The Bush revenge brigade hits the SCLM

While we found a better permalink to this article on the Guardian, a UK paper, it showed up on our Excite feed. In Newsview: Cross Bush, Face Payback:

But Bush and his chief political adviser, Karl Rove, are essentially following the same game plan that the late Lee Atwater - an early political mentor of Rove's - used to get the first President Bush elected in 1988: define and undercut an opponent early with a fusillade of negative attacks.

"This team is tough. You cross them and they go after you and raise questions about you and your credibility rather than what you have to say," said Thomas Mann, a scholar with the Brookings Institution.

It's a really excellent article from a long time AP writer, who not only sums up their tactics, but provides a nice, fairly complete list of those brave souls who have come out against Dear Leader's miserable failures. All, naturally, have gotten the slime treatment.

These guys really don't have any shame. It's nice to see Powell backing up Clarke (as covered in other diaries). Let us hope that this marks the beginning of the end for ShrubCo. Just tell the truth and they think it's hell...
--
(/) Roland X
aka Captain ABBA

Exhibit A

Quick note: this blog will now be a mirror for my diary at Daily Kos. While I am grateful to my readership sticking with my sporadic posting, you're a pretty small group, and the goal of the Justice Log is to make a difference. On to the post...

The difference between Bush and Kerry in a nutshell.

QUINCY, Ill. (AP) - In the city that saw a historic 19th century debate, John Kerry called for monthly debates with President Bush to elevate the tenor of a campaign that's opened with a relentlessly negative tone.

"Surely, if the attack ads can start now, at least we can agree to start a real discussion about America's future," said Kerry, speaking Saturday to about 500 people packed into a school gymnasium.

"America shouldn't have to put up with eight months of sniping," said Kerry. "We need to get off that detour and back into the true path of democracy."

...

"Today campaigns too often generate more heat than light, firing up partisans while leaving increasing numbers out in the cold," said Kerry. "Everyone in politics shares the blame, but I have come here today because I believe this campaign should be different."

...

"After calling Republicans crooks and liars, running 17 negative ads over 15,000 times and spending $6.3 million attacking the president, John Kerry is calling for a civil debate on the issues," said Schmidt. "John Kerry should finish the debate with himself."

Emphasis mine.

Now let's see. One of these campaigns has admitted that both sides engage in negative advertising. One campaign has attempted to change the tone. One campaign has made an effort to engage the country in real issues. One campaign was represented by its candidate.

The other campaign enumerated its opponent's negativity without even referring to its own vast slate of attacks. The other refused to even consider debate. The other campaign desperately wants to avoid issues and record because it can run on neither. The other was represented by a flunky -- not its candidate, not its chairman, not its brain, not even one of its better-known representatives.

I recognize that, to a certain point, reality is subjective. But understanding that subjectivity requires also accepting that others' realities continue to affect them no matter what one's own personal beliefs are. Facts, regardless of these subjective beliefs, remain stubborn things, and form the basis of what we call "truth."

One campaign cares about truth and reason. One cares about dogma and power. I leave it to the reader to determine which is which.

(/) Roland X
Captain ABBA