<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Stunningly Dishonest Campaign Ad</title>
	<atom:link href="http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 10:28:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: gcotharn</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40835</link>
		<dc:creator>gcotharn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:25:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40835</guid>
		<description>I appreciate your consideration in reading through my previous comment.

One protestation:  this lunatic has aknowledged, in a reply to Hold_That_Tiger in the previous Landstuhl thread, that Obama did speak to the troops by phone, after the s@#%storm had begun, which therefore is indicative of nothing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I appreciate your consideration in reading through my previous comment.</p>
<p>One protestation:  this lunatic has aknowledged, in a reply to Hold_That_Tiger in the previous Landstuhl thread, that Obama did speak to the troops by phone, after the s@#%storm had begun, which therefore is indicative of nothing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40832</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:32:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40832</guid>
		<description>gcotharn:

1. Your &quot;inserted notes&quot; do NOT make it clear what Obama was saying, because he *didn&#039;t* say those things -- *you did.*

2. Obama did not &quot;refuse to visit w/o Gration,&quot; and he never said anything close to that. You simply made that up and are trying to pass off as truth the lie that Obama said it. He did not.

3. &lt;i&gt;Wild speculation, but here’s my instinct of things: Gration was angered, and Gration convinced Obama to teach Landstuhl/Pentagon a lesson by cancelling the visit.&lt;/i&gt;

Well, at least here you acknowledge that your statement is &quot;wild speculation&quot; and not truth. Speculate all you want, as long as you admit that&#039;s what you&#039;re doing.

4. &lt;i&gt;Why was Obama a bit vague? He is trying to get away with his “politicized” story. &lt;/i&gt;

Why was Obama a bit vague? Because he *doesn&#039;t know each and every detail,* because *his staff was working this event, not him.* Which is what he told Jake Tapper. If you want to believe something else, fine; but don&#039;t attribute it to Obama.

5. &lt;i&gt;Unfortunately for Obama, he’s not so good at admitting mistakes.&lt;/i&gt;

Actually, that&#039;s false. Obama has admitted mistakes several times in this campaign. In this instance, *he did not make a mistake.* It&#039;s the Pentagon&#039;s fault that this happened,* for telling Obama&#039;s staff *after they were already in Europe, on a campaign-financed trip, with only campaign staff and without any Senate staff,* that he could not visit Landstuhl with a former military officer who had endorsed his candidacy.

Also lost in all this, and completely unmentioned by you or any of the other lunatics who are savaging Obama for this incident, is the FACT that he (Obama) *did* speak to the wounded troops *by phone.* </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>gcotharn:</p>
<p>1. Your &#8220;inserted notes&#8221; do NOT make it clear what Obama was saying, because he *didn&#8217;t* say those things &#8212; *you did.*</p>
<p>2. Obama did not &#8220;refuse to visit w/o Gration,&#8221; and he never said anything close to that. You simply made that up and are trying to pass off as truth the lie that Obama said it. He did not.</p>
<p>3. <i>Wild speculation, but here’s my instinct of things: Gration was angered, and Gration convinced Obama to teach Landstuhl/Pentagon a lesson by cancelling the visit.</i></p>
<p>Well, at least here you acknowledge that your statement is &#8220;wild speculation&#8221; and not truth. Speculate all you want, as long as you admit that&#8217;s what you&#8217;re doing.</p>
<p>4. <i>Why was Obama a bit vague? He is trying to get away with his “politicized” story. </i></p>
<p>Why was Obama a bit vague? Because he *doesn&#8217;t know each and every detail,* because *his staff was working this event, not him.* Which is what he told Jake Tapper. If you want to believe something else, fine; but don&#8217;t attribute it to Obama.</p>
<p>5. <i>Unfortunately for Obama, he’s not so good at admitting mistakes.</i></p>
<p>Actually, that&#8217;s false. Obama has admitted mistakes several times in this campaign. In this instance, *he did not make a mistake.* It&#8217;s the Pentagon&#8217;s fault that this happened,* for telling Obama&#8217;s staff *after they were already in Europe, on a campaign-financed trip, with only campaign staff and without any Senate staff,* that he could not visit Landstuhl with a former military officer who had endorsed his candidacy.</p>
<p>Also lost in all this, and completely unmentioned by you or any of the other lunatics who are savaging Obama for this incident, is the FACT that he (Obama) *did* speak to the wounded troops *by phone.*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pug</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40828</link>
		<dc:creator>Pug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:15:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40828</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;John’s better than that&lt;/i&gt;

No he isn&#039;t, Senator Hagel.

McCain inreasingly looks like he&#039;s running for Crabby Old Grandpa of the United States.  Unfortunately, this particular bit of sleaze is probably only the beginning.

He has nothing positive to offer, only same old character assassination Republicans have used since Lee Atwater ran G.H.W. Bush&#039;s sleazy campaign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>John’s better than that</i></p>
<p>No he isn&#8217;t, Senator Hagel.</p>
<p>McCain inreasingly looks like he&#8217;s running for Crabby Old Grandpa of the United States.  Unfortunately, this particular bit of sleaze is probably only the beginning.</p>
<p>He has nothing positive to offer, only same old character assassination Republicans have used since Lee Atwater ran G.H.W. Bush&#8217;s sleazy campaign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gcotharn</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40804</link>
		<dc:creator>gcotharn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40804</guid>
		<description>Okay, I&#039;m laying this out, then you can damn me or whatever, and I am completely done, b/c I can&#039;t do any more than this.  I&#039;m inserting my own inserted notes, in brackets, to make it clear what Obama is saying.  Why was Obama a bit vague?  He is trying to get away with his &quot;politicized&quot; story.  But, look at what he is saying in your ABC News story above:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Continued Obama, “And we got notice that he [Gration] would be treated as a campaign person, and it [Gration&#039;s visiting Landstuhl] would therefore be perceived as political because he had endorsed my candidacy but he wasn’t on the Senate staff. That triggered then a concern that maybe our visit [with Gration w/us] was going to be perceived as political. And the last thing that I want to do is have injured soldiers and the staff at these wonderful institutions having to sort through whether this [a visit with Gration w/us] is political or not or get caught in the crossfire between campaigns.”

“So rather than go forward [with the visit with Gration w/us] and potentially get caught up in what might have been considered a political controversy of some sort,” Obama said, “what we decided was that we not make a visit....&lt;/blockquote&gt;If Obama visits w/o Gration, no one to this day knows who Gration is, and Obama receives no more criticism than such a visit would&#039;ve originally generated from stupid and/or partisan persons.

Obama refused to visit w/o Gration, and that&#039;s exactly what he is saying in his vague-enough-to- gain-media-sympathy statement.  

You know what I actually suspect/speculate?  Wild speculation, but here&#039;s my instinct of things:  Gration was angered, and Gration convinced Obama to teach Landstuhl/Pentagon a lesson by cancelling the visit.  However, the Pentagon plays hardball.  Pentagon then had a hospital person release that specific heart-tugging quote to the media:  &quot;I don&#039;t know why Obama didn&#039;t come.  We were all ready for him.&quot;  That quote, which implies disappointed wounded troops, is a quote guaranteed to get someone like me all in a lather.

But, the crux of my point is:  if Obama truly thought leaving Gration behind would somehow &quot;politicize&quot; the visit, then Obama was temporarily insane.  I don&#039;t think Obama was insane.  I think Obama is spinning his way past this kerfluffle.  I think he now wishes like heck he had gone to Landstuhl w/o Gration.  This thing is going to dog him right up to election day.  My opinion:  Obama should&#039;ve just fessed up to momentary bad judgment, apologized, and promised to try like heck to make up for it between now and the election.  That would&#039;ve gained Obama some sympathy, as everyone makes mistakes.  Unfortunately for Obama, he&#039;s not so good at admitting mistakes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I&#8217;m laying this out, then you can damn me or whatever, and I am completely done, b/c I can&#8217;t do any more than this.  I&#8217;m inserting my own inserted notes, in brackets, to make it clear what Obama is saying.  Why was Obama a bit vague?  He is trying to get away with his &#8220;politicized&#8221; story.  But, look at what he is saying in your ABC News story above:</p>
<blockquote><p>Continued Obama, “And we got notice that he [Gration] would be treated as a campaign person, and it [Gration's visiting Landstuhl] would therefore be perceived as political because he had endorsed my candidacy but he wasn’t on the Senate staff. That triggered then a concern that maybe our visit [with Gration w/us] was going to be perceived as political. And the last thing that I want to do is have injured soldiers and the staff at these wonderful institutions having to sort through whether this [a visit with Gration w/us] is political or not or get caught in the crossfire between campaigns.”</p>
<p>“So rather than go forward [with the visit with Gration w/us] and potentially get caught up in what might have been considered a political controversy of some sort,” Obama said, “what we decided was that we not make a visit&#8230;.</p></blockquote>
<p>If Obama visits w/o Gration, no one to this day knows who Gration is, and Obama receives no more criticism than such a visit would&#8217;ve originally generated from stupid and/or partisan persons.</p>
<p>Obama refused to visit w/o Gration, and that&#8217;s exactly what he is saying in his vague-enough-to- gain-media-sympathy statement.  </p>
<p>You know what I actually suspect/speculate?  Wild speculation, but here&#8217;s my instinct of things:  Gration was angered, and Gration convinced Obama to teach Landstuhl/Pentagon a lesson by cancelling the visit.  However, the Pentagon plays hardball.  Pentagon then had a hospital person release that specific heart-tugging quote to the media:  &#8220;I don&#8217;t know why Obama didn&#8217;t come.  We were all ready for him.&#8221;  That quote, which implies disappointed wounded troops, is a quote guaranteed to get someone like me all in a lather.</p>
<p>But, the crux of my point is:  if Obama truly thought leaving Gration behind would somehow &#8220;politicize&#8221; the visit, then Obama was temporarily insane.  I don&#8217;t think Obama was insane.  I think Obama is spinning his way past this kerfluffle.  I think he now wishes like heck he had gone to Landstuhl w/o Gration.  This thing is going to dog him right up to election day.  My opinion:  Obama should&#8217;ve just fessed up to momentary bad judgment, apologized, and promised to try like heck to make up for it between now and the election.  That would&#8217;ve gained Obama some sympathy, as everyone makes mistakes.  Unfortunately for Obama, he&#8217;s not so good at admitting mistakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40800</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 02:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40800</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Obama is saying he refused to go to Landstuhl without Gration. &lt;/i&gt;

