Liberal Democrats are Evil, Especially Nancy Pelosi!

Huh. I'm watching Dateline on NBC as I type this, and I'm being bombarded by political ads. There are almost no ads for anything but politics, and NBC shows tonight (as with most nights lately). But I noticed something interesting. While the pro-Obama, pro-Democratic ads are fairly standard issue, there's a common thread in the Republican ones.

One ad was an official Mitt Romney ad (he approved this message), and one was against Shelley Berkley, from the National Republican Senatorial Committee . The theme of both? Democrats are bad. Particularly liberal Democrats! Especially President Obama and his liberal Democrat "friends." Both feature shots of Nancy Pelosi, both with ominous graphics, and a sharp, staccato emphasis on words like "liberal, Democrat."  Naturally, the word "Democratic" is never used, it sounds too nice.

It's certainly not new to try and make liberal and Democrat into dirty words. It has been a mission of the Right for decades. But the similarity of these ads was striking, and the deliberate emphasis on those two words, and the somehow evilness of Pelosi was unmistakable. The stimulus, bank bailout, Affordable Care Act--all are attributed to Pelosi, and her reckless liberal spending. Two of the three big votes are also described with a hard rightward spin: wasteful stimulus, government takeover of health care, facts decidedly not in evidence. See for yourself:

The Romney one is only interesting because it's from the candidate himself. Rather than strictly focusing on Obama = bad, or Romney = good, it's trying to tar the entire Democrat[ic] Party. Unfortunately, I can't find the exact ad. The one I did find from earlier in the week seems to be a prototype of the one I saw on television, but you'll get the idea.

Romney Ads Are Driving Me Crazy

Have you watched very much television lately? Do you live in a swing state? If you're like me (my swing state is Nevada), you've been deluged, buried, shat upon by political advertisements, the majority of which are negative. But there's a difference this year, and I don't just mean the increased amount of ads made possible by Citizens United.

The difference is the level of unapologetic lying. And no--as far as I can tell--both sides don't do it. I know this because President Obama has on a couple of occasions changed the content of his ads when critics pointed out issues with their veracity. That's what usually happens in politics. Whether Team Obama deliberately lied, and was caught, or if they were simply wrong, I'll not argue. But they have corrected themselves. On the Mitt Romney side, I've seen quite the opposite. [Story continues below]



For example, Romney's first ad, a clip of Obama quoting John McCain was taken out of context to sound as though Obama was expressing his own thoughts. It's plain, it's clear, it's a lie. But it's still up, and the campaign said the result was "exactly what we want." Since then, Romney's ads have followed that template: say something untrue or out of context (I'll give the benefit of the doubt, and say unintentionally), then when called on it, soldier on anyway, undeterred, with no correction.

When I was at the dentist on Friday (see the results in my Facebook photo in the left column!), the Olympics were on the set. On every commercial break, there were at least four political ads, usually one by Romney, one by Obama, and two from the allegedly unaffiliated Romney SuperPACs. If it isn't three-to-one, it's close, with the occasional interest group-funded anti-Shelley Berkley ad. Sometimes, there's room for little else, and the same anti-Obama ad plays twice in a row.

The SuperPAC ads play like Lyndon Johnson's "Daisy" ad, with an ominous, oh-so-concerned voiceover, dramatic scary music, black-and-white quick cuts of grainy pictures, headlines, whatever. It's the same thing we all know, just A WHOLE LOT MORE!!!

But, leave it to ol' Willard to again take an out-of-context quote (one that doesn't even make sense as a point Obama would try to make), and run with it. It's the "you didn't build that" line, in an otherwise uncontroversial speech, about how we're all in this together. It was cribbed from Elizabeth Warren (who tells it better, though the President may have just had a inelegant patch in his speech that day), and about nothing more than realizing that no matter how successful you are, you had help. When you make a bundle in America, you needed America to do it. Populist stuff.

Romney's team cobbled together the President's "gaffe" (in quotes, because it really wasn't one), and has one ad in particular that is running every commercial break in Nevada. In it, they take the line and present it dishonestly. Then a grey-haired man in a green t-shirt gets all indignant and butt-hurt that the Prez is attacking him, attacking small business. Doesn't Obama realize that he and his dad built this company with his bare hands, blood and ball-sweat? Yeah, and a whole bunch of government help, it turns out!

So, the premise of the ad (that Obama meant business people didn't build their own businesses) is wrong, hinging on one barely suspect pronoun, "that." The dude in the ad is--I want to say "fraud," but let's be charitable--not completely honest.  And yet, the ad runs endlessly with no correction, no clarification. This tactic is new at the presidential level, as far as I know.

[Excerpt]


Guy Who Thinks Small Business Loans Aren’t ‘Government Help’ Also Can’t Tell Cusses From Threats

So it turns out that the business owner in that dumb Romney ad about the fake “You didn’t build that” line, and who it turns out actually did rely on government loans and contracts for some of his business, now haz a sad because some people have been calling and emailing his business to say mean things about him. Jack Gilchrist, owner of a metal fabrication company in Hudson, New Hampshire, appeared in the ad, above, whining about being “demonized” by the President for being successful, which of course rather badly misses the point. . .

Read more at: Wonkette

How to Make a Scary Political Ad

I found this clip while researching the name of that scary music they use in dirty political ads (it's called "Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi (O Fortuna)" by the way). I got onto the topic due to two new GOP be very afraid! videos.

This is how they manufacture attack ads in Australia. Not so very different from American politics, is it? Except that--by and large--it is our conservative party, not the liberal one, that practices these tactics the most. Or at least the worst.

More DIY videos at 5min.com

John McCain Against Negative Ads Before He Was For Them

Watch.

Excellent Anti-McCain ad from TruthandHope.org

Now this is how it's done. . .



Found at: AmericaBlog

New Barack Obama Ad: McCain & Deregulation

Barack Obama continues to stick to the issues in his negative advertising. And while I wouldn't be surprised if there are quibbles from the right on this, the ad seems to have the virtue of being true. Hopefully, more of this type of ad will eventually debunk in peoples' minds the meme that McCain is trying to get them to believe: that it is Obama that's getting personal in attack ads. I think McCain needs that discussion about pots and kettles.

McCain Ad Shows "HANG" Over Obama's Head

Image from source, Raw Story

Here we go again. Another political ad contains what might be a--deplorable if true--subliminal message. Taking a shot of Barack Obama at a rally, the ad shows supporters holding up letters that say, "C H A N G E." Except the shot is matted with a "vignette" effect, which changes the message to "H A N G."

Now, ordinarily I'm suspicious of claims like this. They often seem like a stretch. But as a graphic artist, I'm familiar with the vignette effect. It's even all the way around. Somebody had to go to extra effort to matte out the "C" by making the vignette effect irregularly shaped above Obama's head. That to me says, deliberate.

[Excerpt]

McCain ad questioned as word 'HANG' appears over image of Barack Obama

A McCain ad aired on Fox News channel with the words "HANG" in the background along with a photograph of Barack Obama has sparked outrage after being noticed by a reporter at a local Fox television affiliate. . .

Read more (with video) at: Raw Story

New Barack Obama Ad: McCain Don't Know Much

Catchy, and true. The only way I like "attack ads" is true. So I approve this message too!

What Republicans Think of John McCain

The string of John McCain's negative ads on Barack Obama have been catalogued exhaustively here and elsewhere, I know. The reason I've been focusing on them has been to show the desperation inherent in these mostly dishonest, and wildly scatter-shot attacks.

The most recent line of attack is to show comments made by running mate Joe Biden and former competitor, Hillary Clinton. As everyone knows, primary fights get muddy, and it isn't unusual for former competitors to join forces for the general election. In each of those cases, there are things that were said in the heat of battle that must be tempered or disavowed. Anyone remember "voodoo economics" from George H.W. Bush to Ronald Reagan?

McCain faces a bruising ad war if he continues this tack. As this video shows, many Republicans have had an unkind word or two to say about McCain, and not always in the context of a primary fight. Take a look.



Found at: NewsCorpse

An Official Anti-McCain Ad from Barack Obama

While we're having a pile-on John McCain, I'd say it's about time for an official Barack Obama anti-McCain ad. It ain't bad. It isn't as prickly as the two I posted below--Obama is still playing semi-nice--but it's effective. And once again, it's true.

Another Awesome Anti-McCain Ad

Now this is the type of ad either Barack Obama or the DNC ought to be putting out. It's a full-frontal attack on John McCain's McSame-ness with George W. Bush, and what's even better--it's all true.



Once again, found at: AmericaBlog

John McCain Befuddled at Press Conference

This video shows three camera angles of the same question. I wondered at first, why would they do that? And by the first few seconds of angle #3, I had my answer. John McCain looks absolutely lost, befuddled. He's groping for an answer, "All right. Um. . .first of all. . .um. . . . . . .the first quest. . .you said. . .why am I?" I was expecting a General Stockdale, "Who am I? Why am I here?" question next!



From AmericaBlog, via The Jed Report.

Chuck Hagel & Jack Reed Slam McCain's Tactics

Yesterday's Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer was a little odd for political gab fests. Schieffer had two guests, Republican Chuck Hagel and Democrat Jack Reed, discussing Barack Obama's over-seas tour, and John McCain's series of attacks on said trip.

Usually, in these situations, you have a back-and-forth slap fight, with each side expressing completely opposite takes on the issue (any issue). This time, they were mostly in agreement, and were both coming to Obama's defense. Interesting.

New McCain Attack Ad Uses Wounded Vets

You know, if there's ever been clearer evidence of the wedding of right-wing talk radio, FOX "News" and a political campaign, I've never seen it. John McCain is using the themes--and even some of the words--used by talkers like Sean Hannity in this latest attack ad. And, true to form, he's distorting the truth to do it. After the video, Joe Sudbay of AmericaBlog has an excellent write-up on the story.



[Excerpt]

McCain launches negative ad based on lie: The new Karl Rove version of John McCain is now on full display

McCain has a new, nasty attack ad running against Obama. It's based on pure falsehoods and a fake GOP created controversy -- and the sick thing is that McCain is now using wounded U.S. soldiers as political fodder. No surprise really -- except for McCain's media toadies who still think he's a stand-up guy. McCain has the Bush/Rove crew on board and this is standard procedure for them. McCain has got nothing to offer the American people so McCain is setting out to destroy Obama's reputation. He can't win -- he can only make Obama lose. . .

Read more at: AmericaBlog