Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

GINGRICH: Attack ad irony

Letter by Francis K. Kurriger, Tacoma on Dec. 21, 2011 at 4:29 pm with 44 Comments »
December 21, 2011 4:29 pm

Isn’t it a bit amusing that Newt Gingrich, the tutor of wannabe congressmen (or women) in how to use “attack and smear” ads in 1993 to get elected, now is whining about those same tactics being used against him?

Tags:
,
Leave a comment Comments → 44
  1. Fibonacci says:

    So, Fancis, did you expect anything different? Old Newt has always thought that the end justify the means and that only the GOP, or more specifcally HIM can save the world.

  2. took14theteam says:

    Fib-

    Take off those BHO colored glasses. BHO and the Dems are going to/have been using the exact same tactics. Have you not seen the attacks on the republican candidate that happens to be in the lead?

    The community agitator has been well trained. I hope your eyes don’t burn and your ears fall off when BHO gets into full attack mode to save his job. Damn the country as long as he get re-elected.

  3. How did Obama enter into this conversation when the letter is about Gingrich and his whining about his fellow Republicans?

    Deflection must be genetic with Conservatives.

  4. LarryFine says:

    LOL… yea, nobody ever did that before. Slow letter day.

  5. bobcat1a says:

    RW, it’s not deflection; it’s projection. Whatever sin you commit, blame the enemy for that sin. It helps you mask your guilt from yourself.

  6. Fibonacci says:

    Hey took1. It seems to me like the Republikans are doing plenty of attacking each other that they don’t need the Democratsto do it. I can’t wait to see how they will turn from full out attack mode to support mode when one of them sqeeks by to get the nomination.

  7. concernedtacoma7 says:

    So a letter about politics excludes the leader of one party?

    Axelrod has used more dirty tricks than any pol in Washington.

    Look up how many times BHO has had a sex scandal destroy his opponent. Please debate this, it is a nice dem story that needs telling. No rhetoric until you look up his (BHO) history from the beginning.

  8. Pacman33 says:

    “Isn’t it a bit amusing that …”

    It would be real amusing if old Frank could have clued us in to an example of these tactics he refers to. Maybe at least a target of the the confidential tactics. Anything that would separate his letter from the unsupported, mundane and precarious clamor from the left, day after day.

  9. Pac – you need examples, were you around in the 1990s and since, really?

  10. harleyrider1 says:

    No, it’s not amusing. I wish election rules did not allow for negative campaigning. Often people believe what they see or read and vote accordingly. Some do not have other means or are not politically educated to seek or otherwise find the truth. Often, even with a skill-set, truth is difficult to find.

    What is even less amusing Francis is that you and others have not learned yet to put America first, party second. Both parties have created problems yet both parties are valued as providing checks and balances. And sometimes in history, parties have shown they use thuggery, unions, rally poor people, ads, extreme pressure – anything they can to not be blamed and stay in “power”.

    Both parties have contributed to our damage, whether out of ignorance or neglect and we have helped them. So, no it’s not amusing.

    But in the year 2012, we need to put people in office that are willing to set aside politics, have a record of being able to compromise, and rebuild America. Jobs, factories, inducements to re-locate “call centers” here in this Country, and support with more than their words, us.

    All elections, even local, should be Country first, party second.

  11. bigredone says:

    Harleyrider1,
    I could not have said it better myself. And I have been trying for years to do just that. Party affiliation be damned. We all need to look at the candiates who look out for us not just their jobs. I plan on voting AGAINST every single incumbent this election because NONE of them, Democrat or Republican, care about me or you, only about re-election.

  12. Took14 – those attack speak of are Republican on Republican attack ads.

    Concerned7,
    The letter was about Newt and Rpop on Rpot attack ads.

    “Axelrood . . .” Better to not blog and be thought a fool then to blog and prove that you are one.

    Pacman – turn of the Game Boy, come out of your basement, and smell the rpot on rpot attacks.

    Harley –
    Yes, it is not amusing.

    I wish we could get Anonymous and Corporate money out of politics.
    (If you can’t vote you don’t pay or play.)

    Rpots put the good of BIG BUSINESS and the RICH way before American and the good of the American People, and want noting more that to drown the Federal Government in a bathtub.

  13. The majority of the attack ads are funded by super PACs with anonymous donors and not under direct control of the candidates.

  14. “Look up how many times BHO has had a sex scandal destroy his opponent.”

    What sex scandal destroyed McCain and Palin – Obama’s only opponents since 2008?

    I do recall the Republicans trying to whisper a “gay sex and cocaine” rumor about Obama, along with Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, etc.

  15. Fibonacci says:

    harleyrider
    You hit the nail on the head. I want a politician to tell me why I should vote for HIM, not why I should NOT vote for the opponent.

  16. LarryFine says:

    Yea, first time anything like that happened.

  17. bobcat1a says:

    Why do we have so much negative campaigning? Because it WORKS! Remember that old saw, “Nice guys finish last.” It’s true in politics. Expecting politicians to not engage in politics speaks to a complete separation from reality.

  18. Why does anyone care about Gingrich anyway? He was last week’s flavor of the week. He’s over and done with now.

    This week it looks like the “anyone but Romney” candidate will be Ron Paul.

    Next week, maybe Jon Huntsman. The week after, maybe Rick Santorum. After that they will have run out of flavors and it will have to be Mitt Romney.

    Don’t you all think it’s time to draft Sarah Palin to run for president?

  19. alindasue says:

    muckibr said, “Next week, maybe Jon Huntsman.”

    That would be nice, but Jon Huntsman is even more of a moderate than Mitt Romney is. He’s not freaky enough for the circus sideshow acts that seem to appeal to the ultra-conservative base that seems most vocal in the republican party this year.

  20. alindasue, note that I prefaced it with “maybe”. The Republicans don’t want Romney who is a Mormon, and probably don’t want Huntsman for the same reason. (I could have written “anyone but Mormon” but wanted to give Jon a chance.) That only leaves Santorum, and basically nobody really wants him. They are running out of flavors. Time for them to go get Sarah Palin to bail them out, ya think?

  21. Alindasue and Muckibr
    When it comes to rpot canidates No Moderate Need Apply.

  22. Is it any wonder that the man with the most baggage wants everyone else to “cut out the negative campaigning”?

  23. It’s common knowledge that the independent vote decides virtually all presidential elections. The conservative right and liberal left simply don’t have the numbers to overcome the independent sway. Given that, I’ve always wondered why the GOP contenders take the “I’m the most conservative” approach to winning the primary, when those very qualities actually repulse the independent voter? If the GOP wants to guarantee defeat, they should choose the most religiously, socially and economically conservative dude they can find. The funny thing is that very contest is being waged right now!

  24. But norsey, how do you explain George W. Bush winning twice?

  25. George W winning his first primary or winning the two general elections? I can’t speak to the former, but the self-described ‘compassionate conservative’ governed as a moderate, making him palatable to the independent voter. A hard-core bible thumpin,’ science-hatin,’ gold-standard lovin’ type of candidate hasn’t the slightest chance wooing over the independent voter. Thank goodness for that, btw

  26. George W didn’t “win” twice.

    Next question?

  27. took14theteam says:

    Nope, he was “elected” twice.

    Next question?

  28. Nope, he was selected

  29. Dubu a Moderate?

    God Save us if a true neoconsacon every gets in.

  30. You know, thinking about how the Supreme Court awarded the 2000 election to George W. Bush, even though the vote count actually showed that Al Gore won the election, I might be swayed after all to go along with Newt Gingrich’s idea that presidents should be able to fire judges, and justices!

    JUST KIDDING!!!

    But, the facts are that Dubya did not win the 2000 election. The US Supreme Court handed it to him.

    I still cannot figure how how there were enough really foolish people in this country to elect that Crawford Texas village idiot to a second term. Baffling!!!

  31. “now is whining about those same tactics being used against him?”

    That quote would apply just as easy to a hoard of politicians.

  32. It’s off topic and I hate to get pulled into the vortex, but there are differing opinons …

    In the first full study of Florida’s ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue…

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

  33. Nice editing, amjim – Why’d you leave out “using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled “undervotes” — ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through — to be counted.”?

    And here all this time the Conservatives were trying to defund NPR and PBS. Meanwhile in a single article, PBS carries water for their cause.

    Another “take” on the 2000 Florida results:

    So Al Gore was the choice of Florida’s voters — whether one counts hanging chads or dimpled chads. That was the core finding of the eight news organizations that conducted a review of disputed Florida ballots. By any chad measure, Gore won.

    Click for Printable Version

    Gore won even if one doesn’t count the 15,000-25,000 votes that USA Today estimated Gore lost because of illegally designed “butterfly ballots,” or the hundreds of predominantly African-American voters who were falsely identified by the state as felons and turned away from the polls.

    Gore won even if there’s no adjustment for George W. Bush’s windfall of about 290 votes from improperly counted military absentee ballots where lax standards were applied to Republican counties and strict standards to Democratic ones, a violation of fairness reported earlier by the Washington Post and the New York Times.

    Put differently, George W. Bush was not the choice of Florida’s voters anymore than he was the choice of the American people who cast a half million more ballots for Gore than Bush nationwide. [For more details on studies of the election, see Consortiumnews.com stories of May 12, June 2 and July 16.]

  34. For breavity, and I included the link.

  35. BTW, I didn’t “edit” it, I copied part of the first paragraph and included the link. (I have noticed on other threads a few comments that have been copied w/o supporting links. Your’s being one of them).

    Since I am a moderate, registered independent, I figured PBS, the Miami Herald, and USA today would be fairly accurate.

  36. amjim, Serious question for you,. Really!

    You say you are a “registered independent” right. How are you, where are you “registered”? I ask, because I have always considered myself independent too, but I keep getting stuff from the state Republican Party asking for donations and such, as if they believe I am a registered Republican.

    Where does one register their political affiliation or non-affiliation in Washington state? I really would like to know.

  37. Good question. I registered many years ago. I know that doesn’t help.

  38. I was under the impression that here in Washington the only way your party preference would be recorded is if you participated in the local party caucuses. But, I have never been to any of those, either Republican or Democrat, so still wonder why the Republican Party would think I am or was a Republican. Since I got out of the army I have always maintained my Independent political non-affilliation to any party.

    Oh well, sorry for the side-trip.

    That Gingrich guy is just too strange. Did you all see that neither he nor Perry will be on the Virginia state Primary Ballot? That’s a lot of primary votes they will miss out on. How’s he gonna spin that?

  39. I know our state has made some changes over the years. I just remember I didn’t want to claim a party. I have voted across all party lines from time to time.

  40. There is no party registration in the State of Washington. That includes “Independent”.

    This is why Republicans can create a phoney primary majority for the weaker of two Democratic candidates if there is no opposition to the Republican.

  41. There was when I registered waaay back when. Then again, besides that it does not matter, it is off topic.

    Speaking of creating phoney primaries, somebody here said they were voting for Gingrich, muckibr.

  42. amjim, in the context of what I was saying, I did say that if it looked like Gingrich could win the Republican Primary I would most certainly vote for him, because I believe President Obama could easily defeat Gingrich in the General.

    However, it looks as if Gingrich has flamed out and doesn’t even stand a chance of a Primary Place or Show, let alone a Win. So, I will likely vote for some other Republican in the Primary in order to help President Obama in the General.

    Does that clarify?

  43. Thanks, no clarification was needed.

  44. <—–betting he registered to vote before a guy that served in the military in the 1980s

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0