Kerry ads lay out priorities; Bush spot labels him a liberal

[True_Blue]

WASHINGTON - Just as John Kerry launched two campaign ads Wednesday intended to help voters become familiar with him, President Bush's campaign unveiled a commercial calling the Democrat more liberal than Ted Kennedy or Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Kerry says in one of his new ads: "My priorities are jobs and health care. My commitment is to defend this country." In the other, the presumptive nominee says he would "reach out to the international community in sharing the burden" in Iraq.

The 30-second ads started running in media markets in 17 battleground states Wednesday, the first in a series meant to explain Kerry's proposals and present his biography as well as counter impressions created by Bush's negative ads.

Kerry's campaign bought its largest amount of airtime yet this year - about $4.5 million worth to run ads over 10 days through the end of April. The buy overlaps by a few days the $1.3 million the campaign already was spending this week. One Kerry campaign official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the additional money means Kerry is now running even with Bush on the air for the first time.
http://www.theworldlink.com/articles/2004/04/24/news/ne...

[Nlighten1]

1. As if being a liberal is a bad thing.

[skooooo]

7. Personally, I think the "liberal" label...

...is meaning less and less to people. We have a whole generation who's grown up since Nixon was in office. The conservatives have diffused the meaning of "liberal" to such an extent that I don't think it's all that much of an effective 'weapon' to hurl at democrats anymore.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

10. I humbly disagree.

With the exception of a paltry few, I'm not seeing a lot of Dem politicians embracing the "Liberal" label. Most eschew it.

[skooooo]

11. ..but does anyone know what it even means anymore??

...and if not, how can it be used as a weapon?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. If it doesn't have any meaning, why shy away from it?

It's meaning is the sum of the efforts to define "it" by the respective parties. Since the Pugs have spent more time and effort defining it it has a generally perjorative meaning in the public consciousness. Dukakis had the right idea when he said "I'm a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union" in 1987.

No shame.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. The same people who recoil at "liberal"

wouldn't be able to define "Communist" either, but would show the same emotional revulsion. They've been conditioned to the word itself, not its meaning.

[ozymandius]

12. Correct

I see the word "progressive" being used more frequently. It does make it difficult for the opposition to run on a platform that would be labelled as inherently "unprogressive".

EDIT: spelling

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. Until some smartass puts

"progressively worse" into a campaign ad. And then hammers it home for 20 years. Politics are generational.

[InformedSource]

15. Yeah, I kind of agree

The Rightists (I refuse to call them "conservatives" because they ain't the least bit conservative; downright radical) have done a very effective job of equating the word "liberal" with wimpy elitist gay agenda friendly flakes, and the Democrats have helped them along -- all the way back to Ducacus (however the hell that's spelled) in '88 who bent over backwards to deny having anything to do with liberalism, saying it was "about competence." Bill Clinton pulled it off by campaigning as a centerist, appropriating Republican issues, and kind of subtly signalling to what's left of the left that he was really on their side (which he wasn't, at least not on issues such as "free" trade and welfare reform).

A few people have shown the way to reclaim liberalism and shove it back in the Republicans' faces -- Arianna Huffington's new book shows how it could be done. But thusfar what I've seen from Kerry is the same old hypercautious DLC fudging.

Nevertheless, he's got my vote and, later when things get close, what little I can scrape together for campaign contributions.

[Nlighten1]

19. We need to take the name "liberal"

and make it mean something again.

[pinto]

2. OOOOOOHHH, Kennedy and Clinton boogeymen. GuessOBL is off this week.

[pinto]

3. I like Kerry's move to more specifics.I'm voting for a President not a god

which seems to be the basis of Bushco's campaign.

[PurityOfEssence]

4. Do not run from that label

"Liberal" is a good thing; even Bill Maher says: "look it up in a dictionary; there's nothing wrong with that word."

We can't allow this word to be demonized, and it needs to be defended at every turn. Kerry should flatly state that some may call him that, some may call him other things, but the word itself is a good thing: it means accepting and constantly adjusting. The idea that it means mollycoddling and mad spending is simply ridiculous; truly, liberalism is more responsible because it attempts to accomodate and adjust for everybody. It's better for society to have safety nets to keep people from falling to various disasters; the clean-up costs of those disasters are alone more expensive than the preventative ones. (I don't mention the pain and death, because that would be an emotional argument, hence unusable on conservatives; when arguing with conservatives, the only thing that matters is how it impacts THEM.) Hatred of Liberalism is transparent selfishness and primitiveness, and it needs to be said on a regular basis.

Me? I'm a liberal.

[MissMarple]

6. Me too. I'm a liberal and I'm proud of it.

The Constitution is a liberal document, and I support the Constitution. Now, what does that make George and his anti-democratic Patriot Act and the Republican party's general subversion of democratic values?

[PurityOfEssence]

14. Anti-democratic

tee-hee-hee...

[DianeG5385]

5. I say Kerry defuse the liberal issue

by releasing an ad where he unequivocally states that he's a proud liberal. Most of the attcks work because of a basic misunderstanding of what a liberal is.

[Nicholas_J]

8. New Bush ads are getting ready to attack Kerry

And his record and ability in National Security, because they are expecting the Democratic Party and Kerry to celebrate the anniversary of BUsh's landing on the aircraft carrier on May 1st.

[leesa]

9. It's GOOD to be a liberal, no problem!

[Democat]

13. Bush is a negative campaigner - you won't hear the media say that

Only Democrats are "negative".

[w4rma]

16. Bush is going to make "liberal" a positive word again at this rate.

Sen. Kerry: Entrepreneurial Democrat