• 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!

Offensive, Stupid, Valid...

What do you think of the video? Pick all that apply

  • Total voters
    19
Redress

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
112,958
Reaction score
60,492
Location
Sarasota Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed


What do you think of the video?

Edit: This is a real campaign video. No ****.
 
Last edited:
The fact it is real makes it completely stupid. Like it was just a terrible video.
 
I hope to whatever god cares about American politics that we aren't so stupid that ads like this are effective, but I have no such faith in the American people.

Ads like this are why I don't believe in free speech and don't believe in allowing politicians to hide behind anonymous committees.
 
Actually - it's not a real campaign video.

It's says "Paid for my Turn Right USA . . . Definitely NOT authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee . . . so suck it McCain-Feingold"

:shrug:

So - no candidate came up with this, it's not endorse by any party - rather, it's endorsed by a superpac . . .which just donates money around. . . at their website this is their 'mission' statement:

Mission

Turn Right USA is a Federal Non-connected, Expenditure Only Political Action Committee (SuperPAC) organized to execute Independent Expenditure campaigns by a group of American citizens who are:
1.unrepresented by the political class of this Country;
2.nauseated by the laughable stupidity of professional politicians;
3.outraged by their liberal benefactors like George Soros, and
4.angered that their opposition is too cowardly to fight back!

Turn Right USA’s mission is to expose and lampoon the typical politico’s microscopic brain through cutting-edge viral videos with guts and humor!
Click to expand...
 
Taken from their website:
Turn Right USA is a Federal Non-connected, Expenditure Only Political Action Committee (SuperPAC) organized to execute Independent Expenditure campaigns by a group of American citizens who are:
unrepresented by the political class of this Country;
nauseated by the laughable stupidity of professional politicians;
outraged by their liberal benefactors like George Soros, and
angered that their opposition is too cowardly to fight back!
Turn Right USA’s mission is to expose and lampoon the typical politico’s microscopic brain through cutting-edge viral videos with guts and humor!

Edit: So basically it is about as honorable as anything that Move-On does...at least they dont depict her with a Hitler mustache. Her opponent has denounced the ad. The question is does it tell the truth in all its offensive glory?
 
Last edited:
I find the whole thing stupid, btw if you're a WW2 buff you may recognize the mug shot at the 0:58-1:00 mark.
 
Last edited:
Kinda catchy.

I would say the real losers are the people who donate to this SuperPAC. Talk about throwing money down a hole.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Actually - it's not a real campaign video.

It's says "Paid for my Turn Right USA . . . Definitely NOT authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee . . . so suck it McCain-Feingold"

:shrug:

So - no candidate came up with this, it's not endorse by any party - rather, it's endorsed by a superpac . . .which just donates money around. . . at their website this is their 'mission' statement:
Click to expand...

I use the term "campaign video" to refer to a video that campaigns for or against a candidate. By that definition, it is a campaign video. By "real" I meant that it was not done as a joke.
 
Its a Citizens United world now, you can pander to your base without being accused of pandering to yoir base!

Maybe we should just get it over with and elect a corporation to rule us. They're people now, right.
 
It's just really really stupid. I'm not offended by it, but it's just stupid, and hurts the people putting it out, more then the person they are attacking.
 
I'm not sure this is as dumb as everyone is making it out to be. It depends on the goal of the group. Her opponent does not endorse the video and had nothing to do it so it doesn't make the opponent look bad. If I were a constituent, I would want to look into these allegations against Janice Hahn to see if there is any truth to them. If that was the goal, then mission accomplished IMO
 
Redress said:
I use the term "campaign video" to refer to a video that campaigns for or against a candidate. By that definition, it is a campaign video. By "real" I meant that it was not done as a joke.
Click to expand...

Of course it was a joke. Read their mission statement...

Turn Right USA’s mission is to expose and lampoon the typical politico’s microscopic brain through cutting-edge viral videos with guts and humor!
Click to expand...

Define Lampoon: A light, good-humored satire.


Therefore, by your own definition of 'real'... it wasn't.
 
Whovian said:
Of course it was a joke. Read their mission statement...



Define Lampoon: A light, good-humored satire.


Therefore, by your own definition of 'real'... it wasn't.
Click to expand...

It's about a real person and a real issue with the intent to influence the election. It was not done as a parody of an add, but as a real add.
 
Redress said:
It's about a real person and a real issue with the intent to influence the election. It was not done as a parody of an add, but as a real add.
Click to expand...

Apparently about a real person who did a real stupid thing with real peoples tax dollars. The commercial may be juvenile, but reading some of the people that got paid by the ho and their crimes, it might just be a commercial that needed to be made, yo.
 
Redress said:
Actually the add is factually incorrect and misleading on that issue as well. PolitiFact | Video accuses Janice Hahn of hiring gang members with taxpayer money as 'gang-intervention specialists'
Click to expand...

Interesting that in the Politifact article you cite Hahn herself defends the position and actions. Later it is stated that the government unequivocally does NOT hire gang members. Absolutely not. No way. They hire Connie Rice, who then pays gang members. So if the add were more accurate, Ms Hahn would be a trench coat/fedora wearing smoke and shadows type, filtering the money to Ms Rice, who would then be doin the stripper act. Not a DIRECT payment, but obviously she knew what time it was.

"When we contacted Hahn's campaign, spokesman Dave Jacobson reiterated the point that Hahn did not "directly" fund gang-intervention specialists.

But that doesn't mean city money doesn't filter to them.

"She (Hahn) did not hire any gangsters," said civil rights lawyer and gang expert Connie Rice. "The city doesn’t pay the intervention specialists directly."

Rather, Rice said, city funds go to agencies like hers, the Advancement Project in Los Angeles, which then go out and hire intervention specialists. And, she said, it works: violence is down. That's why city and county law enforcement agencies routinely work with organizations that hire former gang members to "interface" with the gang community, she said.

"We have to engage with the people doing the damage," said Rice.

"Do we talk to actual gangsters, yes," Rice said. "We ask them not to shoot kids. This is the reality. We're trying to save lives, not score political points. It's smart policy."

Is it controversial? Sure, Rice said. And sometimes some of the people hired for gang-intervention work "mess up." Those found to be abusing the system are cut off, she said. That doesn't mean the program isn't working, she said. "You can throw stones at that," Rice said, but the reality is "when you go into gang-controlled hot spots, you have to deal with the gangs. People don't understand what we're facing out here. In our hots spots, we still have the OK Corral."
 
VanceMack said:
Interesting that in the Politifact article you cite Hahn herself defends the position and actions. Later it is stated that the government unequivocally does NOT hire gang members. Absolutely not. No way. They hire Connie Rice, who then pays gang members. So if the add were more accurate, Ms Hahn would be a trench coat/fedora wearing smoke and shadows type, filtering the money to Ms Rice, who would then be doin the stripper act. Not a DIRECT payment, but obviously she knew what time it was.

"When we contacted Hahn's campaign, spokesman Dave Jacobson reiterated the point that Hahn did not "directly" fund gang-intervention specialists.

But that doesn't mean city money doesn't filter to them.

"She (Hahn) did not hire any gangsters," said civil rights lawyer and gang expert Connie Rice. "The city doesn’t pay the intervention specialists directly."

Rather, Rice said, city funds go to agencies like hers, the Advancement Project in Los Angeles, which then go out and hire intervention specialists. And, she said, it works: violence is down. That's why city and county law enforcement agencies routinely work with organizations that hire former gang members to "interface" with the gang community, she said.

"We have to engage with the people doing the damage," said Rice.

"Do we talk to actual gangsters, yes," Rice said. "We ask them not to shoot kids. This is the reality. We're trying to save lives, not score political points. It's smart policy."

