Latest Paid Cheesy Bush Attack Ad Running ONLY in West Virginia...

[flpoljunkie]

Bush campaign relying on media to disseminate this trash. And, they are, of course, doing Bush's dirty work, for him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64485-2004Mar16.html

The ad features pictures of soldiers -- who are either actors or appear in stock footage -- while a narrator says that Kerry voted in October 2002 for military action in Iraq but "later voted against funding for soldiers." Over the sound of a Senate clerk calling "Mr. Kerry," the ad says: "No body armor for troops in combat. No higher combat pay. No to better health care for reservists and their families. No -- wrong on defense."

Kerry spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter called the ad "ridiculous" and ticked off other votes in which the senator has supported the military.

She said Kerry cast a "protest vote" against the $87 billion request in October, adding: "If Bush is so concerned about the troops, why did he send them to war without the equipment they needed, why did he mislead the nation about the threat of weapons of mass destruction and why has he opposed supporting increased troop pay?"

The spot is airing only in West Virginia, where Kerry addressed veterans yesterday, and while Bush aides said it could receive wider airing, they appear to be counting on media coverage to reach a national audience.

Kerry has voted for military pay raises, most recently in 2002, and for a large increase in defense spending that year. A Pentagon budget request last year opposed an extension of combat pay for soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, although the White House quickly reversed that stance, and the administration decided to deny health benefits to an estimated 164,000 veterans because their ailments are not service-related.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. It ran on my local ABC station this morning in Arkansas..n/t

[Imajika]

2. Sorry, but I wouldn't describe this Ad...

....as cheesy.

It is a very damaging attack ad. It is misleading and downright mean, but such is politics. Kerry did vote against the 87 billion supplemental which contained the items described in the ad. Calling it a protest vote will not help. Kerry really needs to argue that the bill did not contain ENOUGH for the troops and that this was the reason he did not vote for it.

Be prepared for a lot more of this. It is only a matter of time before the Bush campaign starts running campaign ads of Kerry's anti-war testimony and activities.

This is gonna get nasty, and the nonsense that I see posted here so often declaring Bush is "toast" or "finished" or "done" is absolute garbage. The Republicans may tarnish Kerry's image so badly that even if most Americans don't like Bush, they simply won't see Kerry as a viable alternative.

It's gonna be a long 8 months.

Imajika

[Blue_Roses]

7. I have to agree here

I saw the ad and even though I agree with why Kerry disagreed with it, they (Bush) have made it look as though Kerry is very anti-war, and against support for the troops.

Kerry has to debunked these ads fast. They are airing every 5 minutes it seems here in Arkansas.

[ihaveaquestion]

3. One of the Clear Channel radio goons in Tampa

ran a radio version of this yesterday. It attacked Kerry's vote record, saying he voted against money to support the troops and buy them body armor.

I don't see how anyone can believe this crap!

[Imajika]

4. They will believe this crap..

..because Kerry did vote against the 87 billion dollar supplemental.

His response that this was a protest vote is terrible. The Kerry team needs to do a hell of a lot better than that.

This was the danger of voting against the 87 billion dollar boondoggle.

I would have thought the Kerry campaign would have been ready with something explaining this vote. For staters, he could say that the bill did not have enough funding for the military and too much grant money for foreign countries.

Imajika

[phantom power]

5. once they get an ad like this out

Kerry will end up on the defensive. Even if there's a good response, it ends up looking defensive: "yeah, but...."

It's very important to respond no matter what, but Kerry's campaign also needs to "get ahead" of Bush on some issues, in the same style.

They need to hit Bush on some set of issues *before* he can define them, that way the same dynamic works in Kerry's favor: Bush ends up on the defensive. It shouldn't be too hard. Economy, the environment, his *actual* record on fighting terror. Just as long as we define the issue before they can.

If you play pure defense, you will always lose, even if your defense is spectacular.

[Hav]

6. .

Well, the Kerry campaign should try to make ads that counter Bush ADs just like that statement then.
Most people only see the AD but not this statement.