From the Webb campaign comes a press release entitled, "Allen Fights Reagan+óGé¼Gäós Praise of Webb; Allen Reagan Advertisement is a lie." First, a short statement.
Today, George Allen released a TV commercial, which outright lies about Jim Webb+óGé¼Gäós service in the Reagan Administration. Allen falsely accuses Webb of only having served 10 months for the Reagan Administration, when Webb served 4 years in the Reagan Administration first as Assistant Secretary of Defense, then as Secretary of the Navy."Here we go, we are getting a taste here of Scotty Howell+óGé¼Gäós work. Last year Virginians saw this when he said Governor Tim Kaine would let Adolf Hitler live,+óