Bush calls for end of 527 ads. Will Kerry follow suit??

[Laz]

In the article I have l Linked below, Bush is asking for an end to all 527 ads. Will Kerry follow suit on his end? Will the Campaigns finally start focusing on the issues instead of mud slinging?

Bush asks for end of all 527 ads

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by Laz
In the article I have l Linked below, Bush is asking for an end to all 527 ads. Will Kerry follow suit on his end? Will the Campaigns finally start focusing on the issues instead of mud slinging?

Bush asks for end of all 527 ads

When pigs fly! 87% of the 527 are directed to and from Democratic causes. When Kerry has nothing more to gain, then he may, but I won't hold my breath. In the meantime, I am glad the Swift Boat Vets are able to get their story out.

 

[Paradise]

Originally posted by Laz
In the article I have l Linked below, Bush is asking for an end to all 527 ads. Will Kerry follow suit on his end? Will the Campaigns finally start focusing on the issues instead of mud slinging?

Bush asks for end of all 527 ads

There is no need to ban 527 ads that promote the truth. It is only those that manufacture lies like the swift boat vets. Remember the "bushes" are vicious. Papa Bush use the race card with Willy Horton. Dubya did the same thing saying that McCain fathered a black baby. Now, the latter who fought the Viet Cong in Alabama is smearing Kerry volunteered and went into the lion's den.
*********************************

----..The NRA: The most valuable asset American
gun manufacturers could hope to have.
Because, contrary to popular belief, it isn't
an organization that defends freedom...
It's an organization that gets as many guns sold as possible.

 

[Tink&SquirtsMom]

Of course Bush called for an end to them, they are mostly against him. I don't think there is any need to end them... when they are true. When ads have come out against Bush that are not fully substantiated Kerry has denounced the specific ad resulting in it being pulled from broadcast. Here is one example:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- John Kerry on Tuesday condemned a television ad that criticizes President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air National Guard, even as prominent veterans linked to the Democratic presidential campaign echoed the commercial's accusations.

In a campaign shadowed by the war on terror, the military records of Kerry and Bush emerged again as an issue after Republican Sen. John McCain called on Kerry to denounce an ad that accuses Bush of using family connections to avoid the Vietnam War.

McCain, a decorated Vietnam veteran with the reputation of a political maverick, had called on Bush two weeks ago to condemn an ad in which several veterans accused Kerry of fabricating his war record.

The White House has declined to denounce that ad. Kerry, mindful of McCain's political clout, quickly accepted the Arizona senator's challenge concerning the anti-Bush ad running in response.

"I agree with Senator McCain that the ad is inappropriate," Kerry said in a statement released by his campaign. "This should be a campaign of issues, not insults."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/17/war.records.ap/

But when an ad against Kerry comes out that again is unsubstantiated by the facts (and even by those making the accusations personal accounts at the time of the incident) Bush refuses to denounce the ad... and then when he is pushed on it only calls for an end to all soft money ads.

Hmm... refusing to denounce an ad which may benefit him, and calling for an end to all soft money ads when the vast majority are directed negatively towards him. Oh yeah thats a great and noble thing he's doing.

edited because I somehow got the quote in two places... I am on a roll today

 

[cati]

He never will, he can't focus on issues.

 

[Viking]

The more money the candidates are throwing around, the more attractive becomes this idea:
Why don't they just sell the presidency at Ebay?
It would stop all that mudslinging and the money could be used for a good cause

 

[Elwood Blues]

There ya go.

 

[peachgirl]

In the article I have l Linked below, Bush is asking for an end to all 527 ads.

As long as they are accurate, I see no reason to stop them. Just stop lying...it's that simple.


Surely Bush is not trying to suppress free speech is he????

It's really fun to watch the scrambling now that the swift liars are finally being proven to be the slime many of us said they were.

<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>

 

[Teejay32]

I have no problem with accurate ads either. Waste of time, denouncing them.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by peachgirl
As long as they are accurate, I see no reason to stop them. Just stop lying...it's that simple.

It's really fun to watch the scrambling now that the swift liars are finally being proven to be the slime many of us said they were.

I agree that they should as long as they are true. But before they're even investigated (by either side), they get called a pack of lies, and attack, and slime politics.

The SBFT are scrambling? Really? It appears that Kerry is doing much more of that then they are.

I heard John O'Neill on the radio today and while there may be some holes in their story and there are some contradictions, I'd be hard pressed to call them slime. I actually plan to get the book and read it.

Are you?

And while I'm at it, I plan to get Kerry's book "Tour of Duty".

Have you read that?

It's Kerry's own words that have be Kerry's biggest problem. He can't seem to get his stories straight. And to save you the time and trouble, I've already made mention of the SBFT issues.

Are all of the statements by the SBFT lies? Do you think that there might be more truth in what they say than lies?

I heard a VN POW (held for almost 7 years) on the radio say that the worst part of his imprisonment was hearing the rebroadcast of Kerry's Senate hearing testimony. He felt betrayed and that Kerry should apologize for spreading lies about fellow soldiers.


And to save you he time and trouble, I know that you say that the SBFT should apologize to Kerry for anything they said that wasn't true. (you're quite predictable )

 

[richiebaseball]

Originally posted by peachgirl
As long as they are accurate, I see no reason to stop them. Just stop lying...it's that simple.


Surely Bush is not trying to suppress free speech is he????

It's really fun to watch the scrambling now that the swift liars are finally being proven to be the slime many of us said they were.

It's really fun watching those that defend Michael Moore's documentary trying to spin it so that somehow, someway, this is different. Don't they both have the same rights? Can't they both tell a story from their viewpoint?

I seem to remember reading that Michael Moore announced he had a host of attorneys ready, willing, and able to sue those that wrongly criticized his facts. I think it's fair to say that his facts have been criticized. Where are the lawsuits?

Surely Moore was not trying to suppress free speech was he?

I seem to remember reading that Senator Kerry's campaign sent letters to television stations stating that they could be held responsible for the false and libelous charges made in the ads. Where are the lawsuits?

They have also threatened to sue the publisher of "Unfit For Command". Where are the lawsuits?

Surely Senator Kerry is not trying to suppress free speech is he?

John O'Neill has challenged Senator Kerry to sue him. Perhaps that should be Senator Kerry's next move.

Richard

 

[WDWHound]

There are 2 problems here.

1st: Just becuase a group has money does not mean it should lose its right to freedom of speech. That goes for both the swiftboat vets and MoveOn.org. Campaign finance reform has gone way too far already. Lets not make it worse.

2nd: It would be nice to restrict campain ads to only those that don't lie, but who gets to decide who is lying? I don't trust either side. No, that route holds all the halmarks of the beginnings of censorship. I don't want the media, a campaign manager or some government agency telling me what I can and can not hear and see.

In the end, it boils down to this: Both sides should be able to run their ads and speak their piece. The press can investigate the claims made by these ads if they so chose (even if they only seem to want to investige claims made by groups they disagree with) and the public can make up their own minds as to who is telling the truth. If one of the candidates feel they are being slandered or libeled, there are existing legal remedies for this. I don't need anyone protecting me from free speech, be it from Move On, the swift boat vets or Micheal Moore.

 

[JPN4265]

Originally posted by Laz
In the article I have l Linked below, Bush is asking for an end to all 527 ads. Will Kerry follow suit on his end? Will the Campaigns finally start focusing on the issues instead of mud slinging?

Bush asks for end of all 527 ads

LOL!! you have to be crazy to think that JOHN, JOHN's would ask for the 527ads supporting them would be taken off the air.

 

[MJames41]

Originally posted by WDWHound
There are 2 problems here.

1st: Just becuase a group has money does not mean it should lose its right to freedom of speech. That goes for both the swiftboat vets and MoveOn.org. Campaign finance reform has gone way too far already. Lets not make it worse.

2nd: It would be nice to restrict campain ads to only those that don't lie, but who gets to decide who is lying? I don't trust either side. No, that route holds all the halmarks of the beginnings of censorship. I don't want the media, a campaign manager or some government agency telling me what I can and can not hear and see.

In the end, it boils down to this. Both sides should be able to run their ads. The press can investigate the claims made by these ads if they so chose (even if they only seem to want to investige claims made by groups they disagree with) and the public can make up their own minds as to who is telling the truth. If one of the candidates feel they are being slandered or libeled, there are existing legal remedies for this. I don't need anyone protecting me from free speach, be it from Move On, the swift boat vets or Micheal Moore.

Very well said, and worth repeating.

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by peachgirl
As long as they are accurate, I see no reason to stop them. Just stop lying...it's that simple.


Surely Bush is not trying to suppress free speech is he????

It's really fun to watch the scrambling now that the swift liars are finally being proven to be the slime many of us said they were.

<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>

Actually the more the left tries to refute the Swift Boat Vets, the deeper they did their own hole. The Swift boat Vets are true heros. The only one trying to surpress free speech has been Kerry; threatening to sue radio and tv stations that run the ad, requesting a withdrawal of the book from the publisher. He has done everything BUT debate the issue and release the records.

 

[JPN4265]

Originally posted by Paradise
There is no need to ban 527 ads that promote the truth. It is only those that manufacture lies like the swift boat vets. Remember the "bushes" are vicious. Papa Bush use the race card with Willy Horton. Dubya did the same thing saying that McCain fathered a black baby. Now, the latter who fought the Viet Cong in Alabama is smearing Kerry volunteered and went into the lion's den.
*********************************

----..The NRA: The most valuable asset American
gun manufacturers could hope to have.
Because, contrary to popular belief, it isn't
an organization that defends freedom...
It's an organization that gets as many guns sold as possible.

OMG, your credibility just went in the toilet! You really don't believe what you just wrote do you?

 

[Patch'sD]

Democrat 527 ads Good, Republican 527 ads Bad. That's what I am getting. Moveon.org is Ok, but SwiftBoatVets is not. The DEM's have got to get off the Whinning Band Wagon. What a bunch of babies.

 

[Parrothead1964]

All I can say is God help anyone who actually watches either side's ads in an attempt to make an informed decision as to whom to vote for.

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by Parrothead1964
All I can say is God help anyone who actually watches either side's ads in an attempt to make an informed decision as to whom to vote for.

Seriously!

Look, don't blame those who make these kinds of ads. Blame the people who watch them and take them as fact because it's knocking the candidate they dislike. And, those people are us....all of us.

Face it, for a majority on this thread, if the ad says what you want to hear, you're all for it. If it doesn't then you think it ought to be stopped.

Dawn whines over and over about Kerry suppressing free speech by asking for a book to be recalled. She calls it book "banning" because it makes it sound as bad as possible.

All the while, she knows full well that George Bush not only requested a book to be "banned", he threatened legal action and he was successful in his fight to have the book taken off the shelves.


These ads are here not because they're legal, they're here because they work.

Dawn whines that Kerry isn't calling for an end to 527's, but she calls people who are making these types of ads heros.

Hypocrisy isn't a sufficient word.


If you don't like the ads, quit watching, stop assuming they are true and don't base your vote on them.

Then, we won't have to ban 527's because the negative ads will stop the day they quit working.

<center><IMG width="150" SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/colonelpanic/DU_Photos/web-content/IwoBush.jpg"></center>

 

[MJames41]

(Checking to see if Hell froze over) I agree with much of what Peachgirl just said. Unfortunately, I don't think they will ever stop working. They preach to the choir.