HATCH TRYING TO HIDE HIS NEGATIVE ATTACKS
Mike Hatch has enlisted the help of his wife Patti to try to distract Minnesotans from Hatch's negative attacks:
"Mike [Hatch] is proud to stand with these individuals and groups as we prepare for what will be a barrage of negative attacks these upcoming months ahead. The Republicans have already launched their negative attacks -- instead of focusing on the issues Minnesotans care about, they would rather divide and distract us from discussing what really matters. Mike is here to talk about a new agenda for Minnesota and I ask that you join him in this cause. Together we can make a difference." Source: Mike Hatch for Governor email, October 27, 2005, signed by Patti Hatch.
Hatch will try to pretend he is running a postive campaign, but Hatch has launched his own attacks on Governor Tim Pawlenty.
"He [Hatch] took several swipes at Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's stewardship of the state." Source: Associated Press, October 28, 2005
"In his letter, Hatch blamed Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty for a 'humiliating government shutdown this year,' referring to the eight-day budget impasse with the Legislature in early July. 'I look forward to working with you and restoring our pride in this great state,' he wrote." Source: Pioneer Press, October 28, 2005
Hatch's announcement speech was filled with negative attacks:
"Simply put, we now have an administration that masquerades as 'Minnesota
"Mike [Hatch] is proud to stand with these individuals and groups as we prepare for what will be a barrage of negative attacks these upcoming months ahead. The Republicans have already launched their negative attacks -- instead of focusing on the issues Minnesotans care about, they would rather divide and distract us from discussing what really matters. Mike is here to talk about a new agenda for Minnesota and I ask that you join him in this cause. Together we can make a difference." Source: Mike Hatch for Governor email, October 27, 2005, signed by Patti Hatch.
Hatch will try to pretend he is running a postive campaign, but Hatch has launched his own attacks on Governor Tim Pawlenty.
"He [Hatch] took several swipes at Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's stewardship of the state." Source: Associated Press, October 28, 2005
"In his letter, Hatch blamed Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty for a 'humiliating government shutdown this year,' referring to the eight-day budget impasse with the Legislature in early July. 'I look forward to working with you and restoring our pride in this great state,' he wrote." Source: Pioneer Press, October 28, 2005
Hatch's announcement speech was filled with negative attacks:
"Simply put, we now have an administration that masquerades as '
Indeed, this administration has refused to close a several hundred million dollar tax loophole for foreign owned corporations, while attempting to strip thousands of Minnesotans of their health care coverage.
This is an administration that claims to be 'value-based,' yet attempts to expand gambling."
"Minnesotans are fed up with political gimmicks and rudderless leadership that shortchanges our future. They are tired of leaders who place pledges to special interest groups ahead of our common interests as Minnesotans.
This is an administration that has allowed industrial polluters to set their own mercury emission standards."
16 Comments:
I hate to say this, because I really dislike the politics of personal destruction, but we need to set aside, once and for all, the fallicy that no one likes negative campaigning. If that were really true, we would still not be suffering through cycle after cycle of negative comments and advertisments....
Lady_Logician,
If what you say is how you feel, then you should probably go to another blog. You will be greatly disappointed here.
The whole premise of MDE is for personal destruction one DFLer at a time.
So pointing out inconsistencies in a candidates voting record is "personal destruction"? How about pointing out that the candidates words and actions don't match....do you call that a "personal attack"?
That is one problem I have with the DFL. A Republican runs and ad that says "my opponent said he was going to do this and he did the opposite" and the DFL screams attack ads and yet they turn around and run ads that are patently false about the other candidates (Republican, Green, Independent or whatever). As long as the Dems have people spewing things like "Republicans have never worked an honest day in their lives." you can EXPECT to be treated in kind......
Name one ad by the DFL that is an example of what you're talking about and I'll shut up for the rest of this thread.
For an example of what I'm talking about, just look to the right of your post and see what's listed under Attorney General Mike Hatch. Anything about his cases that you disagree with? Rulings? No. Lots of innuendo, assigning of intent and far fetched dot connecting.
Nothing on his record. So where's your outrage for this?
I say bring it on, rare is the Republican that an stand an in-kind return of fire. That I know from experience.
I'll give you an example: The current White House. When people appointed by this White House came out to stand against their DECISION, not them but their DECSIONS, they were personally attacked and discredited. Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke and fmr Sec Tres. Paul O' Neil all wrote books documenting this. There are about a dozen generals too who haven't written a book, but have come out against some of the decisions that are being made. All of them smeared by the White house.
St_Paul - here is a grand example of what I am talking about.....
http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=SAMBOBLOG-10-27-05&cat=WW
What part of calling a black man "Sambo" do you find to be ok? And where do you find MDE doing something like this?????
Hold on LL. You said:
"A Republican runs and ad that says "my opponent said he was going to do this and he did the opposite" and the DFL screams attack ads and yet they turn around and run ads that are patently false about the other candidates (Republican, Green, Independent or whatever)."
This was a blogger who ran that, not the Democratic candidate. When it was discovered, he pulled the ad immediatly.
More from that article:
Virginia's Democratic gubernatorial candidate pulled campaign ads from a bloggers' Web site Thursday because the blogger had derided a black Republican candidate in Maryland as "Sambo."
The campaign of Virginia Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine ordered the campaign ads pulled after it became aware of the Web site's attack against Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, who announced for the Senate earlier this week.
------------------
So, I thank you for pointing out that the Democrat did the right thing. I only wish the Republicans would have done that right thing when they were running down to Bob Jones University who have some policy related racist and supremist viewpoints about race and religion (catholics and jews). I take that back, Alan Keyes went there and called them to the mat on all of their crap. He got about 3% of the vote.
And- what about Tony Perkins of the Family Institute or something like that. he's a spokesperson for the right that when he ran for Congress in Louisiana, begged and paid David Duke(Republican) for his private donors list which included many white supremists. Or how about the South Carolina tactics of the Bush supporters that insinuated that McCain had an illegitamite black child and disstibuted photos. No one bothered to clarify that that child was his adopted child from Bangladash who happened to be very dark. I beleive she was an orphan that had problems with a clepf foot and other things.
No your example showed that the Democrats will do the right thing when their supporters overtly go overboard. My three examples are further proof of why the GOP still are at the low end of the leaarning curve.
Being from Chicago LL, I give you enough credit to see this. I do forgive you for being a Northsider and will credit your bend to the Right with that.
stpaul_dfler said...
This was a blogger who ran that, not the Democratic candidate. When it was discovered, he pulled the ad immediatly.
True a blogger was the one that did that....NOW how would you have reacted if our friend MDE had done that?????? Would you have been totally OUTRAGED and demanding an apology or would you be making excuses that he is "only a blogger"????? Yes the candidate DID do the right thing by pulling his ad and he is taking HOLY CRAP from his base for doing so!!!! Where is YOUR outrage over that....
Bottom line is, we all have our agendas and biases. To pillory one side for engaging in their agendas and biases while ignoring the ones on your side is hypocritic and disingenuous.
StPaul_DFLer said...
Being from Chicago LL, I give you enough credit to see this. I do forgive you for being a Northsider and will credit your bend to the Right with that.
Hehe...you too? No wonder the native MN's rag on us so much....we seem to be taking over the place....
All that aside, I would much rather live here in the Cities than I would in Chicago. It's too built up....when "the city" runs from the lake on the east to Rockford on the west it has gotten too big for me......I like my trees (except this time of year when I have to rake leaves for days on end....)
Ummm, OK, but I thought we were talking about what Dems and Repubs do? Not what if's.
Here's the historical truth:
Politics in America has never been jsut about the issues, its always been about the personality and posturing. I can show some nasty examples going back to pre the Constitution when we were a republic under the Articles of Confederation.
Your side can't do it, and neither can mine. All we can do is keep the personal stuff to an ever changing minimun and project your candidates credentials and likability.
That's going to be it for the week in my non-partisan commentary.
stpaul_dfler said...
"Your side can't do it, and neither can mine. All we can do is keep the personal stuff to an ever changing minimun and project your candidates credentials and likability."
GIVE THAT MAN A CIGAR!!!! You are absolutely correct in that it is something that neither side can stop doing! It is therefore (as I said before) disingenuous to try to claim that only one side or the other does it and it is hypocritic to slam one side for doing it while ignoring it while your guy does the same thing....
Who knows, maybe you're a closet Republican ;-)
Glad to see that Reps and Dems can agree on something.....
Hypocitical is one description, but I think its become such a mainstay that its also called played politics.
Two examples:
1. NOW standing behind Clinton after he clearly has been less than respectful to some women and his marriage.
2. Some on the Right trying to downplay the gravity of perjury and obstruction of justice now, when seven years ago, the same voices thought it was a very serious crime.
So, will I go on and slam some republicans who will in the next week try to downplay these charges, even though I worked to change the dialogue seven years ago?
Yes.
I expect you to do the same.
This type of politics is still effective for rallying your base.
----------
On me being a Republican. I agree on a few things:
1. Strong National Defense and no limit on costs when protecting the nation and citizens(money- not Constitutional Rights).
2. Immigration reform.
3. Golf courses- the ones at the private clubs.
4. Party loyalty. They keep their troops in line better than anyone.
The list is 100 items long of why I am a Democrat.
You asked about candidates sliming one another....remember when Senator Edwards felt the necessity to "out" Vice President Cheney's daughter? And yet when the VP and his family (and indignant Republicans everywhere) screamed in outrage, the Kerry/Edwards campaign said that she was "fair" game......
stpaul_dfler said "So, will I go on and slam some republicans who will in the next week try to downplay these charges, even though I worked to change the dialogue seven years ago?
Yes.
I expect you to do the same."
Were you one of the few who said that President Clinton should have been punished for his perjury 7 years ago? Or were you one of the ones excusing it by saying "it was just about sex"?????
My feelings about it then are the same as they are now....if he lied in sworn testimony he deserves to go to jail. Can you honestly say the same?????
And I have several thousand reasons why I am a FORMER Democrat......
OK - I realize that Doug Grow is NOT a politician, but then again neither is Ron Carey and for Mr. Grow to bring Mr. Carey's AUTISTIC CHILD into a political discussion is beyond the pale, wouldn't you agree StPaul?????
http://www.startribune.com/stories/465/5696399.html
No, I disagree on both points.
The Republicans have set a bar for themselves that Democrats have not. They want a public standard set for morality, public spending and such.
They enjoy the support and money from groups who are very overtly anti-gay, yet in their private lives, live under the protections and choice freedoms the Democrats have delivered. It's what makes Mary Cheney comfortable enough to be out (she wasn't outed, she was an active lesbian).
'Outing' would be exposing California Congressman David Drier. We all know its the real reason the he wasn't allowed to take Delay's place when he had to step down.
Except, once again, Alan Keyes. He dis-owned his daughter last year when she came out of the closet.
The guy is nuts, but consistent.
Grow's column points out the hypocrisy. You, Let's review Grow's column:
Take the case of Ron Carey, who became chairman of the Republican Party of Minnesota in June because many party activists feared that Gov. Tim (No New Taxes) Pawlenty was becoming too big a spender.
Philosophically, Carey is very conservative on the issue of government spending.
But then there's life.
Stories in the Star Tribune last week about controversies surrounding the Minnesota Autism Center show that Carey's family has benefited mightily from an organization that receives about 70 percent of its funding from public sources.
Carey, who has an autistic child, is chairman of the board of the center, which has had success, especially in working with very young autistic children.
His son, now 8, currently receives only six to 10 hours a week of publicly funded therapy a week. But the therapy was much more intensive a few years ago, Carey said. Documents show that the cost of the intensive therapy runs to more than $100,000 per year, per child.
...Isn't there a conflict between Carey, the leader of a party so resistant to government spending, and Carey, the parent of a child who benefits from public spending?
"There's research that shows this program is very effective," Carey said. "Kids are being helped to become indistinguishable from the rest of the society. These kids can grow up to be independent, tax-paying citizens. As a fiscal conservative, I can argue that a dollar spent on this saves $10 down the line."
That is the same argument made by many people who defend a wide spectrum of public spending.
---Exactly the same argument----
Carey says spending on such programs as those offered by the Minnesota Autism Center define the whole notion of "compassionate conservatism."
"Government by nature is not bad," Carey said. "It's abuse that's bad. It's waste that's bad."
Carey said that having an autistic child "has made me a better person. But it hasn't changed me from being a conservative Republican."
---------------------------
When Jim Jeffords of Vermont left the GOP, mainly over this EXACT kind of funding as he has a special needs child too, you guys blasted his ass non-stop. Rush Limbaugh's fat ass still does. Of course he has no children and several wives- another story.
Honey, you're only making my point for me. Thank you kindly.
Post a Comment
<< Home