Obama Stupid PAC

[Silver E90]

Four straight posts from Scotch and xbook deflecting the topic away from the ad. That tells you something. The ad is indefensible but they can't say that.

[xbook]

I will agree that the ad is hyperbolic, but I won't go and say it's the worst thing ever in politics.

[Silver E90]

Originally Posted by xbook

Or we could talk about how the Romney campaign is trying to say that the Obama Administration is "gutting welfare", through waivers given to the states. Well as it turns out, Governor Romney had asked for this exact thing back in 2005. So here goes the GOP trying to pin their policies on President Obama again.

http://www.policyshop.net/home/2012/...f-waivers.html

Well since it came from a progressive blog it must be 100% factually correct with absolutely no spin, right?

[ScotchAndCigar]

I haven't seen the fucking ad, can't you read?

And again, what I said was that it's no different than the multitude of ads from the other side's PACs, or historical ads like swift boat or Willy Horton.

And I'll start denouncing ads as soon as all you thread-starters begin denouncing the full-of-shit titles of your threads.

[ScotchAndCigar]

While we're at it, you gonna denounce Romney's idiotic "war on religion" crusade?

[xbook]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

While we're at it, you gonna denounce Romney's idiotic "war on religion" crusade?

Or how about they denounce the blatant lie that is Rmoney suggesting that the Obama administration is trying to curtail voting rights for voters in Ohio?

[mspeasl]

Originally Posted by xbook

Or how about they denounce the blatant lie that is Rmoney suggesting that the Obama administration is trying to curtail voting rights for voters in Ohio?

Or how about Florida?

[Silver E90]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

I haven't seen the fucking ad, can't you read?

And again, what I said was that it's no different than the multitude of ads from the other side's PACs, or historical ads like swift boat or Willy Horton.

And I'll start denouncing ads as soon as all you thread-starters begin denouncing the full-of-shit titles of your threads.

1. Thanks for the personal attack that's appropriate. Why do you feel the need to ask me if I can read? I would assume that you would research and watch the ad before you would come back in this thread to comment.

2. We are not talking about the other sides ads, we are talking about this ad. If you would like to talk about those ads then I would suggest starting a new thread.

3. I have not started a thread in this sub-forum, so therefore I can't talk to those.

[ScotchAndCigar]

There's no merit to any of the PAC ads, Rush Limbaugh,Michael Moore, Fox news, most of the political websites, and many of the people in this forum. Singling out any one implies a false acceptance of the others. I'm still waiting for someone to denounce the dozens of lies about Obama.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by Silver E90

I have not started a thread in this sub-forum, so therefore I can't talk to those.

Oh, so you won't comment on something you didn't create. Sort of like me and that ad, no?

[jtvr4]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Every repub group anti-obama ad is full of lies. Only difference is that I don't feel the need to whine about it and call all repubs stupid.

The problem is that the ad is completely false and Stephanie Cutter knew this. She claims she doesn't know the details when she clearly does per her taped conversation with Soptic in May. They got caught in a undebatable bold lie and will continue to run the ad. What's just as silly is that the Obama campaign said they had no knowledge of Joe Soptic. One day later Jen Psaki said they've worked with Soptic before... What a total cluster fuck.

http://factcheck.org/2012/08/is-romn...-cancer-death/

My mother worked at GST and I spent alot of time at that plant which is why this issue hits home with me. As a independent this sure doesn't help Obama win my vote. He needs to get his campaign in order. Fabricating a story that portrays someone to be a murderer is out of line. I have a feeling some people will be losing their jobs.

As for the swift boat shenanigans, nobody is ever going to know what the real deal is.

http://www.factcheck.org/republican-...ar_record.html

http://www.factcheck.org/swift_boat_..._betrayed.html

I love scotch have you tried Dalmore Grand Reserve? Drinking it now, pretty good.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by jtvr4

The problem is that the ad is completely false and Stephanie Cutter knew this. She claims she doesn't know the details when she clearly does per her taped conversation with Soptic in May. They got caught in a undebatable bold lie and will continue to run the ad. What's just as silly is that the Obama campaign said they had no knowledge of Joe Soptic. One day later Jen Psaki said they've worked with Soptic before... What a total cluster fuck.

http://factcheck.org/2012/08/is-romn...-cancer-death/

My mother worked at GST and I spent alot of time at that plant which is why this issue hits home with me. As a independent this sure doesn't help Obama win my vote. He needs to get his campaign in order. Fabricating a story that portrays someone to be a murderer is out of line. I have a feeling some people will be losing their jobs.

As for the swift boat shenanigans, nobody is ever going to know what the real deal is.

http://www.factcheck.org/republican-...ar_record.html

http://www.factcheck.org/swift_boat_..._betrayed.html

I love scotch have you tried Dalmore Grand Reserve? Drinking it now, pretty good.

This is precisely why I can't comment on the ad - I don't know the background info like you and some others apparently do. But it does sound deceptive from what you're saying.

I've had the Dalmore cigar malt, but not the grand reserve. I have Glenmorangie at home right now (on sale at NH state liquor stores), my faves are Balvenie and Talisker, but I often buy Auchentoshan, as it's a suprisingly good lowland (not oily) for a reasonable price. Gee, now I've got the "scotch" song from "The Anchorman" stuck in my head.

[jtvr4]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

This is precisely why I can't comment on the ad - I don't know the background info like you and some others apparently do. But it does sound deceptive from what you're saying.

I've had the Dalmore cigar malt, but not the grand reserve. I have Glenmorangie at home right now (on sale at NH state liquor stores), my faves are Balvenie and Talisker, but I often buy Auchentoshan, as it's a suprisingly good lowland (not oily) for a reasonable price. Gee, now I've got the "scotch" song from "The Anchorman" stuck in my head.

You lucky dog I've never had the cigar malt how was it? From what I've heard it's not made anymore. I've never seen Auchentoshan, I'll have to look for that.

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by jtvr4

You lucky dog I've never had the cigar malt how was it? From what I've heard it's not made anymore. I've never seen Auchentoshan, I'll have to look for that.

Yeah, I don't see the cigar malt anymore. It was true to it's namesake, good with a cigar, as it had a full and dark malty bourbon flavor; but by itself, I wasn't a fan. The Auchentoshan (hard to spell and pronounce) was recommended to me by the bartender at this upscale little bistro place. He said it was very inexpensive, yet better than half the stuff out there, and I agree. It comes in a gray/olive colored box. It doesn't have an official age label, but I believe it's an 8 yr. However, it's smooth nature offsets the normally rough young scotch taste. And it's not watery, nor does it have the Glenlivet's cheap aftertaste, or the oily unrefined taste of Glennfiddich.

Yes, this is off-topic; the official scotch thread is mostly a pissing contest for the rarest, most expensive whiskys, which isn't that interesting to me.

[jtvr4]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

Yeah, I don't see the cigar malt anymore. It was true to it's namesake, good with a cigar, as it had a full and dark malty bourbon flavor; but by itself, I wasn't a fan. The Auchentoshan (hard to spell and pronounce) was recommended to me by the bartender at this upscale little bistro place. He said it was very inexpensive, yet better than half the stuff out there, and I agree. It comes in a gray/olive colored box. It doesn't have an official age label, but I believe it's an 8 yr. However, it's smooth nature offsets the normally rough young scotch taste. And it's not watery, nor does it have the Glenlivet's cheap aftertaste, or the oily unrefined taste of Glennfiddich.

Yes, this is off-topic; the official scotch thread is mostly a pissing contest for the rarest, most expensive whiskys, which isn't that interesting to me.

Which of the following Auchentoshan? I'm going to pick up a bottle tonight.

AUCHENTOSHAN 3WOOD
AUCHENTOSHEN SCOTCH 10YR
AUCHENTOSHEN SELECT SM

[ScotchAndCigar]

The classic, this one
http://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies...lassic-whisky/

I pay $27-$30 per bottle. Feel free to try other variants aside from the classic - that's just all I can get locally.

[ScotchAndCigar]

BTW, I noticed the reviews on that site run the gamut, from "good for the price" to "swill". I think some people don't realize how their accompanying meal or smoke or other factors affect their perception.