Reality check for those upset over Feighan's Dean/Osama ad

[DuctapeFatwa]

Whoever the big moneybag smiles on at the convention, this is the reality of the situation.

Most voters, regardless of party affiliation, believe every meme about evildoers and "Islamic this" and "Muslim that" that you hear on Fox News and in the line at the supermarket.

Just as you have seen most of the candidates try to outdo each other in showing support for Ariel Sharon's policies, they will now have to outdo each other in the "tough on terror" and "Islamophobia" department.

Just like the cool, funny, edgy book or TV movie character that gets a mainstream network sitcom and is turned into an unrecognizable caricature of itself, so will your candidate, whoever he is, have to turn from the pretty words with which he seduced you and direct his energies toward the lowest common denominator.

The people who vote, whether Democrats or Republicans are nowhere near the "average" DU poster in terms of AOB (attitudes, opinions, belief) curve.

The people who are, don't vote. If they did, well, that's another story for another post :)

Some of you may be old enough to remember a man named George Wallace. In 1958, George lost the Alabama governor's race to an opponent who campaigned on a segregationist platform. Now George back in those days was no pioneer of racial harmony, he was a segregationist, but at that time, so were most white men in Alabama and they just kind of took it for granted.

But that changed for George after his 1958 defeat. He made a promise then, that no one "would ever out-"n-word" him again."

And like it or not, your candidate is going to have to decide BEFORE the election, that no Republican is going to "out-terror" him.

Now I know and you may know, or you may rather not think about it, that Osama has a quarter century plus employment history with daddy bush's old company, the CIA. And you may also know that the US pumped money and weapons and everything else into the bed they shared with Saddam until he got uppity about his share of the Kuwait money.

But the FoxNews and Wal-Mart crowd so totally don't know that.

They are more likely to buy into the line that if Osama and Saddam haven't been caught, it's because bush is just too soft on terror and what about our Homeland Security?

How come if bush is doing a good job we still keep getting these terror warnings, all these Al Qaeda sleeper cells right here in America, they could even be right out behind the Wal-Mart!

You can see where this is going, and where your candidate will have to go, if he wants to "win."

After all, a lot of you have said that you understand that policies, issues, don't matter, it's "winning" that counts.....

(I do not support any of the candidates)

[Sliverofhope]

1. Hmm... well put

I would say though, that Bush really does seem to be weak on terror, since he's much more concerned with making a profit for Halliburton. But I think 90% of the candidates, GOP or Dem, would have a decent handle on this situation.

Your point is well taken, though. I knew this campaign was going to be ugly. I guess I just don't want to think that we're going to have to be ugly.

Correction: I have and never had any problem with being ugly to the GOP. It's just the racism anti-Islamic stuff I wasn't expecting. I have no idea why I wasn't, though.

[UTUSN]

2. Kick for Great Post n/t

[Bandit]

3. After Wallace decided no one would out-n-word him

Did he ever win again. He was shot and almost killed and had an epiphany about racism and became a much better man who decided that all his past prejedices were wrong. I'm sure the same applies with your terrorism comparison.

[DuctapeFatwa]

11. He subsequently became Governor of Alabama

and held that position for sometime. His winning campaign was based on his famous quote "Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

He was an immensely popular governor in Alabama, and his independent run for the Presidency in 1968 did remarkably well for an independent candidate.

After he was shot, he publicly repented.

[HFishbine]

4. Stupid, stupid, stupid: capitulating to the paradigm of fear

As John Edwards has been driving home latley, what people need is a message of hope. Others, it seems, would rather wallow in Bush's fabricated paradigm of fear. A candidate who tries to convince voters that he or she is best suited to to play on Rove's court is selling out democratic values. No thanks. Give me a candidate who repudiates the lies and fear-mongering; one who will stand up for the truth and for democratic values -- that's the guy I'll vote for.

It's more of the same ol' crap really. Just as they did when they voted for the IWR, some spineless candidates are capitulating, once again, to the Bush world view in order to advance their political careers. They were wrong to buy into the Bush stratagem the first time and they are wrong to appropriate his contrivences this time. They apparently will never learn that democrats want an opposition party, not automatons on the assembly line of manufactured fear.

If any candidate is behind these ads, and I'm reserving judgement for now, he can rest assured that he WILL NOT get my vote, not in the primary, not in the general.

[Hep]

5. EXACTLY

Anyone who serves as an apologist for this crude, base tactic is opening the door for what happened to Max Cleland. They're saying it's OK. It's NOT OK.

When you have nothing but lies, you no longer do anyone any good. Even if the assholes behind this ARE registered democrats, they've lost touch with the fundamental principles of our party.

[BeFree]

6. Winning does count...duh

* must be a little shaken by this. The ad seems like something out of the rove playbook. If the Deane'rs can make mincemeat out of this low-down campaigning, just imagine what they'll do to rove's pitches!

Looks like we're gonna have us a good season! Ain't nobody gonna "out-T-word" the Dean campaign.

[HFishbine]

7. Another Reality Check

The ad is sponsored by a group headed by Gephardt campaign contributor Edward Feighan. Way to Gephardt! Support the paradigm of fear in the Rose Garden, perpetuate it against fellow democrats.

[SEAburb]

10. Do you have a problem with FREE SPEECH

So now Deanies are against free speech went it comes to their candidate.

[HFishbine]

13. Whhaaaa?

Talk about dodging the issue. Fire away, I say. But if your going to cowardly try to hide behind front men and have hired guns sling your mud for you, you will be discovered.

A person who has only contributed to one of the dem presidential candidates, Dick Gephardt, is behind these ads. People can take it from there.

[SEAburb]

14. Private citizens have the right to support the candidate

of their choice. You Deanies need to stop trying to stifle free speech.

[Romberry]

8. The politics of fear is a loser. That's Bush territory

No Democrat should ever run an ad like this. Ever. And my committment to voting for ABB is sorely tested.

Candidates will not increase their support by tearing Dean down. These ads are a slap in the face of not just Howard Dean but against hundreds of thousands of his supporters and that includes me.

It was stupid. They should withdraw and apologize. Both the ads and the candidates whose campaigns were obviously behind it. They are losers. The way their "leadership" has rolled over for Bush proves it.

[snoochie]

9. Great points

But I refuse to play by their rules anymore.

"The people who vote, whether Democrats or Republicans are nowhere near the "average" DU poster in terms of AOB (attitudes, opinions, belief) curve.

The people who are, don't vote. If they did, well, that's another story for another post :)"

I choose to back a candidate who is willing to court those that don't vote.

Like Edwards, Kucinich insists that the people need a message of hope. Kennedy knew it. 'Bout time the rest of them caught up and stopped trying to help the other team to push us closer towards fascism and tyranny.

[DFLforever]

12. You're very sharp: I too think think this will be the Dem line of attack

GWB is soft on terror and Homeland Security' - this Graham argument is the one I believe Dean will adopt (along with Graham for VP?)

I don't have the link but read in a story posted ealier on DU that
Bill Kristol said - some may think Dean will be a McGovern but Kristol is afraid he may turn into a Kennedy- attacking Bush from the right on national security.