Is it controversial? Sure, Rice said. And sometimes some of the people hired for gang-intervention work "mess up." Those found to be abusing the system are cut off, she said. That doesn't mean the program isn't working, she said. "You can throw stones at that," Rice said, but the reality is "when you go into gang-controlled hot spots, you have to deal with the gangs. People don't understand what we're facing out here. In our hots spots, we still have the OK Corral."
Click to expand...

The only evidence that Hahn got any one out of jail is the word of one person, who thought that was how he got released but did not know it. City funding did go to the program, but as it is represented in the video is entirely inaccurate.
 
Redress said:
The only evidence that Hahn got any one out of jail is the word of one person, who thought that was how he got released but did not know it. City funding did go to the program, but as it is represented in the video is entirely inaccurate.
Click to expand...

I dont know about entirely inaccurate...but like I said earleir...not unlike the Move-On adds. Special interest campaigns can do pretty much whatever they want.

"One of the ads that was submitted that they considered viable for airing – with $7 million, by the way, in funds that we don't know where it comes from, but we know they've said they'd spend $7 million to air the ad that they've settled on – one of them morphed President Bush into Adolf Hitler," explained Gillespie. "Those are the kind of tactics we're seeing on the left today in support of these Democratic presidential candidates."

The first ad shows a series of pictures of Hitler speaking in German. Text on the screen reads as follows: "We have taken new measures to protect our homeland ... I believe I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator ... God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them ... and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."

"Sound familiar?" asks the text, to the sound of cheering Germans.

Saying he believed the White House was guided by a "supremacist ideology," Soros complained: "America, under Bush, is a danger to the world ... When I hear Bush say, 'You're either with us or against us,' it reminds me of the Germans ... My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me."
 
VanceMack said:
I dont know about entirely inaccurate...but like I said earleir...not unlike the Move-On adds. Special interest campaigns can do pretty much whatever they want.

"One of the ads that was submitted that they considered viable for airing – with $7 million, by the way, in funds that we don't know where it comes from, but we know they've said they'd spend $7 million to air the ad that they've settled on – one of them morphed President Bush into Adolf Hitler," explained Gillespie. "Those are the kind of tactics we're seeing on the left today in support of these Democratic presidential candidates."

The first ad shows a series of pictures of Hitler speaking in German. Text on the screen reads as follows: "We have taken new measures to protect our homeland ... I believe I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator ... God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them ... and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."

"Sound familiar?" asks the text, to the sound of cheering Germans.

Saying he believed the White House was guided by a "supremacist ideology," Soros complained: "America, under Bush, is a danger to the world ... When I hear Bush say, 'You're either with us or against us,' it reminds me of the Germans ... My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me."
Click to expand...

Absolutely like Move On adds. Is there a point to your comments other than that other people can do vile things too as some sort of excuse?
 
Redress said:
Absolutely like Move On adds. Is there a point to your comments other than that other people can do vile things too as some sort of excuse?
Click to expand...

Dont get all pissy. Im not excusing it nor defending it. I dont CARE about it. Im not invested in it. So chill already. Was the ad in bad taste? Yes. partially incorrect? You bet. Maybe the bigger discussion should be if these types of ads should be allowed at all. Wouldnt it be interesting if a fourth rate ad company in LA was responsible for bringing down the Soros machine.
 
Redress said:
I use the term "campaign video" to refer to a video that campaigns for or against a candidate. By that definition, it is a campaign video. By "real" I meant that it was not done as a joke.
Click to expand...

You sure you didn't want to give the impression this is the type of ad right wing cadidates run?
 
I can't believe there are real black people in this view. Did they just pick up the first two black crackheads they found off the street? This is on par with those George Bush commercials showing the "real American family" as rural WASPs.
 
VanceMack said:
Maybe the bigger discussion should be if these types of ads should be allowed at all. Wouldnt it be interesting if a fourth rate ad company in LA was responsible for bringing down the Soros machine.
Click to expand...

Well at the end of the video it says what needs to be said with the McCain-Feingold comment. And so yes they should be allowed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom