The Smear Campaign Against Kerry

Remove all ads!

Yeah, you guys seriously need more than two candidates that nobody likes.

 

Oh, I know when to stay out of the way!

Just some quick drive-by points, though:

- Isn't it ironic that Kerry's campaign revolves around Vietnam, and questioning him is like questioning one's patriotism; and at the same time, Bush's campaign revolves around Iraq and the war on terror, and questioning THOSE things also calls into question one's patriotism?

- Whether Kerry is a superhero or just a regular old hero; whether he earned all or just some of his medals; and whether or not he lied about being in Cambodia, it's clear that he served his country with valor and paid a physical price for it.

- Kerry isn't flip-flopping to have supported the Iraq war at the outset and then turned against it later. It's perfectly consistent with his Vietnam days. It shows poor judgement but it's not flip-flopping.

- The real smear isn't from these 527 ads, it's that Bush and Kerry are bashing them in public. Kerry shouldn't have voted for McCain-Feingold, and Bush shouldn't have signed it - 527 ads are exactly what they deserve. It's what Bush and Kerry asked for, and now they should live with the consequences.

- That said, it's an example of how weak a candidate Kerry is that so much of his campaign should rest upon his Vietnam experience - and, in turn, that he should prove so vulnerable to attacks on that history (like the Cambodia fiasco). If you only show one dimension of your character, you shouldn't be surprised when opponents only target that one dimension.

Oh, and Sauron the Puppy...

- Vive la France!

 

Where's the blood?!? The exposed entrails?!? Ripped out eyeballs?!?

Damn, that was a bag o'popcorn wasted. I should've rented Kill Bill Vol. 2 again.

 

Well, that is an excellent question, but one which would take this argument off topic. For some of us it is about returning real political power back to the people again. Our government, and both of the major political parties - appears to be bought and paid for by special interest groups. It is no wonder at all that Harbourboy's off-the-cuff quip is loaded with potent undertones of what has happened to our democratic institutions.

Kerry is not a great choice, IMO. He's not perfect, but much better than the alternative. Since there is so much failure in our current regime, why not give someone else a chance? But I'm bothered by the personal attacks on him as an individual, rather than his politics. The Republicans are resorting to these kinds of attacks rather than focusing on their own record and accomplishments. What becomes clear is that their record is one of failure rather than accomplishment. How about healthcare? what have they accomplished for the American people? or education? or the economy? or in foreign affairs, with our neighbors? Have they improved America's image and prestige abroad? As a challenge, I ask my fellow Americans, who are supporters of the current regime, to defend the record of their party, rather than having to resort to lowly attacks on Kerry's wife as a substitute for their own failures.

 

Which candidate is going to do the most to reduce the USA's mushrooming foreign debt? Any other country that ran such huge and chronic deficits would be an immediate "sell!" You'd want to get rid of its currency and its bonds as fast as you could.
But the current American administration thinks their country is special; the rules, principles and constraints that apply to the strangers don't apply to us, they say.

 

Frankly, I have to say that although I don't approve of smear by either side, I realize that it would take a miracle to stop it.

This is very strange. I never really though I would say this, but I agree with Grey Magistrate on a reasonable amount of these issues. Kerry is presenting himself as one-dimensional. I think he does over-emphasize his war experience (which was distinguished) and I think the whole idea that criticism means a lack of patriotism is absurd. Kerry did not flip-flop on Iraq. I think it takes a great person to admit that he was wrong than to stand blindly behind basic principles and rhetoric (note that I don't really see either candidate doing that).

Of course, I'd still vote for Kerry and hope things turn out better than they have under Bush, but, considering I'm both under 18 and not going to be living in the country, it doesn't really matter.

What I really want would be some way to level the playing field. The money involved in becoming a candidate destroys the democratic process. Also, the two political party system is horrible, but that's way off topic.

 

Here it comes, Splunge!

Part of the problem is that Kerry is running on his strength as an individual, rather than his politics - not a bad move, given how unspectacular his Senate record is. His campaign emphasizes two good points - he is a medalled Vietnam veteran, and he's not Bush. You write as much yourself, Chandos. So Republicans don't have much choice but to target those two issues: first, by questioning how much his Vietnam experience is relevant and positive to him as President; and second, by pointing out way in which his un-Bushness is bad (e.g., nuance to the point of fence-straddling).

Nothing wrong with that, in my mind. We would have a totally different race today if a candidate with original ideas and zest, like Dean, had won the nomination. (Dean would probably be ahead by several additional points, too.)

As for the Republican record:

Healthcare - the Republicans passed the biggest expansion of gov't healthcare coverage since Medicaid/Medicare. The GOP isn't getting any political credit for it because it's too rich for the right and too thin for the left, but it did get the AARP head's approval, which is something.

Education - Bush worked with one of the most leftist members of the Senate, Ted Kennedy, to craft his education bill. Bipartisanship at its most unfortunate, since the best provisions don't kick in for another few years, but at least this is more than Clinton managed in his eight years.

Economy - while the rest of the world stumbles and sinks, America has continued growing at ridiculous levels. In terms of relative growth, the Bush administration is doing far better than the Clinton years, when the entire globe (excepting the SE Asia implosion late in the '90s) was zipping ahead. Compare the Bush economic record to that of Japan, the EU, or any other major country.

Image and prestige - again, a relative measure. Are we measuring by perceptions of raw power and wealth, or by warm and fuzzy feelings? By the former, the American image and prestige has climbed immensely - so much, in fact, that political scientists everywhere are recalculating models to explain when, and how, the rest of the world will rebalance against our growing hyperpower. In terms of the latter, it's certainly decayed, but the half-life of political love is notoriously short. We weren't going to get much love from North Korea, Syria, Iran, or Venezuela, the EU doesn't show us much affection except when we agree with them or are getting beat up, and the Arab world isn't going to like us until we hand over Jerusalem.

A sample question to put this into perspective. The US is withdrawing troops from Germany. Is this a bigger hit to the image and prestige of the US or the EU? One year Germany is stifling American bases during the war in Iraq, the next year it's griping that the US is pulling out some of its troops. This hits the very heart of the "image and prestige" issue. Are the transatlantic troops there to be USED - or to serve as a nice SYMBOL? Same with image and prestige - is it about who we are and what we do, or about how well we get along and smooth over our (legitimate) disagreements?

America IS a special case. Here's one issue: Asian exporters are running huge currency surpluses. They have to get rid of their excess currency somehow. The safest investment in the world is the American bond, so naturally that money flows right back to us. Here's another: businesses globally often use the dollar as their generic store of value. That helps prop up the dollar because there is a huge demand for dollars as dollars, not as means to buy American products. Another: the US has a flood of illegal immigrants that pay taxes without receiving many social services in return, and often exporting their meager salaries as remittances back home, helping to further prop up the US economy. And another: overall US debt as a percentage of GDP is very low compared to EU or Asian countries. In absolute terms, the debt is obscene. In relative terms, it's nothing compared to what other advanced economies confront. And still another: despite the ballooning deficit, the US has still managed to keep interest rates lower than Clinton-era levels without sparking inflation and while maintaining breakneck growth rates.

It's not a question of selfishness. It's just that by the fortunate accident of being the biggest, most stable, and most free-trading of the capitalist powers, US currency and bonds have the special quality of being valued in and of themselves - and the rest of the world is mired in a slump, as the US slows to "only" 3%.

OK, this was TOTALLY off-topic. I think the only blood and entrails will be from when Taluntain catches me!

 

The blood and entrails will come when the Fed finally has to face up to the colossal problem it has created through its naive reliance on statements like:

and

If those statements ever cease to be true (if they ever really were) then the whole illusion falls like a house of cards. Somewhere, somehow, something has to give. You can't keep running up debts forever ($32 trillion and counting). Maybe the trigger will come if and when China ever decides to float its currency. Anyway, I still think that this is the most pressing issue facing the USA because the implications for the world economy are titanic. And I can see no hint of which of these two bumbling show-pony candidates even has the slightest clue what is going on let alone do anything about it.

 

I take it running a campaign based on what Bush has done is not an option.

 

The Euro has already made a little poke at the dollar. The dollar still rules supreme but the Euro is coming slowly but quite steadily.

 

It's all good! I like stirring up the fire with a little gasoline. I simply think what i think from what i feel,see, hear, and observe from news, the people themselves, and their opponents.

I just think there's something scary about a guy who served as junior senator to Ted Kennedy.....


Hell, i'm not conservative just because i think Kerry is a putz. I'm just a skeptical of Kerry being this country's savior and solver of problems. We'll see, because i think he will probably win.

I have nothing against France, i love wine and cheese!! France seems beautiful and i would love to visit Europe if i had the chance. Viva la France is alright with me.

I'm not conservative..i just believe in personal responsibility and the right to bear arms, drive fast cars, free speech, fast cars, diverse games, and fast cars.

 

Er...the part I didn't read. That'll teach me not to skim posts in the future.

Sowwee Massa. Please forgive me?

GM hits the nail on the head. The reason so much effort is made to attack and discredit Kerry's war record is...Kerry's campaign has made a big deal out of his war record. Is it underhanded of the Republicans? Yes. But, I'd say Kerry has only himself to blame for it. You put a lot of effort into building something up, you better expect your political opponents to do their best to smack it back down. That's what we're seeing here.

 

@Splunge...the reason there's no blood and gore is because I've been trying to fight a more "sensitive" war against Liberalism.

Turning back to the notion of a smear campaign...check out this story about how the other half live. Now we're talkin' some good serious smear.

I know it's a Fox link, but all the majors are covering the same story. I just used the Fox link to make Death Rabbit get all itchy.

@Sauron T.P. Did we know you in a previous life as Shralp or Darkwolf?

@Tal Don't you think that's just cuz the Euro's prettier and has a more ergonomic design?

 

The problem with the current smear against Kerry is NOT that people are criticizing his VietNam record. By making VietNam the centerpiece of his campaign, he's asking for criticism, I agree. The problem is that the most vocal critics - the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth - are not only liars, but proven and demonstrable liars. I have no problem with VietNam vets who think Kerry betrayed them by his Senate testimony all those years ago. I can't blame them - were I a vet, I would probably feel the same way, truth or not. But saying that he lied in his testimony and fabricated claims is just false, as are most of the claims that SBVT are making. All criticisms are fair in a political campaign. The difference between a criticism and a smear, in my view, is telling the truth. The SBVT are lying liars and Republican tools, and that makes them scum - not because they're attacking a Democrat.

@ Hack

Whew! So THAT'S what's making me all itchy. I thought I caught crabs again! Thanks, buddy!

 

GM wrote:

Ahm, for one, the US economy looked better in the past decade, one of the fastest growth-rates the US ever experienced. Second, the rest of the world isn't stumbling and sinking, that's hinted by the rise of prices for resources. One cause is that emerging economies are neeeding and buying them in an unprecedented way.

here
And that picture is the same in varoious regions of the world. Prices for construction materials rose 44% on average this spring over here, because some countries started to consume so much (and we generally don't mind selling stuff).

No, they're approaching. You delibaretly go where the Germans try to run from.

Prices are a function of supply and demand. That's why the price of the Dollar rises because of the high demand... that is, the Dollar is falling, isn't it ? Dollar is the currency oil is traded in. Sinking Dollar means rising oil prices if you pay in Dollars. But as I said already on this board, lower Dollar is a natural and healthy developement. It just might be painful for all involved for a time. Interestingly, the trade deficit of the US has risen again, in spite of the lower Dollar. That's not good.

The irony is, that Bush nearly started a trade war, as he didn't see free trade fit for US-Steel, or the other way around, and didn't feel bound to free-trade-agreements previously signed. Ah, the devilish WTO.

While central Europe suffered and will suffer some more, peripheral Europe had a great time until recently. I think the Finish, Spanish and Irish could tell.

That's all off topic.

 

@DR

Agreed.

@Hacken

That doesn't approach the level of the SBVT folks.
It's bad, but not as bad.

 

It's no where near as bad - it's a NEWS STORY! Yes, they referenced some of the jokes that some of the comedians/comediennes and actors/actresses said (like Whoopi referencing "bush" as part of a woman's anatomy) but that's just direct quotes. The story wasn't intended to smear Bush, it was only reporting what actually happened!

EDIT: I just re-read it to make sure - yep it's just a news story - no smear there, nor was a smear intended in this case.

 

Unless he's referring to this, from the news story:

Hardly a smear. Brutal, yes. But nobody's lying. Perhaps Bush lying about something popping into his head?

I too am confused about why this is such a smear - even anything on par as dispicable as the Swifties. Perhaps I'm missing something.