« Obama: I was against missile defense systems before I was for them. | Main | Guess who was covering for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004? »

New McCain Ad: Promise

McCain/Palin has a new ad out that is running nationally on cable and it focuses on the war in Iraq which was a major topic in last night's debate. In this ad, McCain focuses on Obama's vote against funding for our troops and uses Biden's own words to explain how awful that was:

ANNCR: In the midst of war, Senator Obama voted to cut off funding for our troops.

What did Biden say?

JOE BIDEN: "They said they voted against the money to make a political point."

ANNCR: He added...

JOE BIDEN: "This is cutting off support that will save the lives of thousands of American troops."

ANNCR: Barack Obama.

Playing politics. Risking lives.

Not ready to lead.

JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.

This is Obama's most vulnerable point because if we had followed his recommendations on this we would have weakened our country in the face of terrorism and terrorists who have targeted us for destruction. Obama is not only naive when it comes to the war on terror, but he's also dangerous.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (4)

I also think McCain may beg... (Below threshold)

I also think McCain may begin to make headway with the point that Obama still refuses to just say he was wrong on this.

This is a potentially big argument for two reasons:

1) It ties Obama, not McCain, to something people don't like about Bush.

2) It can be used to deflate the notion that a smart guy like Obama can learn on the job. How can you learn, if you're never willing to acknowledge error?

I think McCain's comment was just the beginning of what we'll see on this.

I know I'm biased, but how ... (Below threshold)
Pretzel Logic:

I know I'm biased, but how can this guy garner one vote at this point much less 50-60 million?

FWIW, I thought Obama's bes... (Below threshold)
Steve Schippert:

FWIW, I thought Obama's best moment of the night was when he explained directly how he didn't vote to cut funding for the troops, nor did John McCain when he made a similar vote. He voted against a funding bill that had no timetable, while McCain voted against a funding bill that had a timetable - Barack Obama voted against no timetable, not against funding the troops. McCain voted against having a timetable, not against funding the troops.

There are myriad ways to make the point that Obama is/was not capable of seeking victory - which is the overriding point. Cheap bites about voting against funding the troops is the weakest among them.

Steve, you probably have no... (Below threshold)

Steve, you probably have not noticed the "negative" votes given your comment.

But it shows something related I think.

You make an extremely valid point but, only those of us that take a very close look at the candidates AND politics in general will make the distinction you, and admittedly I have, in both the McCain and obama votes.

"We" know why both voted no and is an example why tagging things onto a bill that may be related but acts as a poison pill to one side is a BAD thing for many reasons.

The vast majority of people don't look as closely, all they see, and sadly care about many times, are these type of ads and sound bites.

As such they fail in the long run to win over either side to the others "camp," they only serve to reinforce preconceived notions on the preferred choice in the election.

The "fence sitters" that remain won't be shifted in either direction on the Iraq issue, I believe.

Hammering obama on the economy, and blasting the cable and over the air networks with ads on obama's ties to failed efforts to improve life in his home district after spending millions, consistently voting to raise taxes as a U.S. Senator, financial ties to both "Fannies," etc will have a bigger effect. I think, but helll, I'm far from an expert.
That said, one thing I wished McCain had nailed obama on would have been via this question:

"Do you favor the bailout bill as written, do you favor skimming 25-30 percent off the top of any potential "profits" be funneled to orgs like ACORN?"






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy