No, let's be honest what that ruling did. It gave corporations the right to do it. You and I always had the right to say whatever we wanted. McCain-Fiengold was a bad idea, but the ruling is worse.
Their are "pros" on the internet. Paid to support/defend various positions.
So how would you interpret the glaring disparity in these numbers when you click on who voted for which alternative?
The fact is that DP members with the proper knowledge can vote more than once in polls in this sub forum. That in a nutshell is the dishonesty. Had Redress put this poll in the 2012 US Presidential Election sub forum this could not have happened.
Aww, and we were doing so well.
Critical thinking and the kind of participation we see HERE is NOT the norm.
From what I've seen, appx 25% of the population LACKS real critical thinking skills. That's the percentage that shows up in polls and graphs concerning beliefs people hold that simply aren't based on objective reality.
There's a quote from one of the founders of the modern Public Relations industry that goes something like this:
"Give me an unlimited budget and 100% saturation and I could get a pig elected to the White House."
Simply put, what others know about how our minds/brains work, THAT WE DON'T, can be and is being used against us by those who DO.
$10 billion dollar a year industry (trade data), outside of those in the direct employ of businesses and political groups.
The same toolbox used to sell soap being used to sell ideas/beliefs.
Never forget that anorexia and bulimia are diseases born in body image beliefs resulting from marketing. Unintended consequences of people constantly being told they suck and no one will want/love them if they don't have/do "x".
Not all, or even most, PR/persuasion is "black". But the tools they use are much more potent than most believe.
So do you want to try to stop those 25% from having the right to vote somehow?
Or teach them how to think critically?
One thing you abosultely shouldn't and can't do - try to control what 100% of us see or hear because you declared that 25% of us are too dumb to.
he quoted someone who was not part of the McCain campaign, and attributed the quote to the McCain campaign...which is a bit dishonest
now Romney is attributing the quote to Obama.. which is also dishonest.
Obama used the comments from a paid consultant to the McCain campaign effort. That was already made clear here. That is not at all dishonest.
Romney took a quote which he knew was not attributed to Obama himself but was Obama quoting McCain. That is blatantly dishonest.
For anyone to pretend that they are on the same level is committing intellectual fraud of the worst sort.
Mike Murphy was not a paid consultant to the McCain campaign... he was not a member of McCain's campaign... in fact, he was very critical of hte campaign after they brought Palin on board.
Obamas said ""Sen. McCain's campaign actually said, and I quote, ‘If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose.’".. which is not true.. McCains campaign said no such thing... Mike Murphy did.
if you are going to pretend to be concerned with honesty, at least apply your standards consistently.
Michael Ellis "Mike" Murphy (born 1962) is a Republican political consultant.[1] He has advised such nationally prominent Republicans as John McCain, Rick Lazio, Jeb Bush, John Engler, Tommy Thompson, Spencer Abraham, Christie Whitman, Lamar Alexander, and Arnold Schwarzenegger.[1][2] He was, until January 2006, an adviser to Mitt Romney, the Governor of Massachusetts and an about-to-become candidate for the Republican presidential nomination for the 2008 presidential election.[3] He stepped down as a result of his role as chief strategist to Governor Romney as well as Senator McCain, who were both widely expected to be Republican challengers in the primaries of the 2008 Presidential election. Murphy said he had decided to be neutral in a contest between two close clients, although he would advise each informally.
“I don’t believe we’re headed into a recession,” he said, “I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong.”
“The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” he said. But, “I’ve got Greenspan’s book,” he assured the audience.
Wikipedia says he advised McCain.
If he did this unpaid - I stand corrected on that one detail. But he still advised the campaign even if not officially attached.
Actually, I think the science of persuasion has reached a level of sophistication that demands greater scrutiny.
We should be educating our children about this, for their protection.
McCain team shapes up without Murphy - Mike Allen and Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com
.. if he's not part of the campaign, he's not part of the campaign...it's really that simple.
that article was from early July with four months to go in the campaign. And why is this supposedly about one person - Mike Murphy - when the real issue is the reluctance of John McCain to talk about economics - a subject which he made major gaffes about, a subject which he admitted his lack of knowledge about , and a subject which worked against him in the campaign? Obama knew that, everybody knew that. That is the basis of the Obama comment - not necessarily what Murphy or anybody else said other than John McCain.
I think my comment about a paid consultant in my post #83 was not the total picture here and I was wrong to base it on that. I was basing that on a previous post in which another poster used the Murphy attribution. It goes beyond that and to McCain himself and the national perception that he was weak on the economy and did not want to discuss it after the previous listed gaffes on the topic.
In the following article by Thomas Defrank of the NY Daily News the quote was attributed to a top McCain strategist:Mike Murphy was not a paid consultant to the McCain campaign... he was not a member of McCain's campaign... in fact, he was very critical of hte campaign after they brought Palin on board.
Obamas said ""Sen. McCain's campaign actually said, and I quote, ‘If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to lose.’".. which is not true.. McCains campaign said no such thing... Mike Murphy did.
if you are going to pretend to be concerned with honesty, at least apply your standards consistently.
I won't say "honest," but I will say shrewd. Let BO say it's untrue.
"But I was quoting McCain! HE said it! HE said it!" The quote still stands.
Even if BO was quoting McCain, the words still ring true.
Good ad. Looking forward to the rebuttal. (Of course, I speak as one who considers BO a lying sack of excrement.)
Dishonest? I see truth, though :shrug:
Look: if Obama and all other candidates didn't dribble out a lot of bull**** faux empty campaign promises to win everyone's favor then those bull****, faux empty promises that weren't possible to achieve wouldn't be there to use against them when they don't make magic happen.
But you know: people want the lies.
So it is as good as true because Obama said other unrelated things and is a politician, so other people want lies. Of course you just said you saw truth in the lie, so maybe you have what people want mixed up with what you want.
Basically, your post is one of the most messed up jumbles of complete nonsense I have ever read. Congratulations!
I’m replying to my own post. I see that names are no longer listed in the votes. And now the count is even more suspect. (Also my previous post is not showing on my list of posts.) Is everybody happy with this?The add is accurate and does not distort Obama's words
1. Tucker Case
2. TurtleDude
The add is dishonest:
1. Catawba
2. Esther
3. Josie
4. lpast
5. LuckyDan
6. Manc Skipper
7. Mickey Shane
8. Phys251
9. rocket88
10. rosie1
11. Your Star
The add is dishonest and crosses a line: haymarket
1. Keridan
2. OhIsee.Then
3. Omgitsme
4. What if...?
Just thought I'd put up an accurate count.
It's dishonest, but what can anyone really do about it?
It all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is.You would not accept lying from your children would you? If your answer is no how can you accept it from people you hold up to your children as role models and I do not care what party the person belongs to lying is not an exclusive behavior to any party.
What can you do? Write them a letter or send them an e-mail or when they come a knocking tell them why you will not vote for thier candidate
I’m replying to my own post. I see that names are no longer listed in the votes. And now the count is even more suspect. (Also my previous post is not showing on my list of posts.) Is everybody happy with this?
The openness of your post explained you vote clearly. I bet if you were even more introspective you'd find a more basic or the root cause of your vote. Thanks.I won't say "honest," but I will say shrewd. Let BO say it's untrue.
"But I was quoting McCain! HE said it! HE said it!" The quote still stands.
Even if BO was quoting McCain, the words still ring true.
Good ad. Looking forward to the rebuttal. (Of course, I speak as one who considers BO a lying sack of excrement.)