Well, some folks think that the WSJ is a liberal rag these days, mostly because of their pro-immigration stance.
Just so you know. 
(BTW, is that “‘escaped’ is a misnomer” quote from the article supposed to be sarcastic? If not, it seems awesomely dumb.)
I take it as, “We think of an ‘escape’ as someone cutting the wire fence and sneaking out with dogs after him; really, this guy just didn’t bother to return from this dumb furlough.” So, I guess sarcastic.
And that’s because …
Wright is above criticism?
There is no connection between Wright and Obama?
All Republicans are racists?
Some other reason ??
Please explain …
Because almost everything objectionable about the WH ad (and you still don’t seem to understand why it was objectionable) applies here. (“Almost” only because no murder is involved here; but fear is.)
No one here has ever claimed options 1-3. Those are what we call “strawmen.”
The reason it’s like Horton is because it’s the same tactic. Use a scary cartoon negro to frighten whitey.
Just to be clear …
I referred to “a” Republican ad and by that I meant “any” future hypothetical ad.
He is apparently completely off limits why???
Wright is above criticism?
There is no connection between Wright and Obama?
All Republicans are racists?
Some other reason ??
Actualy I do understand why it was objectionable.
And if I had anything to do with making ads like that I would take extra extra care to make sure it was totally factual and as free as possible from having the race card played against it.
Then there would be no reason to do it at all.
That’s what you still don’t seem to understand.
All criticism of Obama is off-limits.
Regards,
Shodan
Don’t Call Me Shirley:
Perhaps the admen merely conflated him with the better-known Willie Horton.
Well, that’s the difference between business conservatives (who care about the bottom line of corporations that want cheap immigrant, even illegal-immigrant, labor) and paleoconservatives (who care about . . . other things). A coalition ripe for cracking.
I always thought the same thing. I mean, if something about the ad was untrue or misleading, I could see it being frowned upon, but Willie Horton did escape while on furlough, and he did rape a woman and almost killed her husband. This happened while Dukakis was Governor and he vetoed a bill that would have ended the furlough program. After all of that, he still said he supported the furlough program.
It was all true, but because Willie Horton is black, then it is wrong to show his picture? What if he was white? Would it then be okay to show his picture? If so, why?
If not, then is it wrong to show a convict’s picture while referring to him? If so, why? I must be missing something here…
No… what you don’t understand is that many of Wright’s comments are very objectionable and many churchgoing people believe that Obama should have had a clue after 20 years.
Even Obama finally figured it out today!
I meant there would have been no reason to make the Willie Horton ad if the intent were not to play the race card. It was mentioned upthread that at least two other furloughed MA prisoners had committed not merely rape but murder, but they were white, therefore not used.
As for Wright, what in his message is “objectionable” that does not have to do with race?
Perhaps nothing but that is because he is totally about race.
Why should that be disqualifying?
:dubious: To ask the question is to know the answer.
Provided the question is sincerely asked.
Obama is not totally about race, no more than Dukakis was, as you know, and it is flatly unfair, and evil besides, to suggest otherwise.
And I challenge you, What the … !!!, to make no further posts in the instant thread until you have read every last post in this thread, though it is already gone to seven pages. Your thread is no more than a hijack anyway.
BrainGlutton:
Horton certainly attempted to murder. Is your problem the fact that he stabbings were unsuccessful? After all, the Nobel Committee doesn’t give a prize for “attempted chemistry.”
Horton’s act was barbaric. I don’t know the details of the two actual murderers’ crimes, but maybe they were less horrifying, like a simple mugging. I don’t mean to make light of anyone’s murder. I’m just saying that maybe the details of the crime are more shocking, even ignoring any racial element.
My problem is that his particular case was specifically and undeniably chosen to appeal to racial hatred and fear for electoral purposes, as you know. And the same is true of all Pub attempts to damn Obama for his association with Wright, as you know.
Hijack what? It’s my thread.
Sorry that I don’t have the time to be clearer or you don’t have the open mind to understand but …
by “He” I meant Wright and my point is that since Wright is totally abbout race then you seem to suggest that any ad related to him by the Republicans would by definition be subjet to “Willie Horton” criticisms.