When Karl Rove says you went too far, maybe you should reassess your strategy

[JohnnyMack]

"McCain has gone in some of his ads -- similarly gone one step too far," he told Fox News, "and sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know, beyond the '100 percent truth' test."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/14/campaign.wrap/index.html

Karl Rove is the modern day architect of "burn down everything in your wake" politics and even he sees how desperate McCain is coming across.

[Ike]

pity reply.


I might have more to say if you were whining about spek, or about people whining about spek.

[achiro]

Wow, I saw that interview this morning and wow, just wow. The context was COMPLETELY different, I guess we can add CNN to the list of "they want Obama's jock". He did say both but spent the next few minutes talking about Obama and the McCain doesn't email ad and how McCain can't type because of his war injuries etc etc, then mentioned McCain only after the interviewer asked. Rove had to think for a bit before he could even come up with something. That article really changes it around, bigtime.

[47straight]

Wait, what? I thought Rove worked for McCain? That's the impression the obama campaign and dailykossers have given me.

[JohnnyMack]

Wow, I saw that interview this morning and wow, just wow. The context was COMPLETELY different, I guess we can add CNN to the list of "they want Obama's jock". He did say both but spent the next few minutes talking about Obama and the McCain doesn't email ad and how McCain can't type because of his war injuries etc etc, then mentioned McCain only after the interviewer asked. Rove had to think for a bit before he could even come up with something. That article really changes it around, bigtime.

You watch Fox News? Color me shocked.

[JohnnyMack]

DNdtZGqZA2Y

[achiro]

You watch Fox News? Color me shocked.

It wasn't on fox new, it was on Mike Wallace show. I thought he was interviewing Palin this morning so I made a point of watching.
Irregardless(hahaha homey!), the point was that the focus was on Obama's ads and this made it sound like just the opposite.

[achiro]

DNdtZGqZA2Y

Yeah, there ya go, not only does that miss the first of the interview topic, it is then edited to come across differently.

[JohnnyMack]

I thought he was interviewing Palin this morning so I made a point of watching.

Pfffttt...she gave her interview. They've put her back in the Cheney-like bubble and she's now only to be rolled out at campaign stops to say "I told them thanks but no thanks for that bridge to nowhere. If we wanted that bridge we'd build it ourselves" for the 35,536th time.

[achiro]

Look JM, if this is an example of where you get your information, it explains a lot of your thoughts on this stuff.

[JohnnyMack]

Look JM, if this is an example of where you get your information, it explains a lot of your thoughts on this stuff.

I went to youtube. I typed in "rove mccain" and that popped up. I linked it to this site. If you do that, you too will have the same results.

The first I heard of it was on cnn.com, not some blogsite as you so incorrectly think. Take off your tin foil hat.

[achiro]

I was actually at youtube while you were typing that, search: Carl Rove, entered today and this was the first one that came up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ao0b9Vz9Ss
It is the entire interview. I was wrong on the time spent talki ng about Obama but watch it, then read the article. Any objectiveness can clearly see that they just conveniently left out his points about Obama.:rolleyes:

Stick with the tin foil hat schtick though, its a good diversion to use when your bs is shown in its true light. :rolleyes:

[achiro]

Oh yeah and achiropwned

[SCOUT]

Watching that clip that JohnnyMack posted was like watching the Daily Show. It is a true statement, but misconstrued to make a point.

Thanks for posting the whole clip achiro, I hope they do the same thing for the entire Palin interview.

[JohnnyMack]

I was actually at youtube while you were typing that, search: Carl Rove, entered today and this was the first one that came up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ao0b9Vz9Ss
It is the entire interview. I was wrong on the time spent talki ng about Obama but watch it, then read the article. Any objectiveness can clearly see that they just conveniently left out his points about Obama.:rolleyes:

Stick with the tin foil hat schtick though, its a good diversion to use when your bs is shown in its true light. :rolleyes:

I don't see how the context of that entire interview changes anything. Of course Karl Rove is going to say negative things about Obama while he's on Fox News. Are you that thick? It's when he says openly negative things about McCain's campaign and how it's being run that you should take notice. Which of course was the point of my thread. Before you came in here and started screeching like a howler monkey that I get my information from some liberal blogger.

[achiro]

I don't see how the context of that entire interview changes anything. Of course Karl Rove is going to say negative things about Obama while he's on Fox News. Are you that thick? It's when he says openly negative things about McCain's campaign and how it's being run that you should take notice. Which of course was the point of my thread. Before you came in here and started screeching like a howler monkey that I get my information from some liberal blogger.

