Mitt Romney, too weak to kill Bin Laden

Abdul Alhazred wrote:

Who exactly are Obama's "base" anyway?

Anaxagoras wrote:

Yes. And as I pointed out already, Mitt Romney started it when he accused Obama of being a weak sister on foreign policy in his book.

Are you getting paid to carry that water?

corplinx wrote:

Anaxagoras wrote:

Yes. And as I pointed out already, Mitt Romney started it when he accused Obama of being a weak sister on foreign policy in his book.

Are you getting paid to carry that water?

Are you?

I still don't see how what was said was any nastier than any other bullshit that has been said in any other election ever. And I suspect it will prove quite mild compared to the stuff that will be said when the general election gets into full swing. The only thing that differentiates it from any of that is the fact that Obama said it.

One can only speculate why you so openly feel that one side should refrain from going negative, but not the other...

Nyarlathotep wrote:

corplinx wrote:

Anaxagoras wrote:

Yes. And as I pointed out already, Mitt Romney started it when he accused Obama of being a weak sister on foreign policy in his book.

Are you getting paid to carry that water?

Are you?

I still don't see how what was said was any nastier than any other bullshit that has been said in any other election ever. And I suspect it will prove quite mild compared to the stuff that will be said when the general election gets into full swing. The only thing that differentiates it from any of that is the fact that Obama said it.

One can only speculate why you so openly feel that one side should refrain from going negative, but not the other...

There is lot's of negative campaigning going on for both sides that I don't comment or talk about. Maybe I don't excuse this particularly low ad as it is a step over whatever imaginary line exists, the Johnson ad being another example.

What are these lines you speak of? There have never been lines. Only attacks that are more or less effective than others. The closest thing to a line is the decision a campaign has to make as to whether a particular line of attack will be effective or not. And somehow I don't think that 'lack of effectiveness' is your gripe with this ad. So really, I am curious because I truly don't see it, how is this ad 'over the line' in a way that he bajillions of negative campaign ads you don't complain about are not?