Swift Boat Vets ad vs NAACP James Bryd ad

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ScreamingEagle, Aug 7, 2004.

  1. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    Remember the NAACP ad during the Bush-Gore campaign? It was when Bush was accused of being indirectly responsible for victims like the Texas dragging death victim James Byrd. The black and white ad showed a truck pulling a chain while the daughter spoke declaring "So when Gov. George W. Bush refused to sign hate crimes legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again."

    Was this a nasty campaign ad or what? Republicans sure thought so. But evidently the Democrats thought NOTHING of it. Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather said not a thing about it. Even Joe Lieberman thought it was fine on "Meet The Press".

    But NOW the Democrats are up I arms about the Swift Boat ad. Do we sense a dichotomy here? It's OK to smear Bush but not OK to smear Kerry? (assuming that both ads are smears)

    To compound matters there are even some on the Right who are starting to decry the Swift Boat Vets ad saying that we shouldn't stoop to their level, etc. Even Bill O'Reilly thinks the Vets ad is not good. Many think the Vets ad is just nasty campaigning much like the Bryd ad was considered to be.

    I am so tired of Republicans backing away due to the accusations of the Left! It is time to decimate them! :firing: Personally I fully support the Vet ad because I see it as a first person indictment of Kerry (these guys were witnesses) whereas the Byrd ad was trying to imply that Bush was directly responsible for the death of those like James Byrd just because he did not support some hate-crime legislation (we already have laws against murder).

    What are some of the opinions here? Do you think these two ads are equal or comparable? Do you think such ads should be banned? Do you think both are just dirty campaign tactics as many claim them to be? Do you think Republicans should back off?
     
  2. winston churchi
    Offline

    winston churchi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    Messages:
    640
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +9
    That ad is put out by these vets and has nothing to do with the republican party...
    It is a free country - if those persons wish to spend their money on speaking their mind against Kerry based on their past with him than they have a right to...the same right as moron Michael Moore has about putting out a fictional film as his version of the truth of 911....he has that right also.
    It upsets the democrats because Kerrys whole camp. is based on Vietnam - and Bush bashing - when he isn't talking about his past in Nam he is Bush bashing and vice versa....pretty much all he has done...I guess it hurts a little to find some of his Nam comrads against him...
     
  3. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    I'm glad it's upsetting the Democrats. As it should.

    What bothers me is that some on the right are putting the Vets ad in the same category as the Bryd ad or probably even Michael Moore's stuff.
     
  4. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    We try to be "too nice" all the fucking time.
     
  5. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    Im just steering clear of it. They can tell their story but then its just he said, he said BS. It doesn't solve anything.

    With that said, its absolutely their right to tell their side of the story. I just don't want people getting carried away and start calling Kerry a murderer for his actions in War. If they are going to speak, then speak of the lieing and fabricating he did during that time. Don't revel that he shot a kid in the back.

    No one on here has said this, but i have heard others saying it.
     
  6. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    Here's the problem.....

    We on the right try to take the "high" road all the time. So when stuff like this comes out, we try to distance ourselves because we don't want to appear, rightly so, like we are playing dirty. We don't like to play dirty, because we know that when the people get our message, they tend to support our beliefs. But what happens is that the "masses" see the few conservatives that are on TV saying, "hey, this ain't right" and so they agree. Even if there is truth, we don't want to look "bad" so we downplay the reports. Well, when the shoe is turned, the libs suck it up. I mean, look at MM movie. NOBODY on the left or even in the media, distanced themselves from that movie or MM. They hailed it as being the "gospels". So the masses see Kerry being hit with TRUTHS and the conservatives on TV saying, "this isn't right" and then they see LIES about Bush but hardly anybody coming to his defense and so what are they to think?

    They will think, "I gotta vote for Kerry".

    So let the ad run. As the libs say, in every lie there is a bit of truth. Let the masses decide what is a lie and what is the truth.
     
  7. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    Right, I see how we try to take the high road and not play dirty like the liberals do.

    But in this case, just exactly how is an ad by a group of vets telling their side of the story considered to be taking the "low road"?

    Of course the Democrats consider it to be a dirty "trick" and a dirty campaign ad and want everybody to think the same.

    Is that why "fair and balanced" commentators like Bill O'Reilly became hands- off on this ad? I don't see how he can put it in the same category as MM so-called documentary which was a manipulated movie. The vet's ad refers to plain-speaking people people and their actual observations.

    Also why is it that the few vets on Kerry's platform supporting Kerry are the ONLY vets that we should listen to? Couldn't you say that they are also politically biased?
     
  8. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,568
    Thanks Received:
    8,171
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,203
    Since when is being honest playing dirty?

    Seriously I dont understand that. If its true how is it dirty?

    Its not like the GOP is hiring men to go out and bad mouth Kerry based on lies. These are freakin eye witness accounts. Kerry made his vietnam service relevant so those who served with him are telling the people about him. which is exactly what Kerry and Edwards wanted when they invited people to ask those who served with them.
     
  9. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    You missed my points slightly.....

    O'Reilly, Scarborough, etc. are steering clear of this and it is giving Kerry's camp more legitimacy in their actions. I think the ad should be shown. I believe the ad. I think the media should be asking questions....

    I was just pointing out OUR problem.
     
  10. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,568
    Thanks Received:
    8,171
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,203
    I couldnt care less what Oreilly and Scarborough do. Ive also doubted the sincerity of OReilly's support for conservatives, he is too inconsistant on a few things. as for scaborough, dont know enough about him to make a statement. So i dont really care what he thinks.

    Either way, i dont think either is a clear representative of Conservative media. Rush and Hannity are all over this, not to mention the local radio hosts some of which are libertarians. This is obviously a big story.
     

Share This Page