If you see that I typed "liberal blogger" anywhere in this thread I will give you a brazillion dollars but keep trying.
I am not worried about whether he talked about Obama or McCain, thats not the point. The point is that you posted half truths as the entire story. Now whether you knew it was a half truth or not is something you half to deal with. It makes you either a liar or ignorant of the truth. Which is it?

[SCOUT]

I don't see how the context of that entire interview changes anything. Of course Karl Rove is going to say negative things about Obama while he's on Fox News. Are you that thick? It's when he says openly negative things about McCain's campaign and how it's being run that you should take notice. Which of course was the point of my thread. Before you came in here and started screeching like a howler monkey that I get my information from some liberal blogger.

context is fun.


I don't see how Karl Rove is going to say negative things about Obama

When you clip things just right, it can almost seem like you are saying something different.

[JohnnyMack]

If you see that I typed "liberal blogger" anywhere in this thread I will give you a brazillion dollars but keep trying.
I am not worried about whether he talked about Obama or McCain, thats not the point. The point is that you posted half truths as the entire story. Now whether you knew it was a half truth or not is something you half to deal with. It makes you either a liar or ignorant of the truth. Which is it?

I'm neither. Reading is hard.

[47straight]

Yeah, I know what you mean. I thought I heard something kind of funny from what JM said.


I get my information from some liberal blogger.

Oh yeah, that's it! :texan:



We read this case in evidence class about some prosecutors who edited out the "not" from a suspect's interview that originally read, "I did not do it." Appeals court didn't overturn, said that it wouldn't have made a difference. I thought that the prosecutors shoulda been disbarred.

[King Crimson]

why does anyone think Karl Rove is saying what he *really* thinks anyway?

the last time Karl said something non-strategic was....?

[achiro]

I'm neither.
How do you figure that? You either knew it was a half truth and posted it anyway(which would make you a liar) or that you didn't know it was a half truth(which, of course, would make you ignorant on the truth) I can't think of any other options.



Reading is hard.
I'm doing fine thanks.

[SCOUT]

I don't see how the context of that entire interview changes anything. Of course Karl Rove is going to say negative things about Obama while he's on Fox News. Are you that thick? It's when he says openly negative things about McCain's campaign and how it's being run that you should take notice. Which of course was the point of my thread. Before you came in here and started screeching like a howler monkey that I get my information from some liberal blogger.

More context fun

Of course Obama says openly that you should get information from some liberal blogger.

[Okla-homey]

whatever. T-45 and we're leading. In four weeks, we'll know for sure.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

[Widescreen]

JohnnyMack is officially DonkTuba. Seriously, achiro is exactly right that you either were ignorant of the entire statement or simply posted this skewed and edited video to stir up crap. Now you can color me shocked.

[Partial Qualifier]

JohnnyMack, posting to stir up crap?

seriously?!?

[C&CDean]

JM is just doing what desperate people do.

[Veritas]

Jeebus Mack. You done jumped the shark.

[JohnnyMack]

How do you figure that? You either knew it was a half truth and posted it anyway(which would make you a liar) or that you didn't know it was a half truth(which, of course, would make you ignorant on the truth) I can't think of any other options.


I didn't post a half truth. I posted the part of the article/interview that related to what Rove said in regards to McCain. Nothing I posted was half-true, nor was I ignorant of what was said by Rove as I read the article on cnn.com which if you had bothered to read it, explained the entire context. I chose to post the part about McCain because I found it interesting that Rove would say anything negative about him.

[achiro]

I didn't post a half truth.
Um, yes you did.


I posted the part of the article/interview that related to what Rove said in regards to McCain. Nothing I posted was half-true, nor was I ignorant of what was said by Rove as I read the article on cnn.com which if you had bothered to read it, explained the entire context. I chose to post the part about McCain because I found it interesting that Rove would say anything negative about him.

You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig.

[SoonerBorn68]

Um, yes you did.



You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig.

I'm shocked--shocked and outraged. Everyone knows Johnny wears lip gloss, not lipstick.

[OklahomaTuba]

So, what is Mavrick doing to poor wittle obambi???

Seriously, what lie is The One bitching about? Is it that Mccain called Obama out for wanting to teach 5 year olds how to have gay sex?

[KC//CRIMSON]

So, what is Mavrick doing to poor wittle obambi???

Seriously, what lie is The One bitching about? Is it that Mccain called Obama out for wanting to teach 5 year olds how to have gay sex?


http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/The%20Mavrick%20TWN.jpg


Tuba, ladies and gentlemen.

[47straight]

I didn't post a truth of the article/interview that related to what Rove said in regards to McCain. Nothing I posted was true, nor was I bothered to read the entire context. I chose to post the part about McCain because I found it negative about him.



This new hasn't worn off doing this yet for me.