How do Democrats Define a Smear?
When a Republican (or someone opposing a Democrat) raises facts about what a Democrat has said or done but which he would rather not be made public.
Remember, a Democrat will define it is “dirty campaign tactics” when a Republican criticizes him for garnering the support of unsavory characters, yet it is perfectly legitimate to fault the Republican for garnering the support of considerably less unsavory characters.
14 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Democrats, or liberals anyway, always first to play that card…because they suck at fighting and answering charges. Obama supporters play Hillary as the devil for using “Rovian” tactics…yea, I would hate to copy the guy who won two elections and almost created a majority party for the Republicans.
I find it to be the most annoying quaility…the lack of fighting back and fighting just as hard.
Comment by Darkeyedresolve — May 18, 2008 @ 5:44 pm - May 18, 2008
I seem to remember Republicans calling foul in 2000 when Bush’s arrest record came to light. Attacking the messenger and the timing etc even though the story was 100% true.
More bullshit. How sad that you have nothing to run on but attacks and negativity. Sucks to be a Republican this year.
Comment by Houndentenor — May 18, 2008 @ 6:45 pm - May 18, 2008
Houndentenor, the timing of that release was certainly questionable, but note how you always turn anything we say into an attack on Republicans.
If you think that we (or the GOP) has nothing to run on but attacks and negativity, you haven’t been reading our blog or paying much attention to the McCain campaign.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — May 18, 2008 @ 6:56 pm - May 18, 2008
Or lets not forget the smear campaign that Bush ran against McCain back in 2000. Bush & Co. took the facts that McCain was a Vietnam veteran and a prisoner war and then twisted into a false presumption that McCain was mentally disturbed.
Or, how about the Tennessee Republican party this year (2 of my favorites): 1 had a press release about Obama and his middle east policy, in which it repeatedly mentioned his middle name, Huessin. 2ndly, they published a picture of him from a few years ago and identified him as wearing “muslim” clothing, when in fact he was wearing traditional Somali clothing of his ancestors.
So, when it comes to mud slinging, smearing, lying, etc., about opposite parties, don’t try to ascribe it to just democrats – which by the way, I notice the poster here made a very vague statement characterizing republicans and democrats which he cant’ even back up with any kind of documented facts.
Comment by Kevin — May 18, 2008 @ 7:48 pm - May 18, 2008
Because, Kevin, knowing my tendency for long posts, I strove for brevity in this one, but have backed up my ideas in previous posts with reference to actual facts.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — May 18, 2008 @ 8:30 pm - May 18, 2008
I always tell leftists, “It may reflect badly on you, but no, it’s not a smear, if it’s true”.
Leftists take the exact opposite tack. They tell people, “It may reflect badly on us, and therefore it is a ‘smear’ even if it’s true.”
And GPW, don’t mind Houndie: he’s a master of changing the subject.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 18, 2008 @ 11:18 pm - May 18, 2008
Well if that’s the case, then Kerry must have been in charge of fabricating military records at Kinkos.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 19, 2008 @ 4:37 am - May 19, 2008
#4 – Kevin, maybe the reason we mention Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name is BECAUSE IT IS HIS MIDDLE NAME.
And remember that the next time you call the President by the initial “W.”
Get a clue.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2008 @ 12:04 pm - May 19, 2008
Plus, for all you libtards out there who whine about allegations, I have three words for you from the 2004 campaign courtesy of Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, formerly of CBS:
“Fake but accurate.”
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2008 @ 12:56 pm - May 19, 2008
5: Oh, puh-lease.
8: Funny, because he doesn’t use his middle name in most circumstances and the only group that seemed to use it was in attack against him when talking about the middle east. I notice by the way you have no response about their incorrect assertion that he was wearing muslim garb. care to take a crack at that one?
7: Yup, once again, another one who can’t refute the statement, so he has to make an attack elsewhere.
Comment by Kevin — May 19, 2008 @ 7:49 pm - May 19, 2008
#10 – Little Kevin, of course I will take a “crack” at #8 (insert gay joke here).
Care to guess which is the predominant religious group in Somalia? Here’s a hint – it ain’t Jews and it ain’t Christians.
Also, think of the names Hirsan Ayla Ali and Waris Dharie – two women who emerged from that part of the world talking about Islamofascism.
And as far as B. Hussein’s middle name, HE chose it for HIMSELF. So why should anyone disavow it if he himself will not? Obviously you never read his two (ghostwritten) books.
Really, child, you make this too easy. Go home and let the grownups talk.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2008 @ 11:54 pm - May 19, 2008
Couldn’t help but notice that you casually left out the fact that fellow liberals have attacked him about his middle name. What’s more, a quick Google search shows that liberals seem to be fixated on it the most. Just as they’re the most fixated on the fact that he’s black.
That’s alright. You’ve never refuted any of mine. If you want a cookie, you have to work for it. What’s more, it’s funny how you libtards weren’t at all interested in McCain’s dirty smears against Bush in SC, but I guess it was more important to try and burnish an image that liberals actually give a fuck about veterans.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 20, 2008 @ 2:01 am - May 20, 2008
#12 – Right on, TGC. Funny isn’t it that the ones who are making hay out of Obama’s race/ethnic identity are the Dhimmicrats.
In a similar vein, I would just like to imagine for one moment, if we dared to re-cycle all the “commentary” directed by the Left over the years toward Condi Rice, with Mrs. BHO’s name substituted.
Anyone doubt the Left’s insane response?
Scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites all.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 20, 2008 @ 10:15 am - May 20, 2008
There’s not much to pay attention to in the McCain campaign. He seems confused about economic issues and keeps making mistakes addressing foreign policy issues. What’s to watch. I was pleased with his stance on Global Warming but I doubt that went over well here.
Again, timing is a stupid defense. The story of Bush’s arrests was true and as truth it is not, according to your rules, a smear. The only reason Republicans use Obama’s middle name is to try to convince people that he’s a Muslim which he is not. I think that would qualify as a smear since while the stated fact is true the implication is not. Of course you will disavow any knowledge of the connection which anyone with two brain cells knows is total crap.
Comment by Houndentenor — May 20, 2008 @ 12:20 pm - May 20, 2008