Greg pulled the clip last night and Allahpundit wrote it up, but it's worth revisiting for a few reasons. I'll let AP set the stage:
The first 3:45 is just background stuff, so feel free to skip it, and (b) the rest of it represents quite possibly the most sustained bout of skepticism on cable TV towards an Obama mouthpiece that Team Hopenchange has had to endure in four years. If you can’t watch it all, just watch Burton for two or three minutes starting at 4:15.
The Obama campaign has been shamelessly lying its collective ass off about this ad, so why not allow Obama's SuperPAC mouthpiece to insult your intelligence for a few minutes? This is surreal:
I could barely stomach this clip, to be honest, but I'm glad I persevered because we learned a thing or two during the interview: (1) Some MSM figures can at least feign genuine disgust with the HopenChange Brigade. All three CNN correspondents seemed truly put off by the stench of what Burton was shoveling. (2) Obama's SuperPAC is so proud of the ad that they're airing it in swing states, as part of a $20 million buy. (3) This spot is merely one in "a series of ads," meaning that the worst may still be yet to come. (4) Obamaworld not only has no regard for the truth, they also harbor precious little respect for your intelligence. It was astounding to watch Burton claim that this ad in no way attempts to link Romney to this woman's death. That "reality," Burton helpfully explained, is "clearly lost on some folks." And by "some folks" he means "every single person who isn't a paid hack." Go back and watch the clip. The whole point is to tie Romney to this tragedy and heavily imply that he was responsible by obscuring the timeline. Burton insists that the timeline isn't pertinent. The man's sleaze virtually drips off the screen with every word, especially when he openly laughs at the CNN crew for pointing out the obvious. Allahpundit notices that without the disgusting implication of Romney's culpability in Mrs. Soptic's demise, the ad has...no point at all:
Recommended
The amazing thing is that the spot is completely devoid of any actual point or argument. The closest it comes is suggesting that layoffs are always unconscionable because people depend on the insurance they get from their jobs. But Burton can’t argue that; Obama has enough problems with business that he can’t afford to flirt with “only monsters lay people off” demagoguery. So he’s left here arguing … nothing. Really.
Let's recap: The Obama campaign knows nothing about a man whose personal story they've recounted in their own ads and featured on a conference call. Also, a commercial clearly designed to link Romney to a woman's cancer-related death through grotesque innuendo was actually doing nothing of the sort, despite what the pro-Rommey paranoiacs at CNN and MSNBC (!) seem to think. These people continue to out-do themselves. Three parting thoughts:
(1) Since Burton still remains deliberately unfamiliar with Romney's effective departure date from Bain Capital (February 1999, according to everyone except Obamaphiles), how would he explain the fact that Soptic's layoff -- which was delayed by eight years by Bain's attempt to save the failing company -- occurred when a top Obama donor was actively managing the company? Since Jonahthan Lavine closed the GST factory, made money for himself, then donated to Barack Obama years later, is Obama complicit in Soptic's wife's death via the blood money, or whatever? Oh right, I forgot. They're not blaming anyone for that tragedy. They're just describing it in excriciating (and incomplete) detail in a television ad, the entire purpose of which is to attack Romney. My mistake.
(2) In the original ad, Soptic says he believes Romney "isn't concerned" about the pain he, ahem, "caused" -- including the death of Soptic's wife, which was the theme of the ad. Even if you take Burton at his word that Priorities USA had no intention of tying Romney to her death (and I absolutely do not), isn't the assertion that Romney doesn't even care about that tragic outcome complete conjecture? This is vile.
(3) The top three arguments Democrats have advanced against Mitt Romney over the last few months are that he outsourced American jobs at Bain Capital ("no evidence" - FactCheck.org), that he's a tax cheat ("Four Pinocchios" - Washington Post), and that his heartless actions led to a poor woman's death ("outrageous" - CNN). As the links demonstrate, each one of these attacks has been a wholly inaccurate smear. Since they continue to lie, why should any voter believe a word Team Obama says about anything -- and isn't the fact that they're forced to invent these smears evidence of Romney's laudable character and actual record?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member