No, he did not say that he &quot;refused to go without Gration.&quot; That is incorrect. Read Jake Tapper&#039;s piece again. I&#039;m not going to explain this to you over and over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Obama is saying he refused to go to Landstuhl without Gration. </i></p>
<p>No, he did not say that he &#8220;refused to go without Gration.&#8221; That is incorrect. Read Jake Tapper&#8217;s piece again. I&#8217;m not going to explain this to you over and over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gcotharn</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40787</link>
		<dc:creator>gcotharn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40787</guid>
		<description>BTW:  the Jake Tapper reported Robert Gibbs spin is illogical:&lt;blockquote&gt;When the campaign learned of the Pentagon’s concerns (Wednesday night), they realized that, however they structured the hospital visit, they were going to come in for criticism.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&quot;Concerns&quot; is a bit of dramatic fluff.  The Pentagon merely said Gration&#039;s attendance would break their rules. 

The Obama campaign always knew - from the first moment the visit was discussed - they would receive some criticism from some persons.   Leaving Gration behind would not increase that original (small, imo) amount of criticism which they, as a Presidential campaign, had to be expecting from some (stupid and/or partisan) sources.

The only way any scene was going to be created was if the Obama campaign tried to force Gration onto the visit.  If Obama had left Gration behind, the Landstuhl visit would&#039;ve been a large net plus for him and his campaign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW:  the Jake Tapper reported Robert Gibbs spin is illogical:<br />
<blockquote>When the campaign learned of the Pentagon’s concerns (Wednesday night), they realized that, however they structured the hospital visit, they were going to come in for criticism.</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8220;Concerns&#8221; is a bit of dramatic fluff.  The Pentagon merely said Gration&#8217;s attendance would break their rules. </p>
<p>The Obama campaign always knew &#8211; from the first moment the visit was discussed &#8211; they would receive some criticism from some persons.   Leaving Gration behind would not increase that original (small, imo) amount of criticism which they, as a Presidential campaign, had to be expecting from some (stupid and/or partisan) sources.</p>
<p>The only way any scene was going to be created was if the Obama campaign tried to force Gration onto the visit.  If Obama had left Gration behind, the Landstuhl visit would&#8217;ve been a large net plus for him and his campaign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gcotharn</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/07/a-stunningly-dishonest-campaign-ad/comment-page-1#comment-40784</link>
		<dc:creator>gcotharn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4566#comment-40784</guid>
		<description>First,  I agree the McCain commercial is dishonest.  McCain should be ashamed.
  McCain is a tough and mean campaigner.  This is his style, and it is unbecoming.  

Second, you do not want to see the flaw in your argument about Landstuhl.  

Certain wingnuts (I say a small number) maybe always were going to criticize the Landstuhl visit as political.  So what?  Obama, properly so, scheduled the trip anyway.  If Obama had gone to Landstuhl w/o Gration (whom few had ever heard of before this), then the exact (small) amount of criticism Obama had previously expected would have occurred.  After Obama finished the Landstuhl visit: Gration would&#039;ve still be some anonymous guy whom no one had ever heard of.

Read Obama&#039;s statement with new eyes: Obama is saying he refused to go to Landstuhl without Gration.    Obama chose Gration over visiting with troops.   That &quot;politicized&quot; stuff is Obama&#039;s after the fact spin - illogical after the fact spin; untruthful spin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First,  I agree the McCain commercial is dishonest.  McCain should be ashamed.<br />
  McCain is a tough and mean campaigner.  This is his style, and it is unbecoming.  </p>
<p>Second, you do not want to see the flaw in your argument about Landstuhl.  </p>
<p>Certain wingnuts (I say a small number) maybe always were going to criticize the Landstuhl visit as political.  So what?  Obama, properly so, scheduled the trip anyway.  If Obama had gone to Landstuhl w/o Gration (whom few had ever heard of before this), then the exact (small) amount of criticism Obama had previously expected would have occurred.  After Obama finished the Landstuhl visit: Gration would&#8217;ve still be some anonymous guy whom no one had ever heard of.</p>
<p>Read Obama&#8217;s statement with new eyes: Obama is saying he refused to go to Landstuhl without Gration.    Obama chose Gration over visiting with troops.   That &#8220;politicized&#8221; stuff is Obama&#8217;s after the fact spin &#8211; illogical after the fact spin; untruthful spin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

