McCain campaign: Obama spreading 'smears' about Palin

[Hatuey]

McCain camp: Questions on Palin's party a 'smear' - Yahoo! News

ST. PAUL, Minn. - John McCain's campaign said Tuesday that rival Barack Obama's campaign was spreading "smears" about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's past political affiliations. Yet, some of Palin's previous political activities are a matter of dispute.
ADVERTISEMENT

At issue are claims by members of the Alaskan Independence Party that Palin was once associated with it. The party, some of whose members have advocated secession from the United States, wants to place all federal lands in Alaska under state control.

The McCain campaign released voter registration documents Tuesday dating to 1990 in which Palin lists herself as a Republican. Campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982, and has never been a member of the Alaskan Independence Party.

Palin addressed the Independence Party's state convention by video earlier this year, welcoming the party to Fairbanks. She gave no indication of a current or past connection to the party.

You mean its' not okay to use guilty by association fallacies? If it's true Obama should be reprimanded.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Republicans tend to not inherit the irony gene.

 

[Zyphlin]

With all the democrats that seem to be of the belief that using a tactic that your enemy uses is perfectly and completely fine and vindicates you morally, I'm surprised they have such issues with the supposed "torture" of Al-Qaeda members.

I haven't really got into the whole AIP thing as it seemed like a lot of misinformation right off the bat. Will be interesting to see where it goes and if the Obama campaign really were trying to push out and capitalize on bad information.

 

[Ikari]

The ol' pot calling the kettle black eh? Well no side is honest in this thing, both sides are going to engage in smear and yell when the other does so against them. It's just what you get when you put together two really crappy candidates.

 

[Captain America]

Well, the people fussin' about the smears coming from the left have to realize that the rightwing smear machine gave the green light to these sort of tactics many years back. The hens have come home to roost. Ain't karhma a bitch? We all owe a debt of gratitude to the SwiftBoaters....NOT.

What goes around comes around I suppose. :rofl

 

[nikitas3.com]

The Democrats are going to use every tactic they can to smear Palin. She is their worst nightmare - a strong woman who is not a Democrat. Andrea Mitchell of NBC even said that educated women won't vote for Palin. Talk about overt elitism.

How about Palin's hard-working blue-collar husband? Normally you would expect Democrats to embrace this union guy. But now they are dragging out a DWI from 22 years ago.

Desperation anyone? You can smell it. And their tactics are going to backfire. They already have. Obama should be 20 points ahead of McCain. Instead, he is an average about 3 points ahead and the the campaign is just beginning.

Meanwhile Obama has associated with a known terrorist and the media are trying to cover it up. These Annenberg papers are going to derail Obama when some 527s start putting out ads in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania about his past ties to William Ayers. Don't think they aren't coming, friends. And when they hit, they are going to hit hard. Barack who?

The big fear of Democrats is that Palin will clean up the corruption in Washington. Socialism is an ideology of wealth appropriation and corruption. The heart of the Democrat party is in urban political machines which are all corrupt and everybody knows it. Some people won't say it, however.

Democrats need to try and destroy Palin because she is the Next Big Thing in American conservatism, just like they tried to destroy Reagan and Clarence Thomas. They didn't get Hillary. Now they are deathly afraid that the first woman in the White House will be... a Republican.

Please visit my website at welcome to nikitas for more.

 

[jfuh]

The Democrats are going to use every tactic they can to smear Palin. She is their worst nightmare - a strong woman who is not a Democrat. Andrea Mitchell of NBC even said that educated women won't vote for Palin. Talk about overt elitism.

How about Palin's hard-working blue-collar husband? Normally you would expect Democrats to embrace this union guy. But now they are dragging out a DWI from 22 years ago.

Desperation anyone? You can smell it. And their tactics are going to backfire. They already have. Obama should be 20 points ahead of McCain. Instead, he is an average about 3 points ahead and the the campaign is just beginning.

Meanwhile Obama has associated with a known terrorist and the media are trying to cover it up. These Annenberg papers are going to derail Obama when some 527s start putting out ads in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania about his past ties to William Ayers. Don't think they aren't coming, friends. And when they hit, they are going to hit hard. Barack who?

The big fear of Democrats is that Palin will clean up the corruption in Washington. Socialism is an ideology of wealth appropriation and corruption. The heart of the Democrat party is in urban political machines which are all corrupt and everybody knows it. Some people won't say it, however.

Democrats need to try and destroy Palin because she is the Next Big Thing in American conservatism, just like they tried to destroy Reagan and Clarence Thomas. They didn't get Hillary. Now they are deathly afraid that the first woman in the White House will be... a Republican.

Please visit my website at welcome to nikitas for more.

No, I doubt anyone is going to be visiting you website.

 

[jfuh]

Interesting how since the selection of Palin, republican's are suddenly growing a moral fiber and very clearly identifying how negative character assassinations are bad. More so how amazingly they're screaming foul now.

First they question Obama's patriotism, slam Michelle for her comment, suggest that Obama is a closet radical muslim, attack Chelsea for being attacked, calling it all fair game and that any politician should be able to take such scrutiny. But now when the tables are turned and Michelle has "quesitonable" past associations and they are being brought to light, republican's seem no longer capable of accepting this "scrutiny".

 

[PeteEU]

Other than the rumour that the last baby was not hers but her daughters (and yes this was smear based on no evidence), what smear are they talking about?

Pointing out facts and comments is not "smear".

And what smears are coming from Obama himself or his team?

 

[Panther]

Yawn....... wake me when/if you find out that the AIP is a racist, hate filled organization that was the primary moral counselor for Palin. Or you find out she's so radical she even had them marry her and her husband.

 

[jfuh]

Other than the rumour that the last baby was not hers but her daughters (and yes this was smear based on no evidence), what smear are they talking about?

Pointing out facts and comments is not "smear".

And what smears are coming from Obama himself or his team?

How lame are you pete? Didn't you know that anything that shines a dark light on republicans is under the belt smear and the agenda of a liberal controlled leftist media.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Well, the people fussin' about the smears coming from the left have to realize that the rightwing smear machine gave the green light to these sort of tactics many years back. The hens have come home to roost. Ain't karhma a bitch? We all owe a debt of gratitude to the SwiftBoaters....NOT.

What goes around comes around I suppose. :rofl

you mean it didn't start before then? :lol:

 

[Zyphlin]

How lame are you pete? Didn't you know that anything that shines a dark light on republicans is under the belt smear and the agenda of a liberal controlled leftist media.

So aside from left wing bloggers claiming her babies not her...

You're telling me we wouldn't be hearing its a smear and a sexist thing to be questioning a candidates parenting skills for accepting a VP nod if it was a democrat female...or the question would even come up if it was a male?

You're telling me you wouldn't be hearing its a smear to have the pregnancy of a 17 year old child of a candidate become an issue widely discussed by the media and online. At the same time, blaming the candidates policy on sex ed for them failing to be a good parent, despite no evidence the child was in anything other than normal sex ed?

You're telling me that dragging up and making an issue out of the candidates partners DUI 20+ years ago wouldn't be considered a smear and a non-issue?

You're telling me claims that the person was part of a possible radical group that supposedly wanted to secede from the United States (granted the seriousness of the notion is in question) when voting registration doesn't back this up and the candidate denies it wouldn't be called a "Smear" and a partisan attack?

Yes, besides the horrible disgusting smear that her own daughter isn't her own (with one poster in here even putting forth in one post the notion that the baby may not even have been downs), NOTHING ELSE that left wingers have put out in the past few days has been anything but legitimate issues and potential problems that if brought up about Democrats liberals would find them completely acceptable.

:roll:

 

[American]

you mean it didn't start before then? :lol:

I don't think Captain America was born before then.

 

[Captain America]

you mean it didn't start before then? :lol:

Perhaps. But I remember campaigns being a bit more honest and straight forward pre-Swiftboat era. Before Monica.

The invent of 24/7 cable news channels and whacko pundits might have had something to do with the recent tabloid mentality. Rove probably had a hand in it too. I dunno.

I was born in 1957 so I'm kinda new to the scene. :roll:

 

[Captain America]

I don't think Captain America was born before then.

I agree with your first three words, but the rest I am gonna have to ponder. :rofl

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Perhaps. But I remember campaigns being a bit more honest and straight forward pre-Swiftboat era. Before Monica.

The invent of 24/7 cable news channels and whacko pundits might have had something to do with the recent tabloid mentality. Rove probably had a hand in it too. I dunno.

I was born in 1957 so I'm kinda new to the scene. :roll:

You don't remember 1988 and Willie Horton?

Or, back in the nineties when the conservatives were out claiming that Clinton, a sitting president, was a rapist, murderer, and dope dealer.

 

[TBone]

The ol' pot calling the kettle black eh? Well no side is honest in this thing, both sides are going to engage in smear and yell when the other does so against them. It's just what you get when you put together two really crappy candidates.

I'm no GOP member, but I will give Laura Bush credit for chastizing (sic) Kerry's wife when she complained that awful things were being said about here husband. Laura basically stated that this is politics, and this type of stuff happens, don't be thin skinned.

If candidates didn't smear each other, they would be doing their job.

All is fair in love and war and politics?

I saw the "Obama smear report" in Fox. Like Fox would never do anything like this?

 

[mikhail]

Barack Obama statement on this was very good.But isnt it also fair to say the "Obama is a muslim" crap has as little attachment to the McCain Campaign

 

[Laila]

Barack Obama statement on this was very good.But isnt it also fair to say the "Obama is a muslim" crap has as little attachment to the McCain Campaign

I really don't understand how that has gained momentum.
A truley clever "secret" Muslim who is going to sneak into the White House and then destroy it? Please, like we Muslims are so imaginative we're too busy killing each other to give two ****s about the White House remember?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Perhaps. But I remember campaigns being a bit more honest and straight forward pre-Swiftboat era. Before Monica.

The invent of 24/7 cable news channels and whacko pundits might have had something to do with the recent tabloid mentality. Rove probably had a hand in it too. I dunno.

I was born in 1957 so I'm kinda new to the scene. :roll:

you don't remember reagan being called an idiot, (actually every republican), Bush not having the "gravitas", then "hubris", etc?...


Im on a time crunch, but it started way before then.

 

[Captain America]

You don't remember 1988 and Willie Horton?

Or, back in the nineties when the conservatives were out claiming that Clinton, a sitting president, was a rapist, murderer, and dope dealer.

Oh, yes I do. That is one reason I have no sympathy for the GOP now that their very own smear tactics have come back to bite them in the butt.

 

[Captain America]

you don't remember reagan being called an idiot, (actually every republican), Bush not having the "gravitas", then "hubris", etc?...


Im on a time crunch, but it started way before then.

I remember people on the streets saying that. That Bush Sr. was a wimp. I don't remember too much trash talk about Ronnie though.

But I don't remember major news networks and SwiftBoat styled attack ads like we have had since the Gengrich/Starr/Rove era.

But, I will also be the first to admit that I didn't pay as close attention back then, (20 + years ago) as I do today. So I could be wrong.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I remember people on the streets saying that. That Bush Sr. was a wimp. I don't remember too much trash talk about Ronnie though.

But I don't remember major news networks and SwiftBoat styled attack ads like we have had since the Gengrich/Starr/Rove era.

But, I will also be the first to admit that I didn't pay as close attention back then, (20 + years ago) as I do today. So I could be wrong.

You are.

 

[Sir Loin]

You don't remember 1988 and Willie Horton?Or, back in the nineties when the conservatives were out claiming that Clinton, a sitting president, was a rapist, murderer, and dope dealer.

Do you really need it pointed out to you that highlighting what the radical elements of any party had to say about POTUS candidates is intellectually dishonest in the extreme? Each side has whackos spouting all sorts of idiocy, but you are acting as if that is not the case. How self serving and really how futile and narrow minded. Maybe you need to recharge your batteries? Up until the Palin nomination I held your posts in fairly high regard, I can’t say the same for your recent post since Palin’s nomination. You seem to have abandoned your prior intellectual approach. That really worked a lot better for you than this tying half your brain behind your back act is. IMO.

Perhaps. But I remember campaigns being a bit more honest and straight forward pre-Swiftboat era. Before Monica.

I think you are mis-remembering things quite a bit. In fact (I believe the historical record will support this claim) the further back in history you study POTUS elections, the more dishonest and egregious the level of dishonesty often was!

The invent of 24/7 cable news channels and whacko pundits might have had something to do with the recent tabloid mentality. Rove probably had a hand in it too. I dunno.

Well I agree with the many problems that have arisen in trying to fill a 24/7 news cycle, but trying to lie that at Rove’s or Gengrich's and Starr’s feet is just silly.