Democrat Attack Squad
And now a “fisking” of the Associated Press’ Ron Fournier:John Kerry's words are being used against him in President Bush's new television ad, which accuses the presumptive Democratic nominee of waffling on military issues.And it is about time. I mean John Kerry has said and done a lot that can and should be used against him. Mr. Fournier gets it right though, the Bush team is certainly accusing Mr. Kerry of something, but it isn’t “waffling on military issues”; but rather that Senator Kerry is “wrong on defense.” And he is wrong. No matter how many times Kerry nuances himself, the man ultimately was on the wrong side of the funding vote.
Airing nationally on cable TV, the commercial uses the same footage and many of the same lines as a spot Bush is airing in West Virginia this week criticizing Kerry for voting against an $87 billion aid package for Iraq and Afghanistan last year. A text of the ad was provided to The Associated Press before it was unveiled by the Bush campaign Thursday.Man that is a great ad, isn’t it!? I thought for sure we were going to have to wait forever to hear from the often talked about, but seldom heard from “Republican Attack Squad.” (At least from a source that isn’t the conservative blogosphere or talk radio.)
Kerry's tortured response to the West Virginia ad underscored the difficulties of defending Senate votes on massive spending bills loaded with hundreds of unrelated provisions. The Democrat explained that he voted against the $87 billion bill because he did not support the president's military and reconstruction plans. Kerry also noted that he supported a failed amendment that would have paid for the Iraq and Afghanistan programs by repealing Bush's tax cuts.Tortured is an excellent word for describing Kerry. So let me get this straight, Kerry voted down funding our troops because he had philosophical differences with the President’s plan and because he didn’t get his way on raising taxes to pay for it? How arrogant and immature of him! I’m sure that our troops are reassured to hear that a guy who is in the running to be the Commander-in-Chief would rather throw a temper tantrum than support body armor.
"I actually did vote for his $87 billion, before I voted against it," Kerry said Tuesday.Ah, the beauty of nuance. This is going to be an absolutely enjoyable campaign if the junior senator from Taxachusetts keeps on making it THIS easy for us.
Bush's campaign tacked that quote to the end of the West Virginia ad, which was edited slightly to make room for Kerry's response.And in a salute to the purely genius Guinness beer ads, I say, “Brilliant!”
Kerry's campaign criticized Bush and "his attack-dog vice president" for assailing Kerry as "America continues to falter."Crying about your own foolishness is not becoming. And it certainly isn’t very presidential. And out of all of the folks in the Bush administration, I’d have figured Rumsfeld for the “attack dog” position; but heh, what do I know about the Republican Attack Squad. Oh, yeah, I’m in it. I forgot.
"Slash-and-burn politics aren't going to fix the problems in Iraq, employ a single American or bring health care to a single family," said Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's spokeswoman. "Mission still not accomplished."Stephanie, my dear, these lines went over so much better when they were aimed at Howard Dean. Now they are just tired. President Bush has a realistic plan for health care, how come we don’t hear about how John “Effing” Kerry plans to PAY for his? Oh, that’s right, Kerry would have to nuance himself out of saying he won’t raise taxes on EVERYBODY AND THEIR MOTHER!
Both versions of the ad open with Bush saying he approved the message, a requirement under the law. They accuse Kerry of voting against body armor and higher pay for U.S. troops as well as improved health care for reservists, all provisions in the $87 billion bill.Body armor? Check. Higher pay for troops? Check. And health care for reservists? Check. Yep, all that was in the $87 billion bill. We’re rehashing here, Ron…you got anything else to say or do you get paid by the word and are now milking this for all its worth?
The new ad includes the announcer saying, "What does Kerry say now?" and then fades to Kerry's quote. It ends, like the West Virginia ad, with the announcer accusing Kerry of being "wrong on defense."And with all due respect to the credit card commercials, I say: “Priceless!”
It is the latest example of what the Bush campaign promises will be a nimble advertising campaign that targets issues and voters better than the Republican did in the 2000 race against Al Gore.This is a sure sign that the gloves have indeed come off and that the fun is about to begin. I am very glad to hear that Karl Rove and the folks in the Republican Attack Squad (I’m thinking that maybe we should get jackets.) learned some valuable lessons from the last go round.
Bush is spending about $4.5 million through May on cable TV and about $6 million a week on broadcast TV in 18 states to try to cast Kerry as a flip-flopping, soft-on-terrorism politician. After a brief hiatus, Bush also is running his 60-second positive ad that depicts him as a leader on the economy and terrorism.I wonder where all that money came from? Big Oil maybe. Or how about Halliburton. Nope. Most of the President’s money comes from donations of LESS than $250 by the PEOPLE. Where does John “Effing” Kerry’s money come from?
Kerry and his allies are competing ad for ad against Bush in many key markets, accusing Bush of ruining the economy and distorting Kerry's record.They may be running ads, but I’d hardly call it competing. If ruining the economy is giving us an economy wherein “most Americans have at least two cars and their own house, and they send their children to college. Certainly a bigger share of household income is being spent on things that did not feature 50 years ago, such as high-tech health care. But it has brought the benefit of a longer and better life, and not just for the old: since 1980, infant mortality has fallen by 45%.
At the end of last year, America's household wealth, at $44 trillion, passed the previous peak set in early 2000. With Americans wealthier than ever, why are many so anxious? Perhaps they think prosperity will vanish in a puff of terrorist smoke or a housing-market collapse. Perhaps, tentatively, the suburbs, in which half of Americans live, are to blame. For the suburbs fulfill the American dream, but at a price. On the one hand comes greatly increased space: the typical American dwelling now has two rooms per person, double Europe's level or America's half a century ago. On the other hand, expectations grow for every family member to have her own computer, DVD player—and another car. Pile on top of that an annual family holiday by plane, a bass-fishing boat (Americans spend $25 billion a year on boats and jet-skis) and regular meals out (Americans now spend nearly half their food dollars in restaurants). The American dream may cost less than it used to, but it still comes dear. And in a sated society, there is less and less new to look forward to.” (The Economist) I'll take it!
The White House believes the next two months may be more important than the last 60 days of the campaign because they have a chance to define Kerry before Americans get to know him.Do you have a source for that crazy statement Ron or are you engaging in Jayson Blairesque reporting now. This ENTIRE campaign is important. And we’re not worried about defining “Kerry before the Americans get to know him” because the people ALREADY know that he is a liar. "A majority of Americans now see Kerry as a man who only says what people want to hear. Just 33% say that Kerry says what he believes, while 57% say that he does not. On the other hand, a majority of Americans, 51%, see President Bush as a man who says what he believes." (CBS/NYT poll response from Matthew Dowd)
Let’s do this again some time, shall we? It was real fun!
I'm Matt Hurley and I approve this message.
