must be addressed.”

This is quite true.  Rather than talk about the pressing issues facing our nation, including the skyrocketing costs of energy and food, persistently high unemployment, and green energy scams for the sake of political cronies, Barack Obama has tried these last several weeks to shift the focus onto anything but the job he has done as President.  Naturally, the state of the Union at present isn’t conducive to his re-election, and as Governor Palin points out, he wastes no time in changing the subject, this time, using her as the target of his attacks and his narratives about conservatives.  Gov. Palin happily fields the challenge:

“I’m not running for any office, but I’m more than happy to accept the dubious honor of being Barack Obama’s “enemy of the week” if that includes the opportunity to debate him on the issues Americans are actually concerned about. (Remember when I said you don’t need a title to make a difference?)”

Isn’t it funny?  In successive weeks, President Obama has had to resort to attacking Rush Limbaugh, and now Sarah Palin, neither of whom is seeking the Presidency.  Why is it that he can’t focus on the question of the Presidency?  Obviously, it’s because we would then necessarily focus on his record, and he might actually get the vetting the media didn’t conduct in 2008.  Sarah Palin states a laundry list that covers a good deal of the shortcomings of this president:

“Just off the top of my head, a few of these concerning issues include: a debt crisis that has us hurtling towards a Greek-style collapse, entitlement programs going bankrupt, a credit downgrade for the first time in our history, a government takeover of the health care industry that makes care more expensive and puts a rationing panel of faceless bureaucrats between you and your doctor (aka a “death panel”), $4 and $5 gas at the pump exacerbated by an anti-drilling agenda that rejects good paying energy sector jobs and makes us more dependent on dangerous foreign regimes, a war in Afghanistan that seems unfocused and unending, a global presidential apology tour that’s made us look feeble and ridiculous, a housing market in the tank, the longest streak of high unemployment since World War II, private-sector job creators and industry strangled by burdensome regulations and an out-of-control Obama EPA, an attack on the Constitutional protection of religious liberty, an attack on private industry in right-to-work states, crony capitalism run amok in an administration in bed with their favored cronies to the detriment of genuine free market capitalism, green energy pay-to-play kickbacks to Obama campaign donors, and a Justice Department still stonewalling on a bungled operation that armed violent Mexican drug lords and led to the deaths of hundreds of innocent people”

That’s quite a hefty list, and as Governor Palin points out, it’s not exhaustive, but it offers just a sample of all the things Barack Obama seeks to avoid by shifting the focus onto others, including Sarah Palin.   She finishes with this, and I think it’s indicative of the sort of campaign that I hope the current crop of GOP candidates will eventually run:  We need to focus on Obama, his past associations, and the obvious philosophical distinctions between what they offer, versus what Barack Obama has wrought, and what sort of thinking has led to this disastrous Obama administration, and all its negligent or even subversive policies:

“This latest ad is quite odd, but also quite telling. It shows that our President sure seems fearful of discussing the economy, energy prices, and all the other problems people need addressed. And intended or not, now that his ad opens up the discussion of Barack Obama’s radical past associations and the radical philosophy that shaped his ideas about his promised “fundamental transformation” of our country, I welcome the media to join ordinary Americans in finally vetting Barack Obama. The media failed to do so in 2008 to the detriment of us all. Maybe this time around they can do their job.”

I’d encourage you to take a look at the whole response directly.  Governor Palin doesn’t waste much time defending against an out-of-context attack on her statements, instead turning this around and placing the focus where it belongs: Squarely on Barack Obama, and his wretched policies, and even more wretch politics.



Romney Lies – Caught on Video

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012

Here’s another web ad by somebody who truly dislikes Mitt Romney.  It’s a scathing hit-piece on Romney’s flip-floppery and the author promises more in the series. It’s a little lengthy, but the video focuses on economics, taxes, and his record as Governor of Massachusetts, which is the correct place to begin. This video makes the case strongly for why Mitt Romney simply isn’t conservative enough to lead the United States out of its current troubles.


Ron Paul’s Mitt Romney Ad Is a Hoot!

Saturday, February 4th, 2012

Perfect Android Politician?

I have been watching to see if somebody would send me a link to an anti-Mitt ad run by Ron Paul, and my real focus was on televised ads.  I’m still looking for evidence(since I don’t live in any of the first five states) to suggest he ran one on television as part of a paid advertising buy.  I know he did run lots of anti-Gingrich and at least a few anti-Santorum ads in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, but I wasn’t there to see all of those ads.  Now comes this ad from early January, and I don’t know if it actually aired anywhere, or has been merely a web ad.(There are many more of the latter floating around.)  This ad aims squarely at Romney, and it is exceedingly effective.  If this ad aired anywhere, and you know about it, please let me know.  If not, it should be brought up to date(Perry is a minor player in the ad) and aired somewhere, because it’s devastating. Truly:

So Shocking, I’m Speechless – Video

Saturday, January 28th, 2012

"We didn't do any work with the government."

I realize this is a political ad, paid for by a SuperPAC, but frankly, I’m not sure what to say about this.  I am astonished. If this is substantially true, and so far, after ninety minutes of frantic research indicating that it is, I can conclude only that Mitt Romney shouldn’t be let within sight of the White House.  Setting aside any general misgivings about the Medicare program, this is simply unconscionable, and that he was able to carry this off, and disclaim all knowledge?  Unbelievable!   Watch this, and let me know what you think:

I guess it’s only “crony capitalism” if you’re permitted to do this by sanction of law.  What is it when you do this, but get to walk away, despite the illegalities?