Romney Causes Cancer

[nathanm]

Obama's super PAC has this guy film an ad.

No.

[Red Arrow]

Romney ain't afraid to go negative and him and republican PAC will go after Obama.
Obama and democrat PAC money will do the same.

Why would Obama and democrat PAC money go after Obama?  Seems kind of counterproductive.

[nathanm]

Why would Obama and democrat PAC money go after Obama?  Seems kind of counterproductive.

It's no secret that the liberals hate him with the passion of 999 fiery suns. (Romney only gets one extra fiery sun of hatred)

[guido911]

Romney implicated in Jon Benet Ramsey's death....

http://www.theonion.com/articles/romney-murdered-jonbenet-ramsey-new-obama-campaign,29114/

[erfalf]

It was very, very negative.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/31/romney-ramps-up-attack-ads-against-gingrich-to-unprecedented-levels.html

94% of the ads bought in Florida were negative ads.

Romney ain't afraid to go negative and him and republican PAC will go after Obama.

Obama and democrat PAC money will do the same.

Quoting an source that is bent on destroying the republican candidate doesn't really go all that far in perfuading me that he was somehow overly negative. While pointing out the negatively perceived flaws of opposing candidates is negative, what we are talking about in regards to the Obama PAC ad is a little beyond the pale. Linking a candidate by way of a firm he used to work at to the death of a woman who in all likelihood would have died anyways. Playing ads depicting Gingrich saying what Gingrich says during the primary I imagine will seem extremely tame in comparison to what I have a feeling we will see the next two months.

What I did think was comical about some of the Romney negative ads during the primary was that many of the clips/quotes came from decidedly left wing sources.

[erfalf]

Would it be fair for Romney to put our a similar add using employees of companies that this administration has put out of business?

[AquaMan]

Its a weak argument Erfalf. No one is going to engage in it because the nature of politics is negative.(I take that back. They shouldn't, but everyone seems to like to engage in it!) It is indefensible but systemic. If you don't participate, you're a loser with no guts for a fight.  If you do participate it lowers your integrity but wins you office.  If you stand back and let others do it for you it saves you some face but not much.  I have never seen or read about a national political race that was positive, honest, direct, and based on principle. Even during war time races have been case histories in lies, propaganda and distraction.

IOW, unless you just like circular causation conversations, its worthless. At least the topic headline is humorous and unwittingly makes my point.

[Townsend]

Thing's got a new job.

[AquaMan]

That was hilarious!

[Gaspar]

[Townsend]

^^ 

Even in a joke pic he's boring and losing the election.

[Red Arrow]

Thing's got a new job.

That is funny.  You can probably guess that I think it's less than truthful but it is funny.

[Townsend]

Looks like the Obama campaign is matching blow for blow on misleading negative ads.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/10/factcheck-org-calls-low-blow-new-obama-son-of-boss-attack-ad/

FactCheck.org calls 'low blow' new Obama 'Son of Boss' attack ad

(CNN) – An independent fact-checking group, FactCheck.org, claimed Friday that a new Obama campaign ad attacking Mitt Romney over a tax avoidance scandal is "badly misleading."

"The Obama campaign strikes another low blow with a TV spot accusing Mitt Romney of 'personally' approving a notoriously abusive tax-avoidance scheme and suggesting he may have paid 'zero' tax," the FactCheck.org article states. "That's badly misleading."

– Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

– Check out the CNN Electoral Map and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.

The spot, released Thursday by the president's re-election campaign, points to an op-ed by two tax experts who claim Romney was involved with the reporting of a $70 million fictional tax loss when he served on the board of Marriott International from 1993 to 1998.

"During that period, Marriott engaged in a series of complex and high-profile maneuvers, including 'Son of Boss,' a notoriously abusive prepackaged tax shelter that investment banks and accounting firms marketed to corporations such as Marriott," states the op-ed, which was published this week on CNN.com.

The authors –Peter C. Canellos, former chair of the New York State Bar Association Tax Section, and Edward D. Kleinbard, former chief of staff of Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation–wrote that the "Son of Boss" tax shelter marked "perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history" and cost the U.S. "billions in lost corporate tax revenues."

While Romney did not face criminal charges, unlike others linked to the scandal, the authors wrote "his endorsement of this stratagem provides insight into Romney's professional ethics and attitude toward tax compliance obligations."

But FactCheck.org said Friday that Marriott wasn't the only company involved in the "Son of Boss" scheme.

"Viewers (of the ad) may get the mistaken impression that Romney – actually Marriott – is solely to blame for 'one of the largest tax avoidance schemes in history.' Not true. It was a strategy used by many taxpayers that resulted in billions in lost revenue," the article states.

The Obama ad also doesn't give context about Marriott, FactCheck said, and leads the viewer to believe it was Romney who personally handled the deal.

"The tax scheme didn't benefit Romney, and the fictional losses were not his," FactCheck says. "The company involved was Marriott Corp, not Romney or Bain Capital. But the ad gives no hint of this."

Furthermore, the website states that the term "tax avoidance" is technically legal, a distinction not easily communicated in the new spot.

"Combining 'avoidance' with loaded terms like 'scheme' and 'notorious' and 'scandal' and 'fictional losses' further suggests possible tax fraud, but there's no evidence Romney broke any law," the article states.

The spot comes at a time when top Democrats and Obama's campaign have actively worked to raise suspicion about Romney's tax history. They've unleashed a flood of calls urging the presumptive GOP nominee to release more tax returns as a way to answer questions about his financial portfolio.

The Republican candidate, whose estimated worth is valued up to $256 million, has made public his tax return for 2010 and an estimate for 2011, with a pledge to release the full year once the documents are complete. He filed an extension for October.

While Romney says he will not release further taxes than what he has already made public, a majority of Americans disagree with his decision. According to a CNN/ORC International poll released Thursday, 63% of Americans said Romney should release additional tax returns.

[nathanm]

I'm not quite sure why we'd want a President who was one of the people in the industry that helped toss us off the cliff, but whatever.

[Teatownclown]

Three polls show Obama widening lead over Romney

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/three-polls-show-obama-widening-lead-over-romney/2012/08/10/be8f68f4-e2e3-11e1-a25e-15067bb31849_story.html?wpisrc

Goldwater II....landslide.