Monday, July 17, 2006

More Fake Outrage, More Wimpy Democrats

A few days ago, the Democratic Party posted an ad on their website. For once, it was a powerful, effective ad, full of emotional imagery that succinctly presented an unmistakable message: The past six years have been awful, and it's time for a change. Naturally, the Republicans in Congress and Republican bloggers were outraged! Outraged that the ad was effective, but the official line was they were outraged that the ad showed images of flag-draped coffins coming home.

The Democrats who created that ad stood up and faced the latest bout of fake rage. Naturally, they then tucked their tail between their legs and ran as fast as they could in the other direction, but not before they removed the ad from their website.

Instead of giving in (yet again), why didn't the Democratic Party respond by saying the real outrage is that these young men and women are dying in the first place in a war that didn't have to happen, and that it's their duty as patriotic Americans to point that out?

Why didn't they point out that, to some people, it's only ok to feature soldiers in campaign ads when they're alive or when their widows are staring at George W. Bush in adulation?:


Anonymous said...

I'm really tired of people just rolling over and taking it whenever Republicans start with their lies and shenanigans. We HAVE to start calling them on it EVERY SINGLE TIME.

As a parent, you cannot let your child get away with egregious misbehavior even once. That's the only way they learn to do the right thing. Sometimes we have to train up adults to do the right thing too.

Paul said...

Old adage in business "

Paul said...

Old adage in business "Plenty of people bring me problems, hardly anyone brings me solution."

Dem weakness is the solution area. Constant pointing out of problems without providing at least a viable solution (re. Iraq "phased withdrawal, timetable, etc" is a soundbite - listen to anyone try to expound and it gets real muddy real quick) comes across as whining.

Another weakness is regularly going up against gut reactions of many Americans - they may not like the Iraq campaign but zeroing in on coffins is like waving a red flag (my sister may be ugly but say it to my face and them's fighting words). Leaving that imagery out and including a solution would win support. BTW - Howard Dean going on about if Clinton were still in office Hezbollah wouldn't still want to obliterate Israel and Israel wouldn't overwhelmingly respond is just plain laughable and further erodes the Party's credibility.

'Nuther point - overwhelming majority of military do not translate anger/frustration with Iraq to "I hate Bush." See the polls that say "90%" of troops want to go home now? Well, duh. Followup with question of "are you doing good here?" or "is mission as you understand it worth the sacrifice" and you get "yes." Lesson for Dems - less blaming, less namecalling and more solutions. (Point - take a college history/politics/whatever class, get an exam question along the lines of "describe the causes of the Great Depression" and write down "Hoover was stupid. Hoover was an idiot. Hoover lied." See what kind of grade you get.

One more point - this "lying" thing is way overdone. Can debate until next millenium if Bush "lied"(consciously knew what he was saying was outright false. Not believed intel I didn't believe, not was selective (of course gov't officials are selective - all decision-makers are), but he knew the sky was dark and the moon was out but told the world it was high noon. If so, have to address the French, German, Russian, etc etc intelligence agencies. But assuming we expect the people to accept the "he lied" position and we are consistent in applying that standard to other scenarios: Drs. Marshall and Warren won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2005. Showed a bacterium, not excess stomach acid, caused stomach ulcers. Was a long slog for them. Went up against the medical establishment. Had trouble getting funding to pursue the research. Doctors continued to say ulcers were caused by stress, etc. Prescribed tums, Nexium, millions of dollars of meds, yoga, exercise, diet change, etc. According to the Bush lied logic, all these doctors and the AMA lied to the American people and should apologize.

Not commenting on the whole intel gathering/evaluation process. Just saying, constant character attacks against a person who may have believed what he was saying has a way of backfiring and losing support.

Anonymous said...

Paul said:

"One more point - this "lying" thing is way overdone."

"...constant character attacks against a person who may have believed what he was saying has a way of backfiring and losing support."

He knew the intelligence was cooked up. He knew there were no WMDs. Any statements from the administration denying these facts are disingenuous at best. I don't buy the spin.

Paul said...

Just my point! "He knew.. he knew..." Opinion is not evidence and the voters get turned off. And this many years into it - what is it, 4 or 5 - strikes a lot of people like parents arguing over whose fault it is that their darling son got his girlfriend pregnant. When she's eight months pregnant. And they're still pointing fingers at each other. How about a discussion of "what do we do now?" And maybe win an election?

K.C. said...

Paul, are you a Democrat or Republican?

The reason I ask is, I see a lot of "advice" from people who say the Democrats need to stop pointing out lies and corruption, but that advice usually comes from Republicans who wouldn't vote for Democrats anyway, and it's more than a little self-serving.

