Count me in with the people who can't figure out where this came from.

Wow - it doesn't look like anyone is putting Cindy McCain on a pedestal here. The discussion just seems to be about how acceptable it is to bring candidates' wives into the public debate.

I don't see anything wrong with Shiner's posts in this thread. He's not an Obama fan, and he doesn't think that Michelle Obama should be free from criticism. I don't see the problem.

Back on the subject - the statements of potential First Ladies don't make such a difference to me. It's interesting to see where they stand, but it's by no means determinative. If the potential first lady tries to make herself an issue in the campaign (like Theresa Heinz Kerry did during the last cycle), I think they open themselves up to some criticism. I don't think it deserves the same scrutiny as comments made by candidates, though.

Negative backfire? Yeah right! It's been proven time and time again that negative campaigning is more effective than positive or comparison campaigning.

Not sure how the post of mine you quoted was too-liberal-to-believe?

I think if anyone would speak their mind in America, truly speak their mind and opinion, SOMETHING they say will offend more the half of the country. PERIOD. Now, I do not condone racism, and I do not know if I could vote for a president if he or his wife make racist remarks. With that said, I support Michelle Obama from what I KNOW for a fact she has said (i.e. not this supposed crap), because she is out their saying her mind and letting it known. That is more than I can say on almost merely all politicians and their spouses. The video attached to this article offended me more then the article. I stopped the video after I saw some dumb jackass saying he has always loved this country because he has the right to bear arms while showing his 20 billion guns in the back. That is like saying 'I love this country because I can be excessive with showcasing my apparent masculinity.' Anywho, it is not fair to cast drastic judgement without proof, of course, if I saw a video of M.O. attacking "whitey" then I guess, for a second election in a row, I am reduced to wasting my vote on the libertarian party.

Rule number one....don't smoke crack.

With all due, honest respect for the following posters (and others) POVs, thoughts, beliefs et al this is what I was told yesterday:
1) IF the tape(s) truly existed, they would have been in the hands of the major, mass media by NOW.
2) They simply DO NOT exist.
So, as I think I posted before, we are all just going to have to wait and truly see just what does happen between now and Nov.
And at some point, someone can find this thread and post: "I TOLD YOU SO"!:p :eek:;):):D

Yep.

There's no way that this would not be reported if evidence exists.

It would be all over the airwaves, cable and print.

Wright was only saying what many say everyday. :) Perhpas in more colorful language that unfortunately blurred the message and offended some.

Those of you who don't exist with a head up your ass should know that this really isn't about being liberal. Or a Democrat. :)

^^ I agree. I would say more, but...yeah.

Ditto here.

This might be just personal preference, and maybe it's only because of my closeness to those who have worked on campaigns (my wife has worked fairly high up in political campaigns and administrations), but I wouldn't necessarily be posting what I heard from friends embedded in the campaigns, even in such a vague and anonymous way.

I never asked my wife anything about the goings-on of campaigns (I viewed it as a confidential, privileged relationship, on par with an attorney-client relationship, that was no business of mine), but if someone did tell you something, I wouldn't be posting it on a public message board. It just doesn't seem worth it to quell discussion when you could be revealing more than is public knowledge.

Maybe I have a hypersensitivity to this, but that's just my two cents.

I don't think it is impossible at all to hold information back. Now, if the tape is real I'll be surprised if they can hold it until Sept./Nov., but considering this story is just recently picking up steam, I wouldn't be surprised if someone was able to keep it under wraps for a few weeks.

The more controversial, the more difficult, of course. But if you think the GOP hasn't been holding back on things throughout this election cycle, I personally find that view extremely naive.

Shiner;
I agree-just change parties;)
HOWEVER-I just hope that neither side goes, for what ever "reason" to that type of plan.
And I include any and all surrogates in that.
For so many reasons including a rather strong wish not to have to buy a new TV or radio.....:eek::(;):)
It would be rather nice, IMVHO, to have a campaign on real issues and polices for a change.:cool:

I think whether or not a candidate and his family exhibit racial spite is a real issue. Same for the inquiries about Barack's feelings toward America.

I don't want to manufacture controversy, but a lot of this country fears a Barack Obama presidency, and the more light we can shed on his sentiments...the better. Perhaps that light will show he's not the fringe ideologue that many fear, but regardless, I think these are worthwhile subjects.