Madness, thy name is Democrats

The campaign rolls on, and sadly Kerry, the Democrats and their surrogates continue their “hate bush” diatribes. While Russian school children are being butchered by terrorists, they are starting an all out push to attack Bush in every way possible. Not offer a vision, not focus on issues, just attack the President and his administration. Sadly this will not work.

60 Minutes II is planning to bash Bush’s Vietnam service with slick editing and inferring he or his family used connections to get him out of going to Vietnam, of course this flies in the face of Bush directly volunteering to go to Vietnam and being turned down, and of course given the fact that 60 minutes let the Clinton campaign itself edit their 1992 “stand by my man” Bill and Hillary interview it makes anything these guys say or broadcast suspect. A new “biography” is coming out and accusing Bush of all sorts of nefarious things. The press and surrogates are once again attempting to make Bush’s National Guard service part of the debate.

All of these are failed strategies. At best are rehashes of the 2000 campaign… or to put it bluntly “no new news here”. They may speak to the minority of Bush Haters out there, and perhaps energize them a bit, but they won’t win the White House. They may affect a small percentage in terms of their vote, but they won’t swing an election, and will likely swing as many people against Kerry as for him.

These “new” allegations regarding Bush and his service during the Vietnam era again focus the public consciousness on Vietnam. This as has already been shown in this campaign to be a loser for Kerry. If Democrats believe that somehow they can damage Bush by focusing the discussion on Vietnam their hatred has now become a certified madness, and I’m not talking about the angry kind.

Let’s be serious for a moment shall we? I know a tough thing to do in Politics in the final stretch of the Presidential campaign, but lets at least try. Since the 2000 campaign the Democrats and Bush Haters have been slinging this AWOL claim… which if true the implied “worst case” of the allegation and smear is that Bush went AWOL because he was either A) one a bender or B) in rehab for drug or alcohol abuse or C) Both. Now if Bush was AWOL, and I’m not saying he was, but lets just say for the sake of discussion he was, because he was on a bender, or went to rehab, or had a bender and went to rehab 35 years ago, how does this impact the election today? How does this make Bush unqualified for the position of Commander in Chief (which is, make no mistake about it, what the Democrats et al wish for it to do)?

Bush has been Commander in Chief now for 4 years, and he’s done a damned fine job. (I know leftists are getting higher blood pressure from that statement, but it’s the truth) He mobilized a nation to war after being attacked by a Global threat that was ignored by the previous administration (Bubba, better stop reading, don’t want you to have problems with that freshly repaired ticker). He has stood up to the corrupt and impotent United Nations. (Global Socialist are seething over that) He helped unseat a despotic regime that killed women for simply showing their faces, or even their ankle, in public. Destroyed a regime that harbored terrorists and was threat to the world. He helped unseat a despotic dictator who had threatened the world and his regions stability for over a generation, he has not folded, flip flopped, or nuanced his way into rationalizing Evil. He has seen it for what it is, and committed himself to do everything he can do to end its reign. That’s Bush’s resume for the position of Commander in Chief, no often repeated cry of AWOL 35 years ago will undercut it… anymore than a 35 year old 4 month tour of duty will counter years of anti-war activism and 20 years of senate activities to undercut the military.

Your attempt to focus on this AWOL allegation is probably the single dumbest move your campaign could make at this time. You continue to focus the public on the Vietnam era, by doing so you continue to focus the electorate on the traitorous actions of your own Candidate. The longer you talk about Vietnam, the more you remind people of the 1971 lies before congress by Kerry. The longer you talk about Vietnam the more you remind America of Kerry’s group, a group that plotted assassinations of US Senators,. The longer you talk about Vietnam the more you remind America of your candidates meeting with the Communist N. Vietnamese while still a member of the military. The more you talk about Vietnam the more you remind America exactly why your guy can never be trusted as commander in chief. He’s already turned his back on the American soldiers fighting abroad once, and his actions cost 10,000 to 15,000 young American’s their lives (yes the Vietnamese have admitted they were ready to surrender in 1970, but kept fighting because of the anti war actions and in particular the speech given by John Kerry, in hopes that they would get a Dove president in Washington in1972 based on the anti-war movements). He’s voted to put them in harms way, and then voted to leave them there without the arms and equipment they needed as well. Kerry’s record is one that can never be trusted by sane and rational people to be in charge of their sons and daughters in the field of combat. No screaming about AWOL allegations will undo the weakness Mr. Kerry has on the record for being trusted as a commander in chief, and in fact the continued attempts to keep the debate on Vietnam will continue to harm Mr. Kerry more and more.

It is sheer madness to believe that this and other “Hate Bush” rhetoric is going to do anything but backfire nationally, just as it did for Dean among members of his own party in Iowa. If “Hate Bush” dogma backfired amongst your own party faithful, just wait until you see how badly it backfires among the population in general. Preaching to your zealous irrational choir is not a way to win a national election.

Can we safely assume that Soros is up to his word in saying he'd spend any amount to unseat Bush? I think if we follow the money, and remember that accusations made late in the game are very difficult to disprove due to the lack of time and resources, I think this is his game. We need to keep saying the same thing. This is George Soros, a sore loser, willing to destroy the whole American economy, military, etc. just to have his own way. Too bad he has so much money to spend on it. I just pray that Americans tune out. I think it's getting to that point anyway. The democrats have no plan other than to riducule everything conservative. And personally, I think that will eventually turn against them. They are only going to look more desperate and ridiculous in the end. I would love to see the melt-down.

The campaign rolls on, and sadly Kerry, the Democrats and their surrogates continue their “hate bush” diatribes. While Russian school children are being butchered by terrorists, they are starting an all out push to attack Bush in every way possible. Not offer a vision, not focus on issues, just attack the President and his administration. Sadly this will not work.

Sadly? Gladly, this will not work.

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

It is sheer madness to believe that this and other “Hate Bush” rhetoric is going to do anything but backfire nationally, just as it did for Dean among members of his own party in Iowa. If “Hate Bush” dogma backfired amongst your own party faithful, just wait until you see how badly it backfires among the population in general. Preaching to your zealous irrational choir is not a way to win a national election.

I miss those heady days when so many seemed to expect Dean to be the nominee.

633 Reasons Why TV Sucks
by Deborah Branscum
"It probably means little now to Howard Dean, but CNN's top executive believes his network overplayed the infamous clip of Dean's 'scream' after the Iowa caucuses," reports David Bauder. [suntimes URL omitted, nonfunctional] Of note: *Dean's howl was "barely audible" to the live audience; *the footage was aired 633 times by cable and national networks (not counting local news or talk shows) in the four days after it occured; *although even Roger Ailes, Fox News chairman, and the head of CBS News conceeded the event got more play than it deserved, neither ABC nor NBC saw any problem. I'm not a Deaniac but you don't have to be one to be appalled by how one minor event, when repeated practically nonstop over four days, can torpedo a campaign.

D.B. used to write for MacUser magazine, and would cover the Apple user group conventions (yeah, I'm a recovering geek). Didn't shave her legs back then. I stumbled over the page doing a web search for something election related, and just now hunted it up again (took a few tries). She lives in Sweden, and obviously knew little (or acknowledged little) in February about the negative and combative nature of the Kerry campaign, or the way Dean's defeat was orchestrated by the DNC.

George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.