• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP Campaign ad exploits Foley's beheading

DVSentinel said:
Because all Democrats currently in office are responsible for not holding Obama accountable and blocking or attempting to block any reasonable action that would hold the idiot accountable. They have surrendered their Constitutional responsibilities and powers to support Obama.
Click to expand...

Well since the GOP voted AGAINST action in Syria, they hold blame as well. Also, the GOP has REPEATIDLY given in to Obama on numerous occations, so yet again you ignore the fault of the GOP as well. There is no ONE party responsible for this. It could very well be argued if we didn't go into IRaq in the first place this wouldn't have happened.

Glad to see your fauz outrage up though while ignoring the fact the GOP is just as responsible.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
I don't approve of either major party using images of soldiers getting shot or coming home in flag-draped coffins as part of a campaign ad. That's pandering.

War itself, of course, is fair game because it's policy.
Click to expand...

War itself should be considered a crime against humanity. But that's not practical, because if it were, no nation would have any leaders.
 
TheNextEra said:
Well since the GOP voted AGAINST action in Syria, they hold blame as well. Also, the GOP has REPEATIDLY given in to Obama on numerous occations, so yet again you ignore the fault of the GOP as well. There is no ONE party responsible for this. It could very well be argued if we didn't go into IRaq in the first place this wouldn't have happened.

Glad to see your fauz outrage up though while ignoring the fact the GOP is just as responsible.
Click to expand...

The GOP candidate is running against an incumbent. Why should there be outrage against him for things he was not in office to influence? Your argument may be a good partisan rant but hardly applies to this particular case.
 
jmotivator said:
Like using the Iraq war and dead servicemen to push Democrat campaigns?
Click to expand...

The Iraq War and the U.S. casualties in it were the direct result of a Republican President's policy. The Bush Administration committed us to war in Iraq. While I think the Obama Administration has been terrible on foreign policy in many respects, a he did not send a journalist over there only for him to be beheaded, so the two are hardly comparable.
 
jmotivator said:
Well, politicking on dead bodies won the Democrats the White House.
Click to expand...

No, 8 years of what was easily the worst president of the last century is what won Democrats the White House.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
No, 8 years of what was easily the worst president of the last century is what won Democrats the White House.
Click to expand...

Given that that judgement on Bush's presidency was based almost entirely on the war in Iraq and dead soldiers your argument falls flat.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The Iraq War and the U.S. casualties in it were the direct result of a Republican President's policy. The Bush Administration committed us to war in Iraq. While I think the Obama Administration has been terrible on foreign policy in many respects, a he did not send a journalist over there only for him to be beheaded, so the two are hardly comparable.
Click to expand...

They are comparable insofar as ISIS is the product of bad Obama foreign policy. The Syrian civil war and the rise of ISIS was all on Obama's watch. The arming of Syrian rebels was an Obama decision. The current dithering by the President rather than forceful confrontation of ISIS is Obama's decision.

The brutal reality of ISIS is fair game in a US election.
 
jmotivator said:
Given that that judgement on Bush's presidency was based almost entirely on the war in Iraq and dead soldiers your argument falls flat.
Click to expand...

It would also be based on his failed foreign policy across the board and his heralding in the greatest financial crisis and economic collapse since the Great Depression.
 
DVSentinel said:
The GOP candidate is running against an incumbent. Why should there be outrage against him for things he was not in office to influence? Your argument may be a good partisan rant but hardly applies to this particular case.
Click to expand...

Please explain what the incumbent could have done that would have changed ANY outcome in foreign policy. Here's a hint, you can't. Your partisan hackery comments are quite funny though how you lay blame to everyone but the GOP.
 
This garbage is equivalent to any Democratic politician who uses the Video clip of the girl accidentally shooting her instructor against the GOP.
And I will call it out as vociferously as I can also .
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
Please explain what the incumbent could have done that would have changed ANY outcome in foreign policy. Here's a hint, you can't. Your partisan hackery comments are quite funny though how you lay blame to everyone but the GOP.
Click to expand...

Except I do blame them when they are at fault. Do not confuse dislike of socialist with a liking for the GOP.

He could of supported, or at least let it be know that he would support, impeachment or other censure of Obama.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
Just when you thought Republican campaign tactics couldn't sink any lower:

The ad in question:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTG3NacV9co&list=UUZCJHdziE3NT5OdaQPefUBA
Click to expand...

I watched the ad and don't see any exploitation of Foley. Yes, there is a frame of the hooded Jihadi John or whatever his media moniker is holding his knife. The image has been all over the Internet and TV. It's a powerful reminder of what is at state in our foreign policy and why a change is needed in Washington.

The exploitation dog isn't going to hunt.
 
nota bene said:
I watched the ad and don't see any exploitation of Foley. Yes, there is a frame of the hooded Jihadi John or whatever his media moniker is holding his knife. The image has been all over the Internet and TV. It's a powerful reminder of what is at state in our foreign policy and why a change is needed in Washington.

The exploitation dog isn't going to hunt.
Click to expand...

I'm not absolutely certain about this, but what you saw may not have been the original ad.
 
ObamacareFail said:
What do you expect when Obama gives a speech denouncing the beheading and then heads straight for the golf course where he is seen happily smiling as if he had no care in the world?
Click to expand...

president obama does not have unlimited powers to respond to everything, he needs the legeslative branch in order to implement policy. congress is currently on its august recess.
 
TheNextEra said:
I will agree there is a lack of leadership in Washington, however, a senator from New Mexico has very little (if anything) to do with Foley. It was in poor taste to even bring it up in that way in the ad. Also, just to be clear, there is failed leadership PERIOD in Washington D.C. and it is BOTH parties responsible. I know you are not in the one side good one side bad ideology so I'm not accusing you of this. The failure in Washington is the fact that neither side is taking responsibility for THEIR actions and instead just chooses to lay ALL blame to the other. These elementary school antics are only going to hurt the U.S. further.
Click to expand...

How about the GOP pushing granny off the cliff ads the democrats the demorats ran during Bush administration. Would you agree they were in bad taste?
 
DifferentDrummr said:
There's nothing wrong with an ad suggesting a lack of leadership. There is a hell of a lot that's wrong with an ad that uses Foley and ISIS as some kind of sideshow to help convey that message.
Click to expand...

Why is that wrong? It is the lack of leadership in the White House that has led to what happened to Foley and spurred on the spread of ISIS. It's fair game.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Why is that wrong? It is the lack of leadership in the White House that has led to what happened to Foley and spurred on the spread of ISIS. It's fair game.
Click to expand...

you condone the disgusting ad that uses the Terrorist's vile propaganda video becuase of the belief in "eye for an eye"?
 
DifferentDrummr said:
I don't approve of either major party using images of soldiers getting shot or coming home in flag-draped coffins as part of a campaign ad. That's pandering.

War itself, of course, is fair game because it's policy.
Click to expand...

So you want a "cleansed" ad campaign, one that doesn't show the result, your dead sons and daughters, the armless children caught in the crossfire.

Yeah, only running action film like images where the bombs blow up things instead of people is far more palatable, can;t have that Vietnam thing with the images of the thousands and thousands of body bags coming home...why there might not ever be war again.
 
tres borrachos said:
Hey Pol! You didn't see that ad during the 2012 campaign? It was played repeatedly in NH. It made my blood boil.
Click to expand...

And the real truth is that it is the democrats who are harming the seniors. When I am eligible for medicare in a little over 4 years, it will be inferior to what it was before Obamacare. They robbed over 500 billion dollars from Medicare to support Obamacare. Doctors who treat Medicare patients are now being re-imbursed at a rate lower then it costs to treat them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom