So, the Republicans invented the political attack ad? I didn’t know that…
I heard on NPR this AM that Leahey asked NARAL to pull the ad. Good for him.
If you made that your sig you could save yourself a lot of typing in political threads.
No, I am equating them.
If you will lie to get elected, you will lie to stay elected.
If you will lie about where your opponent stands, you will lie about where you stand.
If you will lie to me for my own good, you will keep lying for my own good. What am I supposed to do, assume that at some point you’ll stop lying? When will that happen? It can’t happen during the election, because you might lose. It can’t happen after the election, because then you might not get re-elected. It can’t happen after you’ve retired because the party is just so important. You say you want what’s best for the average person, but you say that you’re willing to lie. Are you lying now? How about now? Now?
Karl Rove is your patron saint. He, too, thinks the ends justify the means.
That’s quite the non-sequiter. I made no claims about who invented what. If we were in Great Debates, I would have the advantage of you. Here I must content myself with pointing out that you failed to call me a scum-sucking bastard. 
[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
No, I am equating them.
If you will lie to get elected, you will lie to stay elected.
If you will lie about where your opponent stands, you will lie about where you stand.
If you will lie to me for my own good, you will keep lying for my own good. What am I supposed to do, assume that at some point you’ll stop lying? When will that happen? It can’t happen during the election, because you might lose. It can’t happen after the election, because then you might not get re-elected. It can’t happen after you’ve retired because the party is just so important. You say you want what’s best for the average person, but you say that you’re willing to lie. Are you lying now? How about now? Now?
[QUOTE]
i take it you are new to politics …
Actually, I do see a difference.
If what you say is true - I grant you , a stretch - then Republicans are defending their propositions because they believe them to be true. Democrats, however, are defending the knowing use of lies and deception.
Congratulations. You just said that liberals are trolls.
Regards,
Shodan
Personally, I think that the Democrats’ policy of avoiding assassination hasn’t worked well over the past 10 years; nor has their policy of not rioting in the streets. Let’s start killing our political enemies and ruling through mob violence!
Or we could continue to stick to our principles and try to find ethical means to win elections. I suspect that a creative ethical ploy will work much better than the transparently unethical ploy which you’re espousing–or in your world is NARAL winning a lot of love for the Democratic Party?
Daniel
It’s a small point, really, but you did say “the Pubbie’s own tactics”, which sounded to me like you were saying they had attack ads patented or something. You certainly couldn’t have meant that the Dems and their support organizations are strangers to these types of ads, because they clearly aren’t. But the whole “10 years of honesty…” thing makes me wonder.
If anyone is interested, The Daily Show just ripped the shit out of that NARAL ad tonight. Who says they never go after liberals?
The aim of a troll, I thought, was to annoy people. Lying is lying.
Highlight: Using that logic if you bought Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” in 1982 you support child molesting.
Looks like pressure from honest people on all sides of the debate worked.
Yeah they pulled it because …
No admission of lying.
None of these organizations ever admits to lying. Pulling the ad is the best we can reasonably expect, I think. And they did pull it, which is more than I can say for some other orgs.
I’m extremely disappointed in them and in the Democrats who attempted–failed miserably, but attempted–to justify these attacks.
Plus, the brouhaha over the ad makes will make it more difficult for the administration to get a rubber stamp of approval for a right wing ideologue, if Robert’s is a a right wing ideologue.
Let’s wait for the results of Robert’s slander suit before jumping to conclusions as to who is lying. He is filing suit isn’t he?
So the Swifties never lied, right? For some reason I can’t seem to find a link to Kerry’s lawsuit…help a brother out?
:smack:
The man was a wimp. His failure to address the swiftvet’s vile accusations head on cost him the election. I hope Bush hasn’t nominated a wimp to the supreme court, don’t you?
You are just about the dumbest poster I’ve seen here, ideology notwithstanding. And given some of the competition you’ve had over the years, that’s saying quite a bit.
To be fair, Mr. Moto, I recall thinking that you were posting some lame-ass partisan stuff in Great Debates a couple weeks ago; I’m not sure that squink’s defense of NARAL here is any more irrationally partisan than your attacks on Air America were.
Daniel
I noticed you punted…so I’ll give you another chance.
You claim that we can’t “jump to conclusions” about whether NARAL lied because Roberts hasn’t sued yet.
Do you apply the same standard to whether the Swifties lied? IOW…since Kerry did not sue, we can’t know if the Swifties lied?