personal, negative, pushing boundaries of political discourse ads are OK

[papau]

Or that seems to be the way the ABCNote put it this morning "the Swift Boat ad and their primary charges about Kerry's medals are personal, negative, extremely suspect, or false. To be (secretly) associated with them (and a presidential campaign) is qualitatively different than working with any of other 527s on either side, whose ads are at their most extreme simply personal, negative, and arguably pushing the boundaries of political discourse."

The ABC Note also reports that gay "activist" suggests the Cheney's new found moderation leads one to ask what is he trying to say to get the gay vote:

"Vote for us anyway because the president will drop it next year? ..or

"Vote for us because other issues are more important? "

"Other suggested questions"
"1. Mr Cheney, it is not like you and the president disagree on gas prices — some people see this as a fundamental and very personal issue. Are you saying you will support your boss even though he wants to discriminate against your daughter as long as you are confident that the effort will fail? Are you aware that yours and the presidents re-election supporters have said they won't give up on this issue no matter what happens in Congress this year?"

"2. Mr. Cheney, what would you say to other families who don't want their loved ones to face the proposal being pushed by the president?

The above seem ripe for use in ads, especially given the right wing Progress for America Voter Fund putting out new ads that per the WSJ

"opens with the smoky ruins of the Twin Towers and moves to several pictures of Mr. Bush with New York firefighters and other rescue workers."