Skip to main content

It's like Sideshow Bob's ad attacking his opponent for furloughing Sideshow Bob
Let's say for a moment that you were an operative for a political party that was responsible for the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, forcing a massive bailout of Wall Street. Furthermore, let's say your party fought tooth and nail against imposing new regulations on Wall Street to prevent a repeat of the crisis that nearly took down the entire U.S. economy. And to top it all off, your party had opposed bailing out the auto industry, apparently because banking is more important than manufacturing.

Now, let's say your party's establishment decided to nominate a former Wall Street executive who became wealthy benefiting from the policies your party had fought for, including a tax rate lower than what most Americans pay—and that this was all happening as Occupy Wall Street highlighted the widening gulf between the super wealthy and the rest of America. If that were the case, what would you do?

Most people would probably switch parties. Really, who wants to defend all that shit? But the operatives at the American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) independent expenditure committee that doesn't need to disclose its donors, have come up with a different solution: a $4 million ad campaign attacking the other guy (in this case, President Obama) for all the things that their party is responsible for.

The result is one of the most dishonest attack ads of 2012. It's not that it's unreasonable to question President Obama's track record on Wall Street. But to do so with the explicit goal of electing a Republican in his place who is guilty of everything in the ad and then some is the height of absurdity.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Wall Street attacks Obama for (11+ / 0-)

    not attacking Wall Street enough.  The counter ad just writes itself.

    I'm from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner Wing of the Democratic Party!

    by TomP on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 10:53:27 AM PST

  •  They're really, seriously going to run ads saying (5+ / 0-)

    (in essence) "Stick it to Wall Street: Vote Republican"?

    How dumb do they think we are?

    I support torturous regimes! Also, I kick puppies.

    by eataTREE on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 10:54:30 AM PST

  •  I'm confused I thought Obama was anti-WS? (4+ / 0-)

    "Rick Perry talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans." --- James Carville

    by LaurenMonica on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 10:54:49 AM PST

    •  Logical consistency (6+ / 0-)

      Not a feature of the Republican base.

      For example, my MiL told me yesterday that gas prices are so high because of taxes. When I asked her if taxes fluctuated daily and that is why the prices at the pump change daily, all I got was silence.

      I swear they aren't intellectually capable of challenging the claims put out there.

      The only difference between (Mitt) Romney and George W. Bush is that Romney hasn't destroyed the American economy, yet - MoT

      by Herodotus Prime on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:03:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  PACs v. VCRs (0+ / 0-)

    I fast forward past all this shit when I watch TV, and I will never willingly watch a political ad--even for people I support--other that clicking through here on Kos if you folks point out something that is particularly interesting.

    I kind of figure the rest of the country with access to VCRs does the same.

    Don't you?

  •  4 Million fingers of American Future Fund are (0+ / 0-)

    in your pension.

    American Future Fund should be the Pork Belly Fund.  The Naked Shorts Fund.  The Worthless Derivatives Fund.

    . . . from Julie, Julia. "Oh, well. Boo-hoo. Now what?"

    by 88kathy on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 10:57:53 AM PST

  •  It's not the height of absurdity, IMHO. It's the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NYFM, Geekesque, Deep Texan, Bluefin

    height of DECEPTION.  Blaming Obama for TARP is like blaming Clinton for 9/11.  It's just how the Grand Ole LIARS roll.  Blame everyone else for their greed, incompetence and CRAP and hope the misinformed masses believe them.  But this year, Rupert Murdoch and his lie machine known as Fox "News" is distracted with problems of their own, so the tight leash they held for a decade over the discourse in this country has loosened just enough, along with the power of these tubes and Occupy protests, to undermine their agenda.  This is just another waste of their filthy lucre, which I love.

    Keep spending on your lies, righties!  You're gonna lose your shirts!  LOL!!!

    Obama created TARP?  Please.  Only a mindless idiot would believe that.

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:03:40 AM PST

  •  Obama can say, "You can criticize the decisions I (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Deep Texan, BasharH

    made about Wall Street as much as you want, but the fact remains, Mitt Romney IS Wall Street.

    What'd the devil give you for your soul, Tommy? He taught me to play this here guitar REAL good. Oh son, for that you traded your everlastin' soul? Well, I wuddn' usin' it.

    by ZedMont on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:15:31 AM PST

  •  Republicans could care less about hypocrisy. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geekesque, BasharH, Micheline, Bluefin

    This is exactly why President Obama didn't do himself any favors by not throwing the book at these guys. The fact is, nothing he could do would ever keep them from attacking him. They just want to continue doing whatever they want without regulation of any sort. This is why one may as well treat them like the enemies they are and nail them to the wall with criminal charges, no matter if they stick or not.

    •  Very true and the electorate... (0+ / 0-)

      At least the reasonable people out there (not counting the 20% or so people who just hate Democrats altogether and everything we stand for) are seeing this truism come to life.  They hear reasonable proposals from Obama and all they see is obstruction and Republicans not even willing to talk about the issues.  Obama's work laying the foundation for a thinking electorate that can make its own decisions will pay dividends for decades to come.

      The most dangerous... programs, from a movement conservative's point of view, are the ones that work the best and thereby legitimize the welfare state. Krugman

      by BasharH on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:01:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Throw crap against a wall, see what sticks. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Deep Texan, Bluefin

    Works better for those trying to tear someone else down (outside groups) than it does for those seeking to get elected (the erratic Senator from Arizona).

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:34:39 AM PST

  •  They're hoping for Huckabee or at least downticket (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Romney obviously can't run against Wall St and Santorum is running against the the Reformation so there's got to be some smart Republican big money hoping for a deadlock and an undamaged candidate. That would be Huckabee and he'd be dangerous. There's no downside for them as they have money to waste where ever and a certain portion of their base is gonna believe anything about Obama because they HATE him for reasons they can't enunciate.

    I also think they want to fire up their fringe base to make sure they don't get washed away down ticket. So let's do all we can to wash them away down ticket.

    If you didn't like the news today, go out and make some of your own.

    by jgnyc on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:57:19 AM PST

  •  Socialists and communists always bail out WS... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    carver, Bluefin

    Haven't you heard?  I mean, you can't be a good communist or socialist or fascist (I know I'm forgetting a few Republican labels for President Obama here) without coddling Wall Street, right?

    This is going to be a surreal election.  Obama will be hit by Republicans who wanted to save Wall Street and Republicans who wanted nothing to do with Wall Street. Instead of addressing their own division on the issue... hey, let's just blame President Obama.  It's really the only thing the GOP knows how to do... deflect the blame to someone else.  No ownership in the problem at all, and when you don't own up to the problem, you really can't be part of the solution.

    The most dangerous... programs, from a movement conservative's point of view, are the ones that work the best and thereby legitimize the welfare state. Krugman

    by BasharH on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:58:43 AM PST

    •  The only hope of... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bluefin, BasharH

      ....the reptilicans is to mount an ultra-nasty, anti-Obama campaign and make the annointed reptilican choices STFU.
      I would guess that the President's re-election committee is well aware of the shit they will have to deal with and have counter efforts ready to go....I hope they have some zingers.  The ads run by the reptilicans for themself and against each other is almost enough to bury them.

      "if you don't make peaceful revolution possible, you make violent revolution inevitable." ….JFK. .......{- 8.25 / -5.64}

      by carver on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:32:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  President Obama has an easy comeback to this (0+ / 0-)

    which is, "Yet the Republicans want to weaken oversight of Wall Street and let them go back to the behavior that crashed the economy."

    "In the long run, Americans will always do the right thing — after exploring all other alternatives." - Winston Churchill

    by puakev on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:32:16 PM PST

  •  Getting people to vote Republican isn't the point (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, Bluefin

    of this add.

    This message is targeted at the "independent moderates" that determine elections. The entire point of this add is:

    "See? Obama sucks as much as the Republicans do. You can't win either way, so you might as well stay home."

    Not that I agree with that. But if that $4M gets a few crucial people to stay away from the polls come November, their purpose will be accomplished. One doesn't have to look far to realize that Republicans aren't so much interested in winning an election because they are the best (see voter disenfranchisement laws sweeping the country or Bush's stolen election in 2000). Any win at all will do for them, damn those who get in the way.

    "My great panacea for making society at once better and more enjoyable would be to cultivate greater sincerity." -- Frances Power Cobbe

    by Panacea Paola on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 01:21:37 PM PST

    •  Not just indie moderates (0+ / 0-)

      It doesn't seem that far removed from the views of some posters on this site. And not usually the moderate Dem variety, either.

      from a bright young conservative: “I’m watching my first GOP debate…and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”

      by Catte Nappe on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 02:12:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site