Andrea Mitchell call THIS a "remarkably negative ad":

[jenmito]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PluoMotgl2w
(It's the new one where Obama says McCain may not BE Bush, but he voted with him 90% of the time.) :eyes:

[Captiosus]

1. Well, to republicans like Mitchell, the truth IS negative.

They just can't handle being told the truth to their face.

[Left Is Write]

2. "Remarkably negative"? Why? Because it uses McCain's actual record and his own words?

[d_b]

3. Mrs. Greenspan can eat my dump.

It's true.

[vaberella]

6. I'm Vabby, and I fully support, agree, and believe in the above statement. n/t

[cynatnite]

4. It is a negative ad...

It's the truth, but still negative.

on edit: After thinking about it, I don't understand what she means when she says 'remarkably', though. Maybe it's more negative than normal for Obama. :shrug:

[Left Is Write]

22. Oh, yes, it fits the definition of a negative political ad -

it's the "remarkably" negative characterization that's baffling.

[cynatnite]

29. Maybe it's because she thought it was unusual for Obama...

She wasn't considering other negative ads he's done or else forgot about them. That's the only explanation that would make sense. If she hadn't, then it is very odd to use that word.

[tigereye]

34. I think it's pretty terse - and not full of vindictive accusations -

unlike the McCain ads full of nasty pix and 40 year old terrorism accusations.


I think it's pretty clever actually. :hi:

[cynatnite]

36. McCain lost it as a sound bite...

That was effing great. :hi:

[Thrill]

5. Shes an idiot

[Poiuyt]

7. If someone compared me to Bush, I'd consider it negative

[boppers]

8. I think she meant:

"Remarkably negative for the McCain campaign".

The last 5 seconds are what really drives it home, with McCain *endorsing* Obama's talking point.

[jenmito]

19. Then she should've said what she meant. I think she meant what she said-to get that

message out to the viewers. And it's a lie.

[cynatnite]

20. She probably did say what she meant...

she can't control what people thinks about it. I didn't take it the same way you did.

[jenmito]

28. So she really meant it's a "remarkably negative ad"? You think she really meant that?

[cynatnite]

31. Yeah, I think she meant it...

Either she forgot about Obama's other negative ads and found this to be unusual for him or she did know and there is no real reason to use it.

That's how I see it. I don't view it the same as you and I don't see the problem here.

[jenmito]

40. The problem I see is that she calls this ad "remarkably negative." I'D call it

"factual." "Remarkably negative" IMO would be McCain's ads implying Obama's a pervert for "teaching comprehensive sex ed. to kindergartners" and saying he hangs around with terrorists.

[cynatnite]

42. An ad can be negative and still factual...this one was both. n/t

[jenmito]

44. Do you think it's REMARKABLY negative? n/t

[cynatnite]

46. It's a freaking adverb. Get over it already.

:rofl:

[jenmito]

48. So you agree with Mrs. Greenspan (R).

Gotcha. ;)

[cynatnite]

49. So, I don't give a shit if she said it was 'fucking' negative...

:eyes: Never seen anyone attach themselves to a word so much before.

[jenmito]

54. I'VE never seen anyone defend Mrs. Greenspan's use of a word so much before.

:eyes: Back atcha.

[cynatnite]

57. Did you miss the 'I don't give a shit' part?

:rofl:

This is why DU can be so much fun.

[jenmito]

63. AND? Does that mean I can't respond to you?

:rofl: You wish I'd let it go!

[Hansel]

53. I think so too.

I've heard Andrea say things that have made my jaw drop because they are so out of line with the facts. And then after I hear her explanation, I understand she's not saying what I thought she was saying. She just has kind of a backward way of saying things.

Not to defend her. It's just an observation.

[billyoc]

9. She's right, I can think of no more damning statement.

[AlCzervik]

10. so pointing out McCain's own voting record is a negative thing?

[CakeGrrl]

11. The problem is, this negativity happens to be TRUTH from McCain's own mouth

no fabrication from the Obama team needed.

McCain's negativity is based on lies and smears about Obama.

We need a Dem surrogate to state this difference plainly.

[icnorth]

12. Effective, Andrea

effective is the word you're looking for not negative.

[CoffeeCat]

13. Andrea Mitchell is politically bipolar...

One minute she sounds reasonable; the next she's making over-the-top comments about Obama.

That woman is all over the map.

I imagine that much of this has to do with the high-pressure tactics that both campaigns unleash
on the media. Both campaigns do it. However, McCain seems hell-bent on bullying the media into
spewing his talking points and strong-arming the media into going overboard to help him out.

They say, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease" and I think the McCain camp is rabid about
complaining and ranting about how they don't get a fair shake.

The other day, when Michelle Bachman was on, Tweety came out and said that the McCain talking points
included verbiage about questioning the patriotism of liberal Congress members. Those were the
marketing tidbits that the McCain camp and the RNC wanted the media to filter down into our living rooms.

Isn't that soooooo revolting?????? The media needs to be telling these people to 'get bent'.

[Kajsa]

14. What does she think of McCain's ads,

and robocalls?!?

:(

[jenmito]

23. Probably that McCain doesn't even KNOW about them-that his campaign "hides"

them from him since he'd be against such negative ads. :eyes:

[Kajsa]

33. Oh that's right!

:sarcasm:- silly me!

:eyes:

[HughMoran]

15. Fuck her and her economy destroying husband

She can rot in hell as far as I'm concerned.

[mckara]

16. Sometimes Facts Have a Liberal Bias

Especially, when Republicans don't want to hear them!

:rofl:

[redstate_democrat]

17. A.Mitchell is an elitist airhead.

Married to another elitist airhead.

[abumbyanyothername]

18. I would not take it down.

I would not, myself, call it negative. McCain is saying, "I'm not." Obama is saying "Yes you are" and backing that up with facts, and McCain's own words. So in one sense, the ad is positive -- this is what my opponent is, in his own words.

I was outraged by the Old and Sick ad, featuring McCain's scar, and asked where I could donate to get it taken off the air.

But this ad goes straight to a point that McCain stated in the last debate. And does not exaggerate or twist facts.

[NRaleighLiberal]

21. Ah, she is pissed because Hubby is on CNN's top 10 financial bad guys list!

[Xipe Totec]

24. Hate Crime! Obama calls McCain a REPUBLICAN!

Alert the Anti Defamation League!

[karynnj]

25. The interesting thing is what that characterization means

That ad says the McCain is very like Bush. The negativity of the ad is dependent on your view of Bush. But, the ad features McCain saying that he he did support and vote with Bush 90% of the time - more than some other Republicans. That McCain statement DOES justify saying McCain is similar to Bush.

The surprising thing is that when McCain is associating Obama with Ayers, Mitchell seems to think that being equated to Bush is bad (in spite of much praise in the past for Bush).

[Cha]

26. Jesus Hussein Christ, andrea fucking greenspan..

Tell the facts about mccain and you say it's "remarkably negative"..you may be right since there's nothing positive to say about mccain.

How about "remarkably dead on"?

[OwnedByFerrets]

27. I would love to see more like it....is remarkably effective!!

[grantcart]

30. It is a negative ad --- what would you call it a positive ad -- it is a true negative ad

McCain runs negative ads that are lies or try to raise fear by irrelevent fear of association. completely different but she is right.



What do you think the reporters are going to say - lets stop everything and call it.


Andrea also was accurate when she called the Powell endorsement devestating. She had the strongest comments and she was right.


Good Andrea is out and Bad Andrea is sleeping.

[jenmito]

32. I'd call it a "factual ad." I agree with the part about what she said about the Powell

endorsement, though.

[grantcart]

39. well its a factual negative ad. There is nothing wrong with negative ads - if they are factual

Imagine running against Bush in 2004 - He started the Iraq war factual and negative - nothing wrong with it.

[jenmito]

41. Do you consider it REMARKABLY negative? n/t

[jonnyblitz]

62. wow, you are over-the-top OBSESSING.

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

it says more about YOU. :scared:

[jenmito]

64. And what does it say about YOU that you feel the need to

comment on something you obviously don't care about? :rofl:

[abumbyanyothername]

47. This reminds me of Al Franken in the MN Senate Race

They asked him about the negative campaigning (they asked all the candidates the same question and gave them each (there are 3) a 2 minute response time).

"Well, I've been running against Norm Coleman's record, and it's kind of hard to talk about Norm's record and NOT sound negative."

I believe he ceded the remainder of his time on that one.

[varelse]

35. That speaks volumes about Bush, doesn't it? (nt)

[TexasObserver]

37. "When McCain says, in another context, he voted with Bush 90% of the time."

Mrs. Greenspan should not be allowed to say anything without having a big sign around her neck saying "married to Alan Greenspan, architect of the economic crisis."

It wasn't another context. He said it when he was running for president, and said it with pride.

I can't believe she was trying to spin that ad. She's disgusting.

[jenmito]

43. Thank you for agreeing with me.

There are quite a few people here who disagree. :hi:

[livedemocarticordie]

38. right

only remarkable comparison to the 70% feel good sweetheart ones he has been running

[Doremus]

45. Ugh. The references to "Mrs. Greenspan"

Can you picture those two flat cardboard people, ahem, doing it?

My mind's eye bleeds.

[LynneSin]

50. what's negative about the truth

:shrug:

[Tribetime]

51. I wish they would separate personal attack ads that are lies from

true ads on the issues that are negative to the opposition. It's totally misleading

[stillcool]

52. I wish they would do that with..

the 'news'. They have one person on that says 1+1=2, and another guy that says 1+1=3, and they are both considered valid points.

[Medusa]

55. Remarkably negative now equals telling the truth?

:rofl:

[Lerrad]

56. Thanks for posting that! It was great! n/t

[Carolina]

58. that's when I turned off MTP

It was bad enough that the roundtbale was peopled by repukes like David Brooks and Joe-the-intern- killer but then that witch said that and compared it -- as though equal -- to McLame's robo calling that accuses Obama of being a terrorist or muslim or whatever.

Truth is not NEGATIVE. McCain's own words coming back to haunt him, to be used against him, is a sweet Mastercard moment!

Fuck you, Mrs. Greenspan.

[Erin Elizabeth]

59. Does anyone give a shit what Andrea Mitchell thinks?

She starts talking and my husband just wanders out of the room. She bores the ass off of everyone. She's irrelevant.

[rainbow4321]

60. She looks like the female version of The Joker when she smiles

Creepy to look at.

[Erin Elizabeth]

61. Sure does. Too much plastic surgery.