If that's the case, thanks for your advice, but no thanks. When Republicans stop lying about their opponents (Swift Boat, anyone?), lying about what they knew (Richard Clark, Downing Street Memos, etc. etc. etc. is not "opinion"), and lying about the state of the union (no, a deficit that's half of the absurdly high amount the Bush administration projected - which they do every year - does not equal a reduction of the national deficit), Democrats can stop pointing out that they're liars.

Besides, have you read Robert F. Kennedy's Rolling Stone article or the Conyers commission report detailing how the 2004 election was fraudulent (please don't tell me hundreds of thousands of mostly minority and Democratic voters being disenfranchised isn't fraudulent)? Not to mention how Katherine Harris had 54,000 Blacks stripped of the right to vote in 2000. We don't need advice on how to win elections, we just need to be allowed to vote in them.

k.C. said...

...I forgot to add, "and we just need our votes to be counted accurately."

Paul said...

Ever listen to Dick Morris? Bill Clinton's chief political advisor? Saw an interview with him once, interviewer made a comment about "right or wrong position" Morris said "my advice is on how to win elections." Most left-leaning Democrats or right-leaning Republicans ask "are you D or R?" and then evaluate the truth context of the comment from that lens. Too bad. I generally never discuss personal information, just stick to issues (as I said, when people go personal with "You are a ...." then in my mind they've conceded the argument. But I'll make an exception this time - I voted for McGovern for President. If you don't know who he is or what he stood for, well, that's an example of Speaking for Principles (McGovern) or Labeling, Namecalling, Fearmongering (Nixon, CREEP, etc). Registered Libertarian until they got too doctrinaire. But that makes absolutely no difference regarding whether or not my questions or observations have merit.

Right now, sadly, both parties are misleading, self-serving and are not much on principles. Republicans take personal responsibility and economic opportunity and turn it into bankrupting the coming generation, as you said. Democrats take adherence to principles of opportunity, education and safeguards and turn it into class warfare, jealousy, and buying votes by taking from successful and giving to those who aren't (and Republicans do the same thing with corporate welfare and a reinvention of the Robber Barons (no - I don't remember them personally). I read Kerry was going to be on O'Reilly on Fox and tuned in. He got asked some hard questions and answered them - couldn't help but think if he'd done that before the election the result would have been different. But the answer that hit me was when O'Reilly said both parties have sold out the people regarding energy - told Kerry he's been around for 20 years, call for independence from the Mideast has been around since Carter and both parties have failed. Kerry said "you're right." Honesty. Then asked him why ANY of you guys deserve another shot. Not much to say to that. But 98 percent of those guys get reelected.

And to my way of thinking, expending all this energy coming up with examples of who's the bigger bum just plays into the hands of the power structure because people stay focused on personalities and old grudges (Israel-Hezbollah, anyone?) and don't discuss what's best for the country, absent a political angle.

Easy example. Kind of a mantra of mine. So Iraq goes away (nice idea, yes?). We're still faced with jihadists who want to reestablish the caliphate and massacre every man, woman and child who doesn't fit their mold of racial or religious purity. So Mr./Ms candidate for either party: what do we do about it?

Anonymous said...

Ohhhh, a libertarian. That explains things. ;)

In all seriousness, the lying isn't just a side issue. It is the main issue, especially when it comes to winning elections. When the lies are repeated often enough and loud enough, people believe them. The only way to counter that is to call bs when they see it. Lying, corruption, and poor ethics should never be tolerated from either party.

I won't go into further detail here, but I suggest looking up anything on the concept of "the big lie".

Chuck said...

To "Anonymous", I think it was...
It's not just the GOP that lies, exagerates, stretches the truth, or whatever you want to call it.

Let's not forget the "October Surprise" of 2000 (Bush having been a bit of a "boozer", apparently). Kerry's statement of being in ... What was it now, Nam? Laos? Cambodia? I don't remember right off...
He claimed to have been one place, and he was called into question by his old CO...or was it some other of his Military comrades?
Whatever. When the lying stops, and the issues get HEARD, we'll all be better off.

And on another note: "Hundreds of thousands" of disenfranchised? Methinks you may be exaggerating yourself....

Anonymous said...

Where did you find it? Interesting read Lip plumpers drugstores avoca indiana new cars Mcghee tennis center in atlanta Naked male models free gallery naked woman pornstars Florida buick dealer roulette winning systems lamborghini nitro free tranny pornstars pics Big amateur pornstars mazda miat zippered window replacement

Anonymous said...

I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! » »