There’s a post over at my favorite conservative blog* calling on the McCain campaign to run “guilt by association” ads against Barack Obama in the swing states. One at a time, 30 seconds each: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, etc.
Frankly, I believe the subtext of such ads is absurd: Obama knows people who are crazy! Ergo, he would be a bad president. In my comment, I remarked that it’s a shame that this poster apparently doesn’t believe that John McCain can win simply on issues that are legitimate.
Nonetheless, I’m ashamed to admit that this idea did get my creative juices flowing. Therefore, here’s my suggestion for the Barack Obama/Bill Ayers “guilt by association” ad. It would be called “TERRORIST LOVER”:
NARRATOR: Barack Hussein Obama knows a guy who is a real bastard.
ON SCREEN: Obama...a real bastard.
NARRATOR: Barack Hussein Obama and aging-hippie terrorist Bill Ayers once served on the board of a charity…AT THE SAME TIME.
ON SCREEN: HOLY F**KING SH*T
NARRATOR: Terrorist Ayers even donated $200 to one of Barack Hussein Obama’s political campaigns once.
ON SCREEN: OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG
NARRATOR: Barack Hussein Obama is a terrorist-lover.
ON SCREEN: Believe it, b*tches.
NARRATOR: It’s time to ask the question: who is the real Barack Hussein Obama?
ON SCREEN: ANSWER: somebody who wants to bomb your house.
* patterico.com really is my favorite conservative blog. It’s the only one I ever read. It takes a non-religious, reason-based, conservative approach to the issues. Patterico and I disagree on basically everything (though he actually does support same-sex marriage, which is cool). Nonetheless, as a rule, the front-page posters are reasonable, respectful, and (somewhat) post-partisan, which is commendable. Also, they practice free speech over there, allowing and encouraging dissenting opinions to be expressed in good faith dialogue (though such will be roundly challenged by the regulars). Suffice to say it’s a good site for another view.
Why does it need to be true for all people in order for it to be true for you?
I noticed this last night, at several points during the debate. I don’t know how to read this. It seems a little…self-demeaning. An attempt to substitute “feminine charm” for substance. Perhaps a personal signal for God in which she acknowledges her false witness?
Could you imagine Hillary (or for that matter, Barack, John, or Joe) getting away with the same? Yeah, me neither.
This video, called Battle at Kruger, is absolutely unbelievable. I don’t have anything useful to say about it, other than that it should be viewed by everybody. This testifies to the power of one individual with a camera, in the right place at the right time.
I’ve been getting pretty irritated at Hillary Clinton lately, especially following the debate the other night, but this made me smile:
Just two more months…maybe sooner. Cross your fingers.