Comments on: Attack Ad Substitutes Fear for Fact http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/ Here are my thoughts; share yours Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:37:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: OneNation4All http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-939 OneNation4All Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:56:35 +0000 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-939 Jim, it's great that the inaccuracies can be discovered and the ad can be disputed, but the sad issue is that, it's inaccuracy is no accident and IS a lie developed to incite fear and mislead the public. Once any sound bite gets out, a new idea and life takes flight and spreads ever so more inaccurately throughout the misinformed electorate. An electorate that selectively hears sound bites to support their bias. Udall and every candidate, this includes Republicans, must turn on a dime to dispute inaccuracies. The problem with that is once your opponent puts you on the defensive you expend your energies and moneys playing catch up. This is not a new way to politic, but the art has been refined by the Rove Republicans to discredit anyone that gets in the way of winning. Look at the smear campaign against McCain in South Carolina during the 2000 presidential primary. There is no accountability or liability for loose lips or lying lips in the press. The lies are front page and the retractions are back page if at all. This is only exacerbated by the fact that the media has increasingly been gobbled up by conservative interests that promote this behavior. Does The Denver Post sound like a familiar pawn in this game? I guess journalism has always been a mix of truth and deception. The problem today is that the reach of "news" is further and deeper than at any point in our history. Who will have the greatest stamina? Jim, it’s great that the inaccuracies can be discovered and the ad can be disputed, but the sad issue is that, it’s inaccuracy is no accident and IS a lie developed to incite fear and mislead the public. Once any sound bite gets out, a new idea and life takes flight and spreads ever so more inaccurately throughout the misinformed electorate. An electorate that selectively hears sound bites to support their bias. Udall and every candidate, this includes Republicans, must turn on a dime to dispute inaccuracies. The problem with that is once your opponent puts you on the defensive you expend your energies and moneys playing catch up.

This is not a new way to politic, but the art has been refined by the Rove Republicans to discredit anyone that gets in the way of winning. Look at the smear campaign against McCain in South Carolina during the 2000 presidential primary. There is no accountability or liability for loose lips or lying lips in the press. The lies are front page and the retractions are back page if at all. This is only exacerbated by the fact that the media has increasingly been gobbled up by conservative interests that promote this behavior. Does The Denver Post sound like a familiar pawn in this game?

I guess journalism has always been a mix of truth and deception. The problem today is that the reach of “news” is further and deeper than at any point in our history. Who will have the greatest stamina?

]]> By: Anoldguy1944 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-941 Anoldguy1944 Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:27:31 +0000 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-941 Lies, of omission as well as commission, are a specialty of the right wing of the Colorado Republican Party. More and more, the acquisition of power and decision-making seems to be the goal, as opposed to serving the interests of the public. We are not better off as a result, and the republic continues its drift into dangerous waters as long as ideologues (from either party) are running the show. Lies, of omission as well as commission, are a specialty of the right wing of the Colorado Republican Party. More and more, the acquisition of power and decision-making seems to be the goal, as opposed to serving the interests of the public.

We are not better off as a result, and the republic continues its drift into dangerous waters as long as ideologues (from either party) are running the show.

]]> By: Jay Marvin http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-945 Jay Marvin Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:22:09 +0000 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-945 Just another example of how the GOP doesn't get the FISA law or the Bill Of Rights. Let's scare the public. It's worked before so it will work again. Big question is will it? Or will the voting public see through this sham? Just another example of how the GOP doesn’t get the FISA law or the Bill Of Rights. Let’s scare the public. It’s worked before so it will work again. Big question is will it? Or will the voting public see through this sham?

]]> By: Wildflower http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-946 Wildflower Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:52:59 +0000 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-946 I recall that during the 04 election there was a report out of the White House that the terror risk was so high we might not even be able to have the election. There was a great hue and cry from the public. After Tom Ridge stepped down he even said that some of the terror alerts were not really high risk. Let's hope the GOP may have called wolf once too often. I recall that during the 04 election there was a report out of the White House that the terror risk was so high we might not even be able to have the election. There was a great hue and cry from the public.
After Tom Ridge stepped down he even said that some of the terror alerts were not really high risk. Let’s hope the GOP may have called wolf once too often.

]]> By: noidea http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-948 noidea Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:18:16 +0000 http://spencerspeaks.com/2007/11/13/attack-ad-substitutes-fear-for-fact/#comment-948 Jay, I hate to break it to you>> but if they are allowed to listen to your phone calls, without a warrant, for up to a year with only a cursory review at 45 days at the FISA court, it seems like Udall doesn't get the Bill of Rights either (specifically the 4th Ammendment). This ammendment doesn't cover "fishing expeditions" as Jim puts it. I guess that this is Jim's ultimate underlying point. That Udall isn't a wuss, as he's just as willing to trample on our freedoms and liberty as the GOP. Be proud. Jay,
I hate to break it to you>> but if they are allowed to listen to your phone calls, without a warrant, for up to a year with only a cursory review at 45 days at the FISA court, it seems like Udall doesn’t get the Bill of Rights either (specifically the 4th Ammendment). This ammendment doesn’t cover “fishing expeditions” as Jim puts it. I guess that this is Jim’s ultimate underlying point. That Udall isn’t a wuss, as he’s just as willing to trample on our freedoms and liberty as the GOP.

Be proud.

]]>