Vetterworld

Logic, reason and deep psychological problems displayed for your amusement

Sunday, September 12, 2004

Slime, Republicans and democrats

I was over reading one of my favorites, Betsy, and a post she had about a new Newsweek article titled "Slime Time Live-In your face: Fueled by shadowy cash, the attacks get uglier and uglier. Why the mud's flying so thick and fast." Ostensibly it is a dissection of how ugly and personal the elections, and politics in general, have gotten. Betsy brings up a problem I share:

The whole tone of the article is objectionable. They equate the Swift Boat ads with this entire story as if both are vicious and possibly dishonest. This is the storyline that the MSM is adopting. I heard Margaret Carlson say lastnight on Capital Gang that now there is Red State truth and Blue State truth. Bush supporters believe the SBVT and Bush opponents believe 60 Minutes. It's too much for Newsweek to actually try to determine which is true and which isn't. But there is no accusation about forgery with the Swifties. The most you have are different recollections about events there. Of course, we can't judge because Kerry refuses to release all the documents.

I could not agree more, and have long had a problem with the claim by both the MSM and demos in general that campaigns have become so mean, with both sides pulling rotten, dirty tricks in a casual, par for the course manner. Really?

I do not deny that campaigns have taken an ugly tone: In the past week we have been subjected to a regimen of allegations about Bush, all meant to undermine his character. Ben Barnes, the 60 Minutes fraud documents tall tale, the new Kitty Kelly "book" scheduled for next week and given major star treatment with 3 consecutive appearances slated for the morning talkers. But what is the consistent thread? It's ALL democrat sliming, all the time. Where is the other half, the Repub slime? Thus far I have heard that the Swift Boaters are an example, but how so? 285 or however many Vietnam vets banded together, with seemingly little to gain (certainly less then the PAID kerry staffers who CBS/NYT/Wash Post et al routinely interview and posit as simple talking heads, not partial in the least, no no never...but NO, we shant mention they work for K boy...). The MSM has never vetted their "larger story" or the "importance of the allegations" they make, instead trumpeting the one or two whom has had problems corroborating their stories. Yet the Swifts are classified as examples of partisan meanness, simply as a given for no reason other then their distaste for kerry.

Another recent example of Repub rottenness is the non-story of Cheney saying that he felt the Repub party was better for the national defense. You would have thought he had a Deanesque meltdown and went completely mad, ranting that Al Queda was just waiting, finger on the button, for a kerry victory. It was a nonevent in total--at least I had the ability to understand what he said, and why, set aside that I completely concur. And when he seeks to clarify his message for the IDIOTS in the MSM, it is spun as some sort of admission that he had overstepped some hostility line...Well, no. The schmucks at NYT, See-BS, ABC, NBC, CNN, etc had so overstated his statements that he felt compelled to correct the record. Had I been advising him I would have blown off the whole thing, but that's just me. The best shot they seem to have to date are the Willie Horton ads, but so what? It was TRUE. Dukakis did parole irresponsibly, Horton did go on to rape, kill, maim, injure. Where is the slime in pointing out failed policies of your opponent?

That brings us to the main point: democrats ARE purveyors of slime, personal attacks and the overall lowering of the process. From all the fakery and fraud in their zeal to attack Bush about events 30 years ago, events that elicit a giant SO WHAT from the public, I believe, to the "October surprise" of the Gore campaign releasing drunk driving records of Bush, to Clinton's long and sordid history of smearing his detractors, to Carvile, Begala et al and their overwhelming unctuousness, the list is never ending. Spinning Karl Rove as the evil mastermind behind Idiot Bush, when not spinning Bush as a manipulating liar, to spinning Bush as Cheney's puppet, to spinning Bush/Cheney as oil baron Haliburton minions, on and on, nary a shred of evidence not withstanding. Yet talk to a demo or, my personal favorite, the "independent voter" who cannot site a single Republican vote in their histories, and you find that all the aforementioned slime is a foregone conclusion, and they remain utterly unaware of their own level of slime ingestion.

The battle of the slime will probably never be honestly addressed, let alone won. Modern democrats (and "independents") are watching the demise of their party. Forced to confront the profundity of their own lack of core values, they must frantically cling to hearsay, innuendo, rumors and SLIME to substantiate not their belief in their values but the demonized nature of their opponents. With that backdrop, how can they be expected to address the situation honestly, rationally or objectively?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home