mamajuana wrote:Not to carp, trespassers, but using your distinctions, a big fuss could have been made of the DUIs George Bush was given, reflecting as they did on his acts which violated the concerns of public safety. But they were hushed and and brushed aside, as being mere nothings conducted in his youth. And the outrage over the publicizing of the Bush daughters' transgressions against law cocerning false identities, etc. I suppose it all depends on what side you're looking from.
No, your "side" only matters if you value your personal opinion above facts and law. I do not.
Given that, I am forced to challenge your version of reality as flawed. I happen to recall a tremendous fuss being made about Bush's DUI.
Google Search: Bush DUI
Take a look at the volume and variety of those results and then tell me that this issue got "hushed".
But of course, that is not the point. The point is that I think it is perfectly valid for people to waste their time complaining about non-issues if that is what they want to do. But what I do not think they should be allowed to do is fabricate charges to level at a candidate.
-
If you know that a candidate is a philanderer and you think his constituents will see that news unfavorably, you have every right to publicize it.
-
If you have no knowledge that he is a philanderer but you make that assertion anyway, simply because you believe it will hurt his candidacy, then I think you have committed a crime against that candidate and the voting public.
-
If you know for a fact that he is not a philanderer and you still make that assertion, you are a scumbag (or group of scumbags) and you have committed a crime.
Quote:But you do something else in what you just wrote. You bring in an extraneous - though hideous - matter concerning the dragging-death of James Byrd, and link it through innuendo, although I had written nothing about that. And that, in essence, is what the Willie Horton ad was.
Nonsense.
You complained that the choice to share factual information about Dukakis was the most egregious campaign tactic you had ever seen. I pointed out the absurdity of your statement by showing how very sick and depraved campaign tactics can get
and have gotten.
I didn't throw James Byrd into this debate,
the NAACP did. If you dislike their tactics take it up with them. I'm only the messenger, and I suspect that you are only upset because you know there is NO justification for what the NAACP did in this case (and I suspect you also realize how partisan and misguided it makes your complaint regarding the Willie Horton ad appear).
