Daschle cries foul over opponent's ad campaign...

[insein]

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2004/04/22/election/us_senate/991senate.txt

Daschle wants ad pulled, lawyer says
By Denise Ross, Journal Staff Writer

A television ad claiming that Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., has introduced a bill to offer jobs and amnesty to more than 6 million illegal aliens is false and should be pulled, according to Daschle's lawyer.

Robert Bauer sent a letter to South Dakota television stations asking them to take the ad, sponsored by the Coalition for the Future American Worker , off the air.

"The Coalition's latest ad … contains numerous and obvious falsehoods," Bauer wrote. "These falsehoods, and the Coalition's history of racist and inflammatory advertising, render this ad unfit for your station."

A spokesman for CFAW said the ad is factual and the group is not racist.

"We are the opposite. The work we do disproportionately helps racial and ethnic minorities in this country," Roy Beck, CFAW spokesman, said. "It doesn't matter what race illegal aliens are. It's a numbers and rule of law issue. They may want to make it a racial issue. Our ad certainly didn't."

Daschle is running against Republican challenger John Thune in the Nov. 2 Senate election.

The ad begins with this news-bulletin style announcement: "This is a special legislative alert for South Dakota." It continues with video images of illegal immigrants crossing the border.

The disagreement about the accuracy of the ad centers on three points:

n First, Daschle and Bauer claim that the ad falsely claims Daschle has sponsored a bill to offer amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Daschle's bill,

S. 2010, requires illegal immigrants to work in the United States for three years, live in the country for five years, know English and U.S. civics and pass a security and criminal background check.

Beck calls that amnesty.

"The chief penalty for illegal immigration is to have to go home. (Daschle's) bill allows more than 6 million illegal aliens to stay here permanently, to work here permanently and immediately be put on the path to U.S. citizenship," Beck said. "You've really got to stretch the definition to say that's not amnesty."

Seems Daschle has pulled the race card early. I see nothing in the article that mentions how the ads are racist towards ILLEGAL aliens.

 

[musicman]

Ah, but the race card is so handy! In another thread, someone was talking about those horrible Willy Horton ads (Bush, the elder vs. Dukakis), and how they appealed to the latent racism in all of us. Horseshit! All Bush did was tell the truth.

 

[musicman]

Incidentally, Insein, I thought you hit the nail right on the head when you pointed out one of the invaluable services a message board like this provides. It gives young people access to well thought out viewpoints they wouldn't otherwise hear-certainly not from their ivory tower-dwelling college puke professors.

Although I'm twice your age, I, too, consider myself a work in progress. The day I stop learning, they might as well just stand me up in the garbage with my hat on.

A little off topic. Sorry. Just thought I'd throw that in.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You rock musicman. Thanks for fighting the good fight!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Oh, and Daschle is SUCH a pusscake.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by musicman
Incidentally, Insein, I thought you hit the nail right on the head when you pointed out one of the invaluable services a message board like this provides. It gives young people access to well thought out viewpoints they wouldn't otherwise hear-certainly not from their ivory tower-dwelling college puke professors.

Although I'm twice your age, I, too, consider myself a work in progress. The day I stop learning, they might as well just stand me up in the garbage with my hat on.

A little off topic. Sorry. Just thought I'd throw that in.

I agree. To say i know all is an arrogant, misinformed statement. There is a vast wealth of knowledge out there that i havent even begun to comprehend. To beat on only one-side of an issue and to only rehash things others have said is not thinking for yourself and forming your own opinions.

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Oh, and Daschle is SUCH a pusscake.

He's a whining wussy!

Thanks for the kind words.

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by musicman
Ah, but the race card is so handy! In another thread, someone was talking about those horrible Willy Horton ads (Bush, the elder vs. Dukakis), and how they appealed to the latent racism in all of us. Horseshit! All Bush did was tell the truth.

I raised the Willie Horton ads to your complaints that the Democrats care only about creating negative and demeaning impressions of Republican candidates. Your raised the slogan "It's the economy, Stupid" as an example, apparently taking issue with the characterization of Pres. Bush Sr. as stupid. I pointed out, and do so again, that Republicans do the same thing, and did so with the Willie Horton ads. Yes, they were factual - as is the slogan pointing out that the major concern of voters in 1992 was the economy. However, the problem that we both have (mine with both ads and yours just with the Clinton ad) is that they were examples of negative advertisement.

The Willie Horton issue (really the issue of prisoner furlough programs) had been raised before the general election by Al Gore, in the primary contest. The difference was that Al Gore raised the issue without the race card. There were quite a few prison furlough recipients and the majority of them were white. Gore cited what he thought was a problem with the program. Fine.

The Willie Horton ads went much further than that in what was obvious race baiting. The juxtaposition of Willie Horton's thuggish mug shot with Dukakis was an obvious attempt to play up to racial prejudices of white Americans. As the ads creators said (Bush always disavowed any connection to the ads) "When we're through, people are going to think that Willie Horton is Michael Dukakis' nephew," said political consultant Floyd Brown of Americans for Bush. [Time, 8/22/88; Washington Post, 9/4/88]. '[T]he only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it.'" Roger Ailes.

I am not saying that the ad stated anything false, but it was as much a negative ad as "It's the economy, Stupid."

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by Reilly

The Willie Horton ads went much further than that in what was obvious race baiting. The juxtaposition of Willie Horton's thuggish mug shot with Dukakis was an obvious attempt to play up to racial prejudices of white Americans. As the ads creators said (Bush always disavowed any connection to the ads) "When we're through, people are going to think that Willie Horton is Michael Dukakis' nephew," said political consultant Floyd Brown of Americans for Bush. [Time, 8/22/88; Washington Post, 9/4/88]. '[T]he only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it.'" Roger Ailes.

I am not saying that the ad stated anything false, but it was as much a negative ad as "It's the economy, Stupid."

Precisely.

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by Reilly
I raised the Willie Horton ads to your complaints that the Democrats care only about creating negative and demeaning impressions of Republican candidates. Your raised the slogan "It's the economy, Stupid" as an example, apparently taking issue with the characterization of Pres. Bush Sr. as stupid. I pointed out, and do so again, that Republicans do the same thing, and did so with the Willie Horton ads. Yes, they were factual - as is the slogan pointing out that the major concern of voters in 1992 was the economy. However, the problem that we both have (mine with both ads and yours just with the Clinton ad) is that they were examples of negative advertisement.

Actually Reilly, you're mistaken. You were arguing the negative ads thing with somebody else. I just sort of jumped in at the end. But, as you say, the Willy Horton ads were factual. That's precisely my point.

The Willie Horton issue (really the issue of prisoner furlough programs) had been raised before the general election by Al Gore, in the primary contest. The difference was that Al Gore raised the issue without the race card. There were quite a few prison furlough recipients and the majority of them were white. Gore cited what he thought was a problem with the program. Fine.

The Willie Horton ads went much further than that in what was obvious race baiting. The juxtaposition of Willie Horton's thuggish mug shot with Dukakis was an obvious attempt to play up to racial prejudices of white Americans.

Had Willy's little "furlough fling" even taken place at the time of the primaries? Not that it matters. Dukakis' program showed him to be dangerously naive and completely unfit to handle matters of public safety. For the life of me, I can't see how reporting the plain truth about his failings constitutes "obvious race baiting." Should Bush have pulled the ad because Horton was black?
Wait for a white prisoner to go on a rampage? Prettied up Horton's mug shot? Perhaps those who saw "race baiting" in what was nothing more than a faithful recounting of the facts were the ones playing the race card.

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by musicman

Actually Reilly, you're mistaken. You were arguing the negative ads thing with somebody else. I just sort of jumped in at the end. But, as you say, the Willy Horton ads were factual. That's precisely my point.

Sorry, I remembered the flow of the conversation, but not where you jumped in.

Originally posted by musicman
For the life of me, I can't see how reporting the plain truth about his failings constitutes "obvious race baiting." Should Bush have pulled the ad because Horton was black?
Wait for a white prisoner to go on a rampage? Prettied up Horton's mug shot? Perhaps those who saw "race baiting" in what was nothing more than a faithful recounting of the facts were the ones playing the race card.

Bush did not air the ads. He disavowed any connection to them.

It is not the reporting of the facts that made the ad negative. Facts can be presented in any number of ways. It is all a matter of what and how facts are reported. It was all in the presentation - that scary looking mug shot of a black man. That is how advertisers and political consultants make their money. If you don't think that facts (otherwise neutral) can be relayed in such a way that the underlying message itself is negative and inflammatory (in this case, race baiting), then we have a fundamental disagreement about the nature of experience.

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by Reilly
It is not the reporting of the facts that made the ad negative. Facts can be presented in any number of ways. It is all a matter of what and how facts are reported. It was all in the presentation - that scary looking mug shot of a black man.

I know you're not saying that all black men are scary-looking. Therefore the fact that Horton was black was quite incidental. Perhaps he was scary-looking because he was a pig-eyed sociopathic piece of shit. I mean, have you ever seen a picture of Aileen Wournos? Ye Gods! Kind of shrinks me up like a spider on a hot stove.

.... facts (otherwise neutral) can be relayed in such a way that the underlying message itself is negative and inflammatory.....

Oh, I'm well aware of that. I watch mainstream media news coverage from time to time.

I don't disagree with the gist of what you're saying about negative ads. It's just this Willy Horton thing is a bit of a sore spot with me.

 

[acludem]

It's sounds to me like these ads are simply lies. This group is making claims based upon their own assumptions about a particular bill. The bill in question is supported by the Bush administration and has bipartisan support. What you have here is a militant anti-immigrant group trying to use anti-immigrant fervor to win an election.

John Thune couldn't beat Tim Johnson, he's not going to beat Tom Daschle. If Thune was any kind of a man he'd tell this group to quit running their ads.

acludem

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by acludem
It's sounds to me like these ads are simply lies. This group is making claims based upon their own assumptions about a particular bill. The bill in question is supported by the Bush administration and has bipartisan support. What you have here is a militant anti-immigrant group trying to use anti-immigrant fervor to win an election.

John Thune couldn't beat Tim Johnson, he's not going to beat Tom Daschle. If Thune was any kind of a man he'd tell this group to quit running their ads.

acludem

Well put.

 

[Hobbit]

I love making fun of Tom Daschle. Rush Limbaugh does a segment called the "Tom Daschle Show" which has an impersonator do Daschle's voice and uses all the same sound bytes (or similar ones) that Limbaugh does. It's hilarious.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by acludem
It's sounds to me like these ads are simply lies. This group is making claims based upon their own assumptions about a particular bill. The bill in question is supported by the Bush administration and has bipartisan support. What you have here is a militant anti-immigrant group trying to use anti-immigrant fervor to win an election.

John Thune couldn't beat Tim Johnson, he's not going to beat Tom Daschle. If Thune was any kind of a man he'd tell this group to quit running their ads.

acludem

Thune would have beat Johnson were it not for some very shady voter registration activities the Dems pulled out in the last few weeks of the campaign. As it was, Thune had every right to call for a recount, but didn't. In any case, he could have gotten a lot of fraudulent votes overturned.
Source: a National Review article that came out in December of 2002. I would have to search for it, but if you want it, let me know.