Obama's 'Willie Horton' ad: Soft On Crime, Soft On Terror
Incognito , Boca Raton: Apr 22 2008
Made Popular Apr 22 2008

barack_16105

Floyd Brown,of the National Conservative Campaign Fund (NCCF), and mastermind of the brilliant ‘Willie Horton’ ad that effectively torpedoed Michael Dukakis’ presidential bid in 1988, has his sights set on Barack Obama this time.

For those of you who might not remember, Willie Horton (in jail for life without the possibility of parole for the brutal murder of a 17 year-old gas station attendant) was released on a weekend furlough programme that he never returned from. Within a year he was re-captured, but not before he had committed double rape and armed robbery. This was a programme then-Governor of Massachusetts Dukakis supported at the time. In fact, he had vetoed a bill that would have prevented those sentenced for first-degree murder to participate in the programme.

Fast forward 30 years, and Floyd Brown has now produced an ad critical of Obama’s stance on gang violence while serving as a Senator in Chicago. Apparently, Obama voted against a law that would have expanded the death penalty to include some gang related murders. The ad is intended to draw attention to the likelihood that if Obama is weak on gang wars, he will be weak on the war on terror. The very effective ad (see below) ends with the following:


“When the time came to get tough, Obama chose to be weak. So the question is: Can a man so weak in the war on gangs be trusted in the war on terror?”
Just another reason why Obama should NOT be the next President of the United States of America.


Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
1 Stars
Reina
New York, United States
For the author...Here is Obama's one speech...'When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world’s most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.'..I hope you would understand Obama is not soft on crime or terror.
1 Stars
Caesar
Orlando, United States
Can you find difference between crime and terror? Going soft on crime doesn't mean Obama is soft on terror also. You look like a Republican and Democrats have no tendency to attack any one in such way. Obama is the winner.
1 Stars
Kyle
New York, United States
Obama and Clinton both have no interest in fighting terrorism. They make speeches against terrorism to control the mood of American public. They are more interested in voting to become president of the country. Who cares of terrorism.?
0 Stars
Incognito republicaninthearts...
Boca Raton, United States
Politicians will say anything to get elected, it doesn’t mean they will follow through on their promises. Obama stands for nothing. He’s a great, charismatic speaker, but that’s about it. He has zero experience.

Kyle, The problem with Obama and Clinton, is that like all liberals they are in total denial about the threat and danger of terrorism.

And yes, Caesar, I am a moderate Republican, hence my blog Confessions of A Closet Republican.
Add your Comment