For John McCain. How in the world does he propose undoing the damage wrought by GW Bush?

The ads that the RNC throws out will pale in comparison to what the DNC will put out on McCain.

He will be painted as out of touch, Bush 2.0 and Old, befuddled & cranky.

Straight talk express? Prepare to be de-railed!

Yes indeed we can!

I always like answering rhetorical questions. It's a way to turn the tables very effectively on one's adversary, putting him at a disadvantage.

Why talk to one's enemies? Because talking is better than fighting and the reason we never talk to our enemies is that historically the enemies we have talked to have ceased being our enemies.

I think responses along those lines can put Republicans on the defense not least because they align Obama with Republican presidents Nixon and the venerated Reagan.

I was expecting a few clips of Wright and something about the Weathermen. Have we moved to a post-Wright atmosphere? One certainly hopes so.

Each of these questions can be answered with a non-telegenic explanation, so the truth value of the video is close to nil. Of course, this won't matter. It's the focus and selection of rhetorical targets that is indicative of strategy, and here we see a change, running on record rather than associates.

Like the current administration, this ad doesn't "do" nuance. Neither will Democratic advertisements.

Play on, MacDuff!

to the Can We Ask site:

http://net.gop.com/canweask/default.aspx

I just asked "Why do republicans hate America?"

We should flood this one out.

How refreshing will it be to have a president who transcends the machismo with which this country has managed its foreign policy for the last half century, and leads this nation by listening to his brains rather than his balls?

The GOP is on the defensive already, trying to deflect attention from the skeletons in McCain's closet (the Arizona land deal, for an example).

It's not good advertising to promote the opposition in an AD. Besides this AD presents clear questions that Obama can answer and address quickly. The RNC did use their technique of trying, but failing, at making Obama look ominous.

I see they are using Hillary's play book.

I'm on board with bignose; however, it may already be happening. I can't seem to load "submit text questions".

I would be very interested in seeing the supposed prenuptial agreement that keeps Cindy's money separate from Moneybags McCain. Will you demand that she release either it, or her tax return? Then, while you are at it, can you ask Senator McCain what medications and mood altering drugs he takes? America wants to know. We can ask, we have that right, but will the old geezer answer?

Mine hasn't posted yet.

Didn't see that coming...

"Will an Obama administration indict the war criminals in the Bush administration?"

I am waiting, waiting with bated breath for my question to show up on their website.

Pax

What do you think of a man who refers to his wife as a c*nt in front of reporters and others?

It hasen't posted, yet.

Here's a question John McCain needs to be asked to answer. Why did he commit adultery while married to his first wife? Is adultery a family value Senator? Since we are asking questions of Obama, it only seems fair the McCain be asked some questions too.

I wonder about the potential effectiveness of this ad.

The constant repetition of "Yes We Can" -- especially when Obama actually says the line at the end -- serves in stark contrast to the rather dated style of the ad. When Obama appears, he seems fresh and alive, while the rest of the ad seems so... old.

The unflattering picture in the open works the same way. We've seen this tactic so many times before, but here -- used against a candidate known for his looks and his charisma -- it looks trashy and tabloidesque. It doesn't work an emblem for what some don't like about the guy, but rather seems like they're just trying to make him look bad.

Is it me, or is this ad weirdly tone deaf?

The first image of Obama in the video shows him giving the middle finger. Certainly intentional on the part of the videomakers.

I submitted this question:

"If GW Bush's brief tenure as Texas Governor was sufficient experience for the Presidency, how can the RNC have an issue with Obama's 3+ years as Senator?"

1) Why has the median american income been stagnant during Mr. Bush's presidency, even though the cost of living has increased, corporate profits have doubled, and the number of billionaires have more than doubled during the same time?

2) Do you think increases in the price of oil might been related to the decline in the value of the dollar?

3) Why has the value of the dollar declined to much during Mr. Bush's presidency?

4) If you think the dollar's decline has been caused by the subprime mess, then do you think the people who created the mess should be rewarded with income tax cuts?

5) If you think the dollar's decline has been caused by the trade imbalance, then do you think people who created the imbalance for their own benefit should be rewarded with income tax cuts?

6) If you think the dollar's decline has been caused by runaway deficit spending by the U.S. government, then how much longer do you think we can afford to continue the very costly war in Iraq?

Is it my imagination or does Obama's skin look darker in these already unflattering photos? Methinks the Republican party is pandering to the 20+ percent who cannot bring themselves to vote for a black candidate, even if he is the better choice. For shame.

A lot of the questions are actually substantive and thoughtful. Not easy for Obama to answer, but at lest the very premise of a lot the questions aren't completely dishonest.

I just sent them my own, but never expect it to see the light of day. Still, it was satisfying. I'm not even sure that the questions that ARE on their website were sent by legitimate questioners. Some of them are "too perfect" and smack of Repug anti-O talking points.