Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Swift boat smear: Putting the W in coWard
Here's the CW on the Swift boat smear and John Kerry, as expressed by the usually level-headed Washington bureau of the Star-Ledger:
I disagree. I think the Kerry campaign's assessment of their opponent has been both shrewd and correct.
First, Bush being who and what he is, the smear was coming anyhow. That's the lesson of Bush I, Lee Atwater, and Dukakis, of Bush and McCain in South Carolina, and of Bush and Cleland in Georgia. The fire was already coming from the shore. Instead of motoring on past it, Kerry turned into it, just as he did on the Swift Boat in VietNam. (In fact, by telling this history at the Democratic Convention, Kerry called his shot, like Reggie Jackson used to do. Let's hope he makes it.)
Second, the Republican smears are an issue. Perhaps the issue. The SBVF[cough]T are, as we know, just the sharp end of the $300 million Republican attack machine known as the VWRC (back). If we can't blunt this attack, we can't win, let alone govern.
Third, if Kerry can't defend himself, successfully against Republican attacks, how can voters expect him to defend the country? That was why the Daschle Democrats blew it so very badly in 2000, and lost the Senate.
Fourth, I don't think Kerry needs to challenge Bush on the economy. The numbers have already done Kerry's work for him. Unless Rove manages to cook the books, Bush is already toast on this one. (Particularly if the new OT regulations screw enough people immediately, as in, their paychecks before the election.)
Fifth, I don't think Kerry needs to challenge Bush on the war. The numbers are doing their work for Kerry there, too.
Finally, everything in Bush's character says he'll never back down, never apologize, and he's going to dig himself in deeper and deeper. (I mean, honestly—stiffing a Viet Nam veteran who's a triple amputee? Where's the "compassion"? Where's the "uniting"?) When the modern Republicans lose, it's when they over-reach, just as with the Clinton impeachment. Kerry is giving them the opportunity to do exactly that.
So. Crossed fingers.
The national focus on attack ads that question John Kerry's Vietnam valor has placed the Democrat on the defensive, consuming valuable campaign time and making it more difficult for him to challenge President Bush on issues of war and the economy.
With Bush and the Republicans preparing for their week in the limelight at the Republican National Convention in New York, experts say the Kerry campaign finds itself at a tactical disadvantage, having lost control of the debate.
(via NewarkStar Ledger)
I disagree. I think the Kerry campaign's assessment of their opponent has been both shrewd and correct.
First, Bush being who and what he is, the smear was coming anyhow. That's the lesson of Bush I, Lee Atwater, and Dukakis, of Bush and McCain in South Carolina, and of Bush and Cleland in Georgia. The fire was already coming from the shore. Instead of motoring on past it, Kerry turned into it, just as he did on the Swift Boat in VietNam. (In fact, by telling this history at the Democratic Convention, Kerry called his shot, like Reggie Jackson used to do. Let's hope he makes it.)
Second, the Republican smears are an issue. Perhaps the issue. The SBVF[cough]T are, as we know, just the sharp end of the $300 million Republican attack machine known as the VWRC (back). If we can't blunt this attack, we can't win, let alone govern.
Third, if Kerry can't defend himself, successfully against Republican attacks, how can voters expect him to defend the country? That was why the Daschle Democrats blew it so very badly in 2000, and lost the Senate.
Fourth, I don't think Kerry needs to challenge Bush on the economy. The numbers have already done Kerry's work for him. Unless Rove manages to cook the books, Bush is already toast on this one. (Particularly if the new OT regulations screw enough people immediately, as in, their paychecks before the election.)
Fifth, I don't think Kerry needs to challenge Bush on the war. The numbers are doing their work for Kerry there, too.
Finally, everything in Bush's character says he'll never back down, never apologize, and he's going to dig himself in deeper and deeper. (I mean, honestly—stiffing a Viet Nam veteran who's a triple amputee? Where's the "compassion"? Where's the "uniting"?) When the modern Republicans lose, it's when they over-reach, just as with the Clinton impeachment. Kerry is giving them the opportunity to do exactly that.
So. Crossed fingers.
