New Obama ad Mocks McCains Inability to Remember how many Houses He Owns

McCain is in constant need of being bailed out of a senior moment , or just out of plain simple ignorance , when being interviewed by the media. In not remembering how many homes he purchased , should send a loud message to the American voters...www.breitbart.tv...

This ad is going to really hurt Obama. It's going to come back to bite him big time.

Just wait till McCain gets to ask him how he bought his million dollar home with the help of a known felon.

Then take into consideration he doesn't even own the houses himself. McCain

On top of the fact that owning multiple homes for personal use or real estate investment is not wrong.

This just makes Obama look silly.

He's grasping for straws here.

reply to post by nyk537


Both Politicians have been grasping at straws since Clinton dropped out of the race.

Thats how politics go - until the nitty gritty in Late october when everything is too tense and everyone just shuts up and waits to see how November plays out.

I liked the ad. If McSame said "the economy is strong", he must have been smoking some quality stuff. Sheesh.

reply to post by nyk537


Agreed. Its not a good line of attack for Obama. At the very least, it provides some political cover for future McCain attack ads against Obama regarding his connections to Tony Rezko. The end result of this will likely be that the Obama/Rezko connection will receive another round of public scrutiny in exchange for a day or two of relatively minor embarassment for McCain over this statement.

If I'm running the Obama campaign, the high risk is not worth the measly reward. With the public beginning to pay more attention to this election cycle, the last thing Obama should be doing is giving the greenlight for further investigations of possible skeletons in his own closet. But that's what he's essentially doing.

Reply to nyk537:

America, get ready to be re-introduced to Obama's good buddy, convicted felon, Tony Rezko! Maybe now the MSM will be forced to report on him and Obama's dealings.

Housing is not a zero-sum game. However many houses McCain has, it does not take away a house from someone else.

If I were an Independent voter, I would view McCain multiple houses as something to look up to, as opposed to the way Obama obtained his multi-million dollar mansion.

Originally posted by RRconservative
If I were an Independent voter, I would view McCain multiple houses as something to look up to, as opposed to the way Obama obtained his multi-million dollar mansion.

What was exactly wrong with the way Obama purchased his house? His bid was the best of two, and Rezko got the second half of the parcel of land independently.

Didn't take long...

McCain Plans Rezko Ads

Poor Obama...he had it reversed a couple of days ago...

He didn't know what he was getting into.

Originally posted by nyk537
Didn't take long...

McCain Plans Rezko Ads

Poor Obama...he had it reversed a couple of days ago...

He didn't know what he was getting into.

Pretty lame imho -- the deal was completely legal and Obama doesn't have anything to apologize for. Too bad Rezko ended up being a criminal, but @#$% happens.

And yet McCain has done something wrong by not knowing how many homes he owns. I don't see that as anything to apologize for either.

And I can gaurantee you the American public will find more of an issue with Rezko that they will whatever it is you think McCain did.

Obama just stepped on a land mine.

---

The main thing this tells people about Obama is he has a serious lack of judgment. He makes terrible decisions.

Rezko, Ayers, Wright, etc...



[edit on 22-8-2008 by nyk537]

Originally posted by nyk537
And yet McCain has done something wrong by not knowing how many homes he owns. I don't see that as anything to apologize for either.

No, he doesn't! It's just if a person can't count HOUSES, for gossake, how can he be trusted to count ballistic missiles and miles of oil pipeline in Georgia and the number of AA missiles in Iran?

reply to post by buddhasystem


The same way if Obama can't have better judgment than to hang around felons, terrorists, and racists.

How can we trust a President who is friendly with a terrorist?

I can't wait to hear Obama explain that in a debate.

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

The same way if Obama can't have better judgment than to hang around felons, terrorists, and racists.

You know full well that Mr.Rezko did NOT reveal any of his shady activity to Obama. If you, personally, do not suspect that your neighbor is engaged in illegal activity, which later turn out to be the case, that does not in any way reflect on YOUR character.

Perhaps, but Obama knew the man was under investigation when he payed the additional $104,500 to make his yard bigger. Obama even admitted this calling the decision "boneheaded".

It's a questions of judgment.

Having said that, how do explain his "friendly" relationship with a man who is a known terrorist who wishes he had done more to harm this country?

reply to post by buddhasystem


And if a man chooses to associate with characters such as Rezko, Ayers, etc, how can we trust him with those issues?

This is the reason that its such a problem for Obama. Regardless of whether or not Obama committed any illegal or unethical acts, his campaign has undoubtedly suffered from his connections with people such as these. Many people in the US tend to be very skeptical of the ethics and motives of all politicians even when that politician's background is spotless. The last thing he needs to be doing is inviting McCain to bring these associations back to the forefront, especially at a time when many people are only now beginning to pay attention to this election cycle.

Originally posted by nyk537
Perhaps, but Obama knew the man was under investigation when he payed the additional $104,500 to make his yard bigger. Obama even admitted this calling the decision "boneheaded".

It's a questions of judgment.

Sure. He regrets that he bought this piece of land, and that's that. It's ridiculous to expect ANYBODY to not have made any mistakes. Still, the deal was 100% legal. Shucks, there is a chance you bought a slice of pizza last week from a fugitive con who works at Papa John's under an assumed name.

Fine. I'll accept that.

Funny how you have dodged my questions about Ayers for two posts now though.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

No, he doesn't! It's just if a person can't count HOUSES, for gossake, how can he be trusted to count ballistic missiles and miles of oil pipeline in Georgia and the number of AA missiles in Iran?

Wouldn't the same apply to someone who couldn't count the number of states? Obama thought there was 57 states.

Originally posted by RRconservative

Originally posted by buddhasystem

No, he doesn't! It's just if a person can't count HOUSES, for gossake, how can he be trusted to count ballistic missiles and miles of oil pipeline in Georgia and the number of AA missiles in Iran?

Wouldn't the same apply to someone who couldn't count the number of states? Obama thought there was 57 states.

Hey it cant be worse than staying in Iraq for 100years, stating that iraq borders pakistan or that Putin is the president of Germany

I think Ill let the "Putin president of Germany" thing go.... he may have had his senior moment that time and meant Soviet controlled East Germany.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by southern_Guardian]

Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

And if a man chooses to associate with characters such as Rezko, Ayers, etc, how can we trust him with those issues?

This is the reason that its such a problem for Obama. Regardless of whether or not Obama committed any illegal or unethical acts, his campaign has undoubtedly suffered from his connections with people such as these. Many people in the US tend to be very skeptical of the ethics and motives of all politicians even when that politician's background is spotless. The last thing he needs to be doing is inviting McCain to bring these associations back to the forefront, especially at a time when many people are only now beginning to pay attention to this election cycle.

Oh so now we're comparing the candidates guilt by association eh? Fair enough.

How about McCains $280,000 contribution from big oil?

And Bush? him and McCain are pritty close, McCain voted 95% with Bush in 2007, 100% this year. As mr Bushes approval rating went down, McCains voting record with Bush went up. How about McCain covering Bushes ass over his lies about the Iraq war eh? How about the 4000 troops that have died in this war of lies, the one McCain is covering up.... the very troops he refuses to support behind closed doors with such policies as the GI bill?

What about McCains wife cindy and her drug addiction? Oh wasnt she a thief that time as well?

How about McCain ditching his wife for a rich stepford wife?

Where was McCain during that horrible days of hurricane Katrina? oh yes he was with Bush, the biggest liar and cheat of them all.

And McCains good buddy and senior advisor Charlie black? The lobbyist who earned over $50million over the last 10years representing companies like Occidental Petroleum Corporation, an oil exploration compan. No wonder McCain is in such a hurry to drill drill drill in Alaska!

Need I go on? Or are you just going to throw more rightwing myths at me?

There no "morals, values or ethics" left in the republican party. They gave their committment to the oil companies 5years ago. The people left to support them are the very same people who easily gave into these lies, people who live in fear. This is why Ron Paul lost, this is why theres no real conservatives left in that party, people are not supporting the GOP for true conservative values any longer.

I couldnt give a rats ass if you dont like Barack Obama because of his left wing policies, but this isnt the issue coming from righties and hilldogs. The issues they site are issues they cant seem to prove. Sounds more like excuses.



[edit on 22-8-2008 by southern_Guardian]