Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Was the Reverend Wright "leak" to the NY Times intentional ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 09:49 AM
Original message
Was the Reverend Wright "leak" to the NY Times intentional ?

Almost immediately, Mitt Romney came out to denounce it.

But what was the purpose of the "leak"?

Was it intended to bring out the Rev Wright issue once again? I don't think so.

In my opinion, it was intended to send a message to the Obama campaign. We will withhold any Republican ads that mention your religious connections to the Reverend Wright and we expect your campaign to do the same in regards to any religious connections to our candidate, Mitt Romney. To do otherwise is to engage in an unacceptable negative type of campaigning.

It was not a "leak". The "46-page document" was part of a plan by the Romney campaign, in my opinion. They understand that the Mormon "issue" is the Achilles heel of their effort to win the White House. The Republican Party cannot win without its Southern base. But the states in the South are very Southern Baptist and do not look favorably upon the Mormon religion. Some have even called it a "cult". The Romney campaign understands this very well. They are doing their best to silence the issue. That is what the "leak" was all about...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. If so then it was a very clever scheme... All other considerations aside.
Not that I think the Reverend Wright thing would do anything but boomerang on the R's, especially in this climate.

SOURCES INSIDE


MY HEAD TELL ME


The answer is... yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. It sounds possible.
But Romney campaign and the man himself is such a mess. It's starting to remind me of the McCain/Palin campaign. Seems to be falling apart. Will be interesting to see the VP choice. A real hard core Fundie? That's about the only choice I can see making Romney look good. And, then that would be a stretch.

But, then...what do I know. I didn't think Bush II would win two terms and while I wasn't happy about Kerry...I thought we Dems could pull him over the top because of the anger over Bush years by the Democrats. I guess during that time only "some" Democrats were angry. The rest couldn't be bothered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. anyone who voted for w the first time, ok, I can let it slide, I know plenty who did, but, I am
close friends with no one who voted for W in '04! Those people are off their rockers for voting for him again. What a horrible first term, and there was no reason to believe anything would change in a 2nd term. I was shocked and sickened as most of us here were when W "won" in '04. As for '12, well, I think the Mormon factor is important. When I was young and going to church, people would talk about the Mormon cult. I cannot believe that a majority of those types of people who were so boisterous in church back in the day, would vote for a Mormon for president. If they are right, the presence of a Mormon becoming president will cause great interest in the Mormon church and prominence they've never had. I kind of doubt that all those folks will vote for him. Especially if an outside group focuses on the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Agree, Divine Discontent.....No one I knew voted for Bush II ..Second Term
Edited on Sat May-19-12 05:43 PM by KoKo
BUT...the truth is...he WON. And, then...Bush I (Chimpy) won ANOTHER FOUR YEARS!

Me and my friends "Dem Activists" of the Dean/Kucinich Years were horrified! We didn't know WHAT to DO!

But, unbeknown to us... A PLAN WAS IN PLACE.

The Plan is IN PLACE.

I'm HOPING with EVERTHING I HAVE that the "New" DLC/THIRD WAY PLAN succeeds...because, if it doesn't...will be wild times ahead. Not something I hope for or anticipate...but it's definitely a concern going forward.

Just saying.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-12 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. Ya mean they didn't want people like this talking...
and getting widespread attention? Compliments of my homepage, buzzflash.com http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05/13/former-mormon-e... /

And I had a funny conversation with a friend a few nights ago about how Ed Vigorrie and other uber leaders of the uber religious right had been calling Mormonism a cult since the first time that he'd run for president. Are they gonna vote for a cultist or stay home was my question.

His parents are affiliated with Bob Jones University so we have a great laugh with that whole 'look in the mirror' thingy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-20-12 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
6. As Colbert and his Republican lawyer have shown brilliantly,
Edited on Sun May-20-12 09:37 AM by No Elephants
the candidate and the Super Pac are not allowed to coordinate with each other.

Winkety wink wink.

This is pure Rove. Attack the other side where you are most vulnerable.

Hence war hero Kerry gets Swiftboated by supporters of the "No drug test for me" draft dodger who went AWOL to the point where neither side had to bring up the war again.

There is a difference, however. Lying or not, the Swiftboaters attacked Kerry on his own behavior. Obama is getting attacked for Wright's behavior.

But, bottom line, the Wright thing may have had some relevance in a primary fight. Obama's been in office almost four years now. We no longer have to try to figure out what kind of President he may make by digging into his past. We KNOW what kind of President he will make.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-22-12 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. I always thought the leak was about
trying to direct attention toward Wright's church. Why? I don't know. To stir up some crap around our candidate's faith or method of worship? Something about the church itself?

Wright himself always seemed very suspicious to me. Like he was trying to draw negative attention to himself. I believed he had been bribed or bought off in order to help instigate a scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Sep 19th 2014, 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC