« War Supporters? | Main | Through The Looking Glass »

Setting The Record Straight

This dude doesn't strike me as important enough to be lying here, I think he's simply been misled by more important members of the VRWC into possessing false beliefs. "Right. And the MoveOn.org, Bush=Hitler ads have nothing to do with Kerry's campaign either." Right. The MoveOn.org, Bush=Hitler ads barely have anything to do with MoveOn. MoveOn asked people to submit proposed advertisements to them, which people would then vote on, and one of which would be turned into a "real" ad on television. The Bush = Hitler ad was duly submitted and, because it was an inappropriate thing to say, rejected by MoveOn. The Kerry campaign had nothing to do with it, since nothing happened. Now if someone were to have called up John O'Neil one day and said, "Hey, I was in the Vietnam War, and I don't like John Kerry. Why don't you see if you can raise some money to do an ad where I'll say I treated Kerry's wounds and that based on that information I know he lied about them," and then O'Neil had said, "that's certainly interesting, how come I never heard that before" and then the guy said, "well, you never heard it before because it's not actually true, I was just suggesting that I pretend to have treated his wounds," then O'Neil said, "that doesn't sound like a very ethical thing to do, I decline to assist you in this venture" I would hardly hold George W. Bush responsible for the faux-medic's misbehavior.

What actually happened, though, was that the Swiftliars ad went on the air, and Bush was asked -- many times -- to disavow it, due to its high number of factual inaccuracies and the dubious background of the men behind it. He refused. MoveOn, when asked to pass judgment on the Hitler ad, said "no thanks." The Bush campaign, when asked to pass judgment on the Swiftlies ad, said "we don't believe in free speech and we weren't paying attention to the McCain-Feingold Act when I signed it because, after all, at the time I was only pretending to think it was a good idea." I don't think Bush should somehow force the Swiftliars to stop advertising. What he should say is that the charges in that ad are false, he does not believe in slandering his opponent, and, in his opinion, no respectable conservative should have anything to do with such slander. He won't do it, of course, because without slanderous allegations against his opponent Kerry can't win this election, just as he needed them to win in 2000, and just as his father has needed them in the past. He's never stood on his own two feet, never stood on his record, never stood on an honest presentation of his agenda and his political beliefs, and never accomplished a goddamn thing in his life without a little help from his old family friends. 2004 is no different.

August 22, 2004 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d83424882f53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Setting The Record Straight:

» Gift Basket from Tom Jamme's Blog
Sweet Blessings, a new Christian-based online shop featuring cookie bouquets, candy bouquets and gift baskets, opens with a campaign to donate a portion of all profits to Habitat For Humanity. The devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, while not a... [Read More]

Tracked on Oct 7, 2005 1:16:07 AM

Comments

It's a beautiful Sunday afternoon. Don't you have something better to do than blog all day?

Posted by: Kenny | Aug 22, 2004 1:44:35 PM

Umm that should be Bush can't win the election without slanderous allegations.

Posted by: poop ruiz | Aug 22, 2004 1:51:16 PM

Yeah Matt, it's a beautiful Sunday afternoon. Don't you have something better to do, like posting comments on other people's blogs?

Posted by: phil | Aug 22, 2004 1:58:10 PM

It seems to me that people are so oblivious to the reality of dirty tricks that it's more effective to make outlandish ads attacking your own candidate then blame your opponent for crossing the line. I wouldn't be surprised if another Bush=Hitler ad appeared from some unknown group that actually supports Bush so that Bush supporters could flog those evil Democrats for saying such things.
I'd suggest that someone should make an anti-Kerry ad claiming that he raped and then performed abortions on Vietnamese teenage girls and blame Bush for supporting such ads, except that the media would investigate the merits of the claim.

Posted by: SP | Aug 22, 2004 2:03:49 PM

Keep in mind that at the time the MoveOn ad contest took place, the organization was widely considered to be Dean Central. I doubt there was a lot of enthusiasm for Kerry at MoveOn at the time (and probably isn't all that much today, except for the fact that he's running against Bush). So the accusation that Kerry was coordinating with MoveOn several months ago is just more hackery.

Posted by: Charlie T. | Aug 22, 2004 2:13:32 PM

Please keep blogging on this issue, Matt. I am positively seething with rage over this disgusting smear campaign. According to Digby, nasty old Bob Dole is joining in on the slander:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_08_22_digbysblog_archive.html#109319528812177621

What a bastard.

Posted by: Donny | Aug 22, 2004 2:38:08 PM

If Al stops by, could someone ask him for a link on the Washington Post's FOIA request on Kerry's records that he's been talking about. My googling skills aren't up to it. And also, did Bush ever sign his Standard Form 180? And where is his DD214?

What is the service information that Kerry is withholding? Is this just a big fishing expedition? (Kerry's withholding his divorce papers too. Why would he withhold those if he didn't have something to hide? Most of us normal people are **happy** to share the records of such a joyful event with the whole wide world.)

Posted by: Zizka | Aug 22, 2004 2:40:34 PM

It seems a little suspicious that the "Bush=Hitler" ad was submitted by a 'Carl Roam'.

Posted by: Justa Rumor | Aug 22, 2004 2:50:52 PM

You're a journalist, not a hack.

Posted by: Blixa | Aug 22, 2004 2:52:20 PM

What he should say is that the charges in that ad are false


Now, why would Bush lie? The charges in that ad have not been proven false, so to say that they have been would be a lie.

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 3:19:49 PM

I'd love to know how the Bushies learned this tricks. Greenwich Country Day? Yale? Texas. their parents? When did these things start? Did the Bushies pick them up along the way? The NY Times magazine has an article out (flail, flail, alright, who recycled it?) which states that Democrats and Republicans use different portions of the brain for political decisions - Democrats feel other's emotions more, empathize, etc.) The argument is whether it's learned vs. organic. It's Darwinism at it's finest....and which brain type will be dominent 100 years from now? Actually, it's best to check out Retrovsmetro.org - it's all layed out geographically. Anybody for country music?

Posted by: Sue | Aug 22, 2004 3:22:18 PM

If Al stops by, could someone ask him for a link on the Washington Post's FOIA request on Kerry's records that he's been talking about.


Here you go: "Although Kerry campaign officials insist that they have published Kerry's full military records on their Web site (with the exception of medical records shown briefly to reporters earlier this year), they have not permitted independent access to his original Navy records. A Freedom of Information Act request by The Post for Kerry's records produced six pages of information. A spokesman for the Navy Personnel Command, Mike McClellan, said he was not authorized to release the full file, which consists of at least a hundred pages."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 3:22:18 PM

And also, did Bush ever sign his Standard Form 180? And where is his DD214?


Look over there! Look over there!

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 3:22:41 PM

Matt,
You're actually letting Bush off too easily. The Swiftlies ads are actually funded by a major Bush fundraiser, are they not? If they are, what's stopping Bush from calling up his fundraising buddy and saying that he'd better stop paying for those smear attacks or Bush won't be able to use any of the money that he donated to Bush's campaign.
I realize we're about a week away from going to the all-publicly funded portion of Bush's last campaign, so the 'I'll return your donations' threat is kind of weak, but you get the idea - Bush could tell his fundraising buddy to cut it out.

Posted by: The Navigator | Aug 22, 2004 3:24:08 PM

Yes, I saw the Washing Post article. But Where Was Bush? Waiting for his personal physician to give him a blood pressure test? Let's get over this issue. Please note that several Republican people were not telling the truth, specify that this has happened many times in the past with the Bush family, and get on with what's important. Another point - why do we have to wait until the Republican convention to find out what the Bush agenda is? This should have been laid out months ago with the Democrats. And why is the press asking Kerry for his agenda? He's already stated what it is. What, these people can't read?

Posted by: sue | Aug 22, 2004 3:28:49 PM

Now, why would Bush lie?
Posted by: Al | August 22, 2004 03:19 PM

Gee, there's a real stumper.
*snicker* [/Al]

Posted by: JP | Aug 22, 2004 3:33:44 PM

Matt, you're using a double standard here...here's how.

Fahrenheit 9/11's key PR staff includes Chris Lehane and other Democratic operatives. The Democrats in the Senate delayed a vote so they could make a show of attending the movie's DC premier. Michael Moore got rockstar treatment at the DNC convention, to include sitting in President Carter's box.

After F911 came out, plenty of commentators pointed out that the movie was a propaganda piece, and deliberately misleading. Also, Moore's repugnant public and Web statements received wide airing (e.g., the Baathist terrorists are more like Minutemen, Americans are the dumbest people on the planet).

Before the convention, but after all Michael Moore's dirty laundry was aired, Senator and Mrs. Kerry went on Larry King live. King asked Kerry if he'd seen F911. What a perfect opportunity for Kerry to publicly distance himself and the Democratic party from Moore's trash populism.

Instead, what did Kerry say? "No Larry, I haven't seen it...I've lived it, for the past four years." Teresa chuckled.

Now, you expect President Bush to step forward and tell the Swifties to back down. Why should he? Kerry's made his bed, both with his attempt to add gravitas to the antiwar movement in the early '70s--a movement whose tone (a tone Kerry helped set) stained the image of all returning vets, with lasting damage to them--and with the vicious tone he allowed the Democratic campaign to take.

If your side is gonna dish it out, Matt, be ready to take it.

Posted by: smagar | Aug 22, 2004 3:38:47 PM

Hey Al, who has the burden of proof here?

Posted by: Donny | Aug 22, 2004 3:41:46 PM

Apparently, Bush has the burden of proof when accusations are made against him, and Bush supporters have the burden of proof when accusations are made against Kerry.

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 4:14:01 PM

If your side is gonna dish it out, Matt, be ready to take it.


Now this is EXACTLY right. If Kerry is going to have Michael Moore -- whose accusations against Bush are far, FAR worse, and have been PROVEN false -- being the star of his convention, sitting in Jimmy Carter's skybox, then you will have to deal with a few little advertisements.

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 4:17:28 PM

One of us! One of us!

Posted by: The Shrill | Aug 22, 2004 4:18:03 PM


Let's revisit 2004, and see what promises Bush kept:

http://www.failureisimpossible.com/needtoknow/campaignslogans.htm

Posted by: Sue | Aug 22, 2004 4:28:28 PM

Wow. I was sitting in Jimmy Carter's skybox too. I had no idea I was the star.

Posted by: Atrios | Aug 22, 2004 4:32:45 PM

I was sitting in Jimmy Carter's skybox too.


Show off.

Posted by: Al | Aug 22, 2004 4:34:15 PM


Please name where you received this information, post the origin, and leave out the unnecessary adverbs.

After F911 came out, plenty of commentators (Name them, please) pointed out that the movie was a propaganda piece(what did they say, exactly?), and deliberately misleading. Also, Moore's repugnant public (we don't shower? I did this morning!) and Web statements (where, who? post, please) received wide airing (e.g., the Baathist terrorists are more like Minutemen, Americans are the dumbest people on the planet) - What wide airing? What tv channels? Who? When? Where? What commentator?
Fact vs. opinion. Very important in the news business.

Before the convention, but after all Michael Moore's dirty laundry was aired, Senator and Mrs. Kerry went on Larry King live. King asked Kerry if he'd seen F911. What a perfect opportunity for Kerry to publicly distance himself and the Democratic party from Moore's trash populism.

Posted by: Sue | Aug 22, 2004 4:35:13 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.