Hypocrisy Embedded in Obama Mailings

Aside from running a very successful funding raising campaign, Barack Obama has also made excellent use of 21st century electronics with the application of text messages and Emails. With over $130 million dollars in the piggy bank, Obama’s campaign is seeking more donations in response to a recent McCain advertisement that falsely depicts Obama as a terrorist. In the past, the Obama campaign has used an opponent’s negative ads as a generator for income– urging their constituents to give money in order to display their rejection of negative campaigning.

On October 23, 2008, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe sent out a mass email request for donations, applying the now-traditional method of displaying condemnation for negative ads:

The Republican National Committee is distributing a mail piece that says “Terrorists” on the front and opens to a big picture of Barack saying “Not Who You Think He Is.”

John McCain — who promised to run a respectful campaign — said that he was “absolutely” proud of it.
Will you take a look at the mailing and make a donation of $25 or more to push back?

Will you fight back with a donation?

We have 12 days to make sure John McCain doesn’t win the White House through scare tactics.
Give this campaign the resources we need to fight back in the final push:




David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

While it is important for the Obama campaign to condemn negative attack ads such as the recently approved by the McCain campaign, they need to be more careful about their choice of words.

In seeking out donations, Plouffe explained that McCain should not win the White House through “scare tactics.” Because of this utterly debased use of scare tactics, McCain might have a chance of winning, and this is the reason to donate money now. Unfortunately, Plouffe is engaged in a similar method of scare tactics– telling their constituents that McCain might win through dirty means unless they donate now.

Neither Party is playing by the rules of ethical conduct. Depicting Obama as a terrorist is at best erroneous racial profiling, at worst- racist. And in the case of the Obama campaign, they are seeking to make a profit over this event. Yes, one way of deterring negative campaigning is through the pocketbook. This is an effective and ingenious device in today’s political capitalism. But the purpose for giving should not be out of fear– especially considering the context.

  • DJS

    Is Obama trying to collect enough money to put his daughter’s through college? Come now how much money does he need? He talks about cutting taxes for middle class, cutting wasteful spending and putting extra taxes on the rich and big business. So if it isn’t the rich and big business giving him the money than it is the middle class who truly believes he is going to cut your taxes. And maybe he will but Barney Frank has already said that they are going to have to raise taxes and Pelosi can’t wait for Obama so she can through in another $300B of wasteful spending. Not sure how long your tax cut is going to last so you better enjoy it will you have it.

  • Independent Woman

    Oh Michael, have these people no shame? He even signed it “David”, oh dear. It just keeps getting worse.

  • Babs

    Michael, can you please point me to this advertisement of the RNC’s where they call Obama a terrorist? For the life of me, I can’t find it.

  • Babs, the Obama campaign has posted the advertisement on their website (which posted in the first paragraph of the commentary): https://donate.barackobama.com/page/smartproxy/www.barackobama.com/images/email/08/oct/rncmail_slp.jpg

    I have yet to track down the actual ad via the RNC records. If anyone has received or heard about it, let us know.

  • Babs

    I can’t read this from you link, but what I can read doesn’t say Obama is a terrorist. I’ve searched the RNC, and I’m on their mailing list – email and snail mail. I haven’t seen anything that even remotely looks like this picture. I’ll have to be the doubting Thomas until I do.

  • Independent Woman

    Michael and Babs,
    I’ve seen the link, and I have to say that I think there has been a misinterpretation here. I think that the RNC mailing is not accusing Obama of being a terrorist at all. I think, instead he is being criticised for his willingness to exchange dialogue with known terrorists. That’s why it says “Why should we care what they have to say?” Have I got this wrong?

  • Babs

    That’s what I could read, too, Independent Woman. I think this is just another Obama stretch. I haven’t found a single shred of evidence to support their claim.

    Isn’t it strange how whenever the Obama camp “misinterprets” it’s ok, but when Biden makes a statement that can in no way be misinterpreted, Obama brushes it aside by saying Joe likes to talk with “rhetorical flourishes”. 😉

  • Michael

    Babs and Independent Woman:

    The danger in these ads are the associative properties. You do not need to say that buying a car will make a man sexy– you just show a car with a beautiful woman next to it. This is advertising.

    I have problems with the overall tone of this link– and I believe McCain has already repudiated the behavior indicated in this clip. However, as this clip shows, Palin is in full support of depicting Obama as a terrorist: