New Allen Ad "Fiction": Swing and a Miss!

By: tokatakiya
Published On: 9/14/2006 11:43:48 AM

[Crossposted at TOKATAKIYA]

The Allen campaign is pissing more money away on a new attack ad. [I'm not posting it on my site because I don't put crap up here.]

Let's look at this closely, shall we?

First they call Webb a "fiction writer" - Ouch. Good dig...at...people who... read...books. (Clearly not Allen's core constituency.)
The ad emphasizes that it was 20 years ago that Webb served in the Reagan administration. Which is such a long time ago that it couldn't possible be relevant nowadays, right. Not nearly as relevant as a magazine article Jim Webb wrote 27 years ago, to be sure. The Allen camp lives in the present (and by the present I mean 1860).

The ad implies that Jim Webb was only in the Reagan administration for 10 months, which is not exactly true (and by "not exactly true" I mean "completely false".)

From Jim Webb's bio: [Emphasis mine.]

In 1984 he was appointed the inaugural Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, where he traveled extensively in, and worked closely with, our NATO allies. As the Assistant Secretary he directed considerable research and analysis of the U.S. military's mobilization capabilities. In 1987 he became the first Naval Academy graduate in history to serve in the military and later be appointed Secretary of the Navy. He resigned as Naval Secretary in 1988 after refusing to agree to a reduction of the Navy's force structure during congressionally-mandated budget cutting.

The ad says, "Webb attacked Reagan policy". The policy of slashing the Naval budget by $12 billion (in 1987 dollars). So, apparently, Jim Webb was too defense minded for Ronald Reagan.

Let's see what President Reagan had to say about Jim Webb when he resigned: [Emphasis mine]

February 23, 1988

Dear Jim:

It is with regret that I accept your resignation as Secretary of the Navy, effective February 22, 1988.

During the past four years, you have served our country with honor and courage, just as you have throughout your distinguished career. As my first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, you played a major role in revitalizing the reserve components of our Armed Forces. You were instrumental in restoring confidence and pride in one of our most noble national traditions -- the concept of the American citizen-soldier.

Since taking the helm a year ago as Secretary of the Navy, you continued to press forward the highest standards of excellence throughout the Navy and Marine Corps. From the most remote outposts to the lecture halls of Annapolis, your commitment to the quality of our military capability and the well-being of our men and women in uniform has been undivided.

As your service to this Administration comes to a close, I want to thank you for the selflessness and loyalty that you have always personified. In the end, it is these qualities that will ensure that freedom endures in this generation and in every generation to come.

Godspeed in all your endeavors.

Sincerely,

Ronald Reagan

The Great Communicator was great at communicating how much respect he had for Jim Webb. Don't be jealous. I'm sure if "Senator" Allen was anything like Jim Webb, President Reagan would have liked him too.

Then they trot out the letter from the Reagan Library which makes it clear that Nancy Reagan never saw the Webb/Reagan ad.

Next they point out that some of Webb's campaign advisors called Reagan an "ignorant fool". This is unfortunate, however, it doesn't change the fact that President Reagan respected Jim Webb and Jim Webb respects President Reagan.

"I'm George Allen and I approved this message." And you paid for it, too. Good use of funds, "Senator". Thanks for spending your money on increased name recognition for Jim Webb. (Speaking of which...)

"Oh, and by the way, sorry again about that M-word thing."


Comments



COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/14/2006 12:29:59 PM)


Um ... ah ... Publius (loboforestal - 9/14/2006 12:37:17 PM)
You can't see the irony in your using the words "rude jerk" ?


Or perhaps (tokatakiya - 9/14/2006 12:44:29 PM)
it will remind all voters that Webb can make his mind up for himself (i.e is a leader not a follower).

It certainly won't make people think he's a Republican - that makes no sense. How does "attacked Reagan policy" equal Republican? What Republican has that been true of in the last 20+ years?

Bottom line: you guys can't get past the fact that Reagan respected Webb. If Allen has anything positive from Reagan, run with it.



COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/14/2006 2:00:26 PM)


Yeah, spoiled child. (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 4:39:21 PM)
Its as if his dad was coach of the Redskins or something. Next thing you know we'll be seeing Webb dressed up in cowboy costumes riding ponies.

"Everyone else in the Reagan Administration who has commented on this issue..."

Yeah, all three of them.

"Come to think of it, that's what Webb called Reagan... "

Don't you mean come to lie about it?



Do you mean... (Walker Keith Armistead - 9/14/2006 12:46:36 PM)
that he didn't really write all those books of fiction?


No (tokatakiya - 9/14/2006 12:50:45 PM)
I just didn't realize being literate was a slur nowadays.


Think it's a strong ad (demo925 - 9/14/2006 12:54:19 PM)
It will hurt us, glad to see Allen is spending money on negative ads.  He must be a little worried.


RE: Target Audience for Ad? (JPTERP - 9/14/2006 12:54:53 PM)
Nancy Reagan fans? 

Yeah, I'd have to agree the ad just seems like a real loser. 

On a visceral level my impression is "George Allen hides behind mommy" (Nancy Reagan in this case).  The female voice sounds a little grating. 

I realize that George Allen is trying to weaken Webb's support with women, but this ad seems tailor made to lose the support of men.  It makes George Allen seem soft and whiny.



COMMENT HIDDEN (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 1:36:18 PM)


RE: Edwin Meese wing (JPTERP - 9/14/2006 3:02:18 PM)
Will find this ad persuasive.  Edwin Meese does not represent the full Reagan movement.  Those who revere Reagan as a God will never vote for Jim Webb anyways.  Those who view Reagan as a good president, but not a God, are likely to be open to Jim Webb's candidacy, and will find this ad distasteful and dishonest.

That screechy voice providing the voice over is not a winner. 



Shocker! (phriendlyjaime - 9/14/2006 1:27:05 PM)
Ratings have been disabled for the video.


COMMENT HIDDEN (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 1:46:40 PM)


Is the Allen campaign paying you? (loboforestal - 9/14/2006 2:26:12 PM)
I'm call bull on this : Gallup Poll recently reported that of those polled, 87% voted Ronald Reagan as the most popular president ever even over KENNEDY, Eisenhower and Roosevelt.

got a reference for that?  (don't try wikipedia, that's unreferecned as far as I can tell )



COMMENT HIDDEN (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 1:52:24 PM)


COMMENT HIDDEN (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 1:56:08 PM)


George Allen? (Lowell - 9/14/2006 1:58:07 PM)
Nancy Reagan asked for ALL candidates to take down images of her husband without permission. Allen's still using the image of Ronald Reagan, repeatedly, despite the fact that he never got permission (that any of us know) and that he never even served in the Reagan Administration.  Talk about disrespectful!


"There you go again" (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 2:02:32 PM)
Don't you get it? Are you too full of rhetoric to allow the reality of the situation sink in finally?

Nancy Reagan doesn't like Jim Webb?  Get it.

Nancy Reagan and the Reagan people like George Allen.  Get it.

How many times are you going to beat your head against the tree on this one?

You can't win the Reagan battle.



Therein.... (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 4:01:43 PM)
....lies the utter failing of your ENTIRE wasted fake outrage over the Reagan thing.

This is not, never will be, cannot in any sound way be construed or spun to be an actual endorsement by Reagan.  It is, however, Reagan's words praising the man who is running for Senate.

You people actually think you can bully us into doing what you want, don't you?

Roger your comment downthread about Lowell being a geek is very revealing.

Move over, there's a new bully in town, and his ass is bigger, badder, and one fucking hell of a lot more authentic than your little Palos Verdes creme-de-la-poseurs.



Strain your pea brain for a minute, (I.Publius - 9/14/2006 2:08:41 PM)
and think about what you just wrote.

"(that any of us know)"

Why do you think George Allen or Nancy Reagan owe you an explanation for anything?

If Nancy hasn't gone public asking him to take it down -- like she did for George H.W. Bush, James Webb, and numerous other politicians -- then the only logical explanation is that Allen has permission.

This is not rocket science, Lowell.  I'm pretty sure that even someone with as limited faculties as you have could figure this out.



COMMENT HIDDEN (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 2:20:29 PM)


Bull shit (Reen - 9/14/2006 3:24:36 PM)
The current Republican party is saturated with freeloaders.  And that's the problem.

We have what Webb wrote, we have what Reagan wrote. Those are facts. 

In contrast, we have a bunch of rambling loser fat boys who write tomes on a progressive blog as to why George "I made it up" Allen and they disagree and why they have decided that Ronald Reagan meant the opposite of what he said.



This is ridiculous (tokatakiya - 9/14/2006 4:22:41 PM)
"Lowell, were you a geek in high school?
I mean that seriously.  Were you picked on as a teenager.  Because, I can't fathom for a moment that you don't understand that Nancy Reagan thinks that Jim Webb is a putz and that she supports George Allen."

First of all, "geek". Seriously. This is what you have to offer?

Secondly, how does that necessarily relate (as you imply) to him not "understanding" that "Nancy Reagan thinks that Jim Webb is a putz and that she supports George Allen." Where is the connection between these things?

Furthermore, has Nancy Reagan endorsed Allen? If she has I haven't seen it. It would seem that the Allen crew is "implying an endorsement" from her. Considering Nancy Reagan's steadfast support for stem cell research and "Senator" Allen's lapdog acceptance of the President's (non-)policy on stem cells, I doubt she will be cutting a commercial for him anytime soon.



(Bowl) Movement conservative (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 5:09:13 PM)
You're right. Webb was not a political hack. He was hired for his military expertise. FOR SHAME!

Why is the ad disgusting? Is it because it shows your hero speaking in GLOWING terms about a man your hack candidate has instructed you to hate? Your feeble mind simply cannot process it.



RE: Reagan (JPTERP - 9/14/2006 5:12:48 PM)
The beauty of Reagan's administration was that he pulled together realists like Webb and idealogues like Meese.

Guys like Powell, Scowcroft, even GHW Bush represent a strain of the GOP that goes back to Goldwater and Eisenhower and certainly runs through the Reagan administration.  Webb is very much in line with these conservatives on national security issues.

Reagan may have built the modern GOP.  However, G.W. Bush and George Allen are squeezing the life out of the party as they embrace the Meese legacy.  There is no place for foreign policy realists in the current GOP.  At least as far as foreign policy goes, Webb has a more legitimate claim to Reagan's legacy than George Allen. 



Actually.... (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 5:27:13 PM)
That is one of the best insightful statements I've heard...

"Webb has a more legitimate claim to Reagan's legacy than George Allen."

Thanks JPTERP!



RE: Thanks (JPTERP - 9/14/2006 6:04:58 PM)
I think it's actually been said before, but it's true as far as national security issues go.  As far as economic policy goes, Reagan's record is mixed--some good and some bad.  Social issues: File under Edwin Meese and G.W. Bush.


Allen didn't listen to Nancy (VA Breeze - 9/14/2006 9:44:12 PM)
Nancy's wishes in July were for the Senate to vote for stem cell research. Allen voted against her wishes.


Keep going apeshit fellas... (Delta Mike - 9/14/2006 2:21:11 PM)
... the more you admit that Webb's ad hit a nerve, the more it is music to my ears.


Two things will come out of this.... (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 2:27:14 PM)
1. Webb pissed off Nancy Reagan

2. He resigned as Sev Nav and has disavowed Reagan's policies



NUMBER #3 (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 4:06:00 PM)
ALLEN IS SCARED SHITLESS.


The point is this. (phriendlyjaime - 9/14/2006 2:22:22 PM)
Webb created a short ad, it introduced him to the community, and I don't think many people even saw it.  This Allen ad, on the other hand, is full of lies.

Hopefully, we will get some great footage at the Obama event, and we can use that for a commercial in other places like here in Richmond.  I think that would be a HUGE plus here.



Sounds like you are admitting that the Reagan ad didn't work, Jaime (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 2:30:04 PM)
It cost him at least a week's worth of time.  It changed the dynamics of the race.  And, surely, he could have opened with something better.

If they were going to do a bio piece, why didn't they just recite his resume and list his medals.  Why not show pictures of his family?

Instead, they had to use Ronald Reagan.



You may be missing the point. (phriendlyjaime - 9/14/2006 2:38:55 PM)
This has angered Allen, and yes, apparently Nancy Reagan has had her say.  It does strike me funny that Webb is not allowed to use Reagan's words and images (which are pretty public, imo) yet many other Republicans have pics of Reagan all over their web pages and mailers.  Personally, I think it was a bit hypocritcal of Nancy Reagan to come after Webb.

Do you not agree that it was not very prudent of Allen to lie about Webb's length of time with Reagan?  I mean, that could easily be refuted.  And lying on TV doesn't work so well anymore.

I really do not agree with your assessment of my opinion.  I think people underestimate Webb and his campaign and their ability to take subtle digs at Allen.  Do we need to gain more points?  Of course we do.  I am willing to wait and see what happens over the next week.  And of course, at the debate this weekend.

Oh, and you can bet there will be an add with pics of family, most notably a young son going to war, and pics of medals.  again, I realize we disagree on our choice of candidate.  However, words from people I do not agree with will certainly not make me change my vote, and I am sure you feel the same.

Let me ask you this; as someone who does not support Webb bc of your ties with the Republican party (and I am strongly tied to the Democratic party, so that is not an insult) what do YOU think Webb should be doing?  What would make you say hmmmmmmmm, maybe that guy is alright?



What would I do? (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 2:57:51 PM)
I'm not in the business of giving advice to the opposition but here it goes.

1. I would have stayed completely away from the Reagan stuff.  Why?  Because the history of the 1994 Senate Race tells me that Nancy Reagan is a wild card.  As a rule, you don't mess with her.

Jim Webb did and he is now paying the price for it.  He will continue to pay the price throughout the remainder of the election.

This isn't too say that he can't talk about his service in the Reagan Administration.  I just believe that using a deadman's words were wrong.  Reagan is not here to take a position in this race.  But, if he were, most observers know that he would support George Allen.

Allen does have Reagan connections, you know?

2.  Iraq is the primary issue in this race and yet Jim Webb has not laid out a path to victory.  You'all tout his mitary experience and his resume and yet not one of you has been able to tell me or the other Republican posters what his position is.

Therefore, I would follow an example setforth by President Eisenhower from the Korean conflict.  I'd have him meet with former and current military leaders to gain a sense of what it would take to get the job done.

This will never happen, however, because your candidate seems to follow the Murtha position.

3. My first ad would have been 1/2 bio and 1/2 position oriented. Maybe even a comparison ad.  The bio ad did little to advance the ball...and it certainly did nothing to impact George Allen's numbers.

4. I would have spent the entire summer months more aggressively campaigning across Virginia with full schedules.  Not this piss ant stuff that he did do...but rather three week long extended car tours of the state.

That's just a sample. 



doo-doo sampler (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 5:45:33 PM)
Sounds like you're not in the business of intellectual honesty either.

1) Yeah, don't mess with Nancy, she'll come after you with her network of psychic friends! The only reason her office wrote that letter is because Allen lied to her and told her the ad was negative. What price is Webb paying? Have any new poll numbers you would like to cite? Do you always just make stuff up like this?

2) Webb has not endorsed the Murtha position. Webb understands that our strategy in Iraq depends on the reality on the ground and that reality is likely to change between now and when he takes office in January. He is too responsible to make promises he might not be able to keep. He also understands that the military doesn't take orders from Senators and we have two more years with the Chimp-in-Chief. George Allen supports the Rumsfeld-Cheney position.

3) Yeah, cram as much info as possible into a 30 second spot, great idea.

4) Yeah, just drive around all day and see what happens. Great strategy.



Your rage is delicious. (tokatakiya - 9/14/2006 2:52:45 PM)
If someone gets as fired up as you folks are about Reagan's legacy (BTW, thanks for the "You cannot win the Reagan battle. It will only destroy you." - I'm still laughing about that one. What are you, the Emperor?) they were already going to vote and vote for Allen. How does that hurt Webb?

Once again, thanks for the free pub.



have you ever heard of the phrase "motivating the base?" I suppose not. (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 3:00:45 PM)
Here are the two big impacts of the Reagan debacle:

1. Higher Republican turnout b/c the base gets motivated; and

2. suppresses African American support of James Webb. 

#2 combined with Sen. Lambert's support of Allen may actually have more impact than #1.



There is no doubt (phriendlyjaime - 9/14/2006 3:07:24 PM)
that Obama's event will even out that Lambert Allen support (and we have no idea how many will go Allen bc of it) or give Webb more support.


yeah...but "even out" is not enough to get you to 50% plus one. (Roger A. Jarrell - 9/14/2006 3:11:02 PM)


Obama="inside the belt way" Lambert="hometown VA hero" (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 4:02:08 PM)
Obama has done nothing for Va.  Lambert has worked tirelessly (20+ years) to bring millions of dollars to Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

"Even out"?  I think not.



LOL!!! (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 4:04:48 PM)
Yes, our hometown hero with a voting record of:

100% NARAL
100% HRC
100% ACLU

Yeah, it's SO hilarious to listen to you Repubs.



Historically Black Colleges and Universities (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 4:53:37 PM)
are not the only issue that is of concern to African-Americans. Barack Obama is much more popular than Lambert and will be supporting the candidate who is not a racist liar.


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/14/2006 3:24:47 PM)


ROFLMAO (Lowell - 9/14/2006 3:36:33 PM)
I. Pubus is an expert on African Americans?  Now THAT is hilarious!


You have no idea (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 4:55:34 PM)
what you are talking about. Have you ever even met a black person?


I guess the only way you can motivate your base (tokatakiya - 9/14/2006 3:14:28 PM)
is to play on a man who's been out of the public eye for almost 15 years. That would be because you have nothing in terms of policy (aside from scare tactics) that can.

Why don't you try Abe Lincoln next? The further back from the present Administration you go the better for you.



COMMENT HIDDEN (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 3:40:26 PM)


Not before Allen stole his mojo (phriendlyjaime - 9/14/2006 3:45:17 PM)
by FALSELY claming he was a Reagan conservative.

Tell him to take the images off his site and mailers.

Your hypocrisy is astounding, yet expected.



Not Worried About Our Base (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 3:53:33 PM)
If you boys really think you're going to suppress base Democratic turnout in this election with a piddly freakin' press-charge on Reagan, you simply don't understand where the electorate is at.

You guys have no idea the kind of freight train that is barreling down on you, do you?



COMMENT HIDDEN (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 3:38:51 PM)


RE: The bait . . . (JPTERP - 9/14/2006 3:56:34 PM)
Webb did NOT call Reagan "a fool".  Listen very closely to the ad.  Of course, Team Allen wants to slander Webb on this and it seems they have suceeded.

Here's a hint--the quote came from Mudcat Saunders, not Jim Webb.

Dick Wadhams used a male prostitute in South Dakota to push his candidate's storyline (this is documented).  A Webb ad claiming that George Allen is sympathetic to male prostitutes because Wadhams employed a male prostitute (for political purposes) in another race would have the same degree of validity.



I shouldn't be feeding PATs (Paid Allen Trolls) (Doug in Mount Vernon - 9/14/2006 3:57:15 PM)
However, this one is too good to pass up.

FACT:  Webb has NEVER called Reagan a fool.  But some Allen campaign aides who resent Jim Webb's change in political allegiances thought they could spin it.

FAILURE.

FACT:  4TheGipper would be stopped at the Massachusetts border and arrested for trying to bring heightened irrationality across the border.



For the record (4TheGipper - 9/14/2006 4:21:54 PM)
I'm not a "PAT."  Like you, I have an opinion and a set of beliefs. And, like you, I am freely voicing them.  Isn't this a great country!

P.S.  I glad Dems like you weren't arrested at Virginia's border.  Lively debate make for a country and a more informed citizenry.



Admit it (George Allen's Noose - 9/14/2006 5:00:21 PM)
Admit that you lied about Webb calling Reagan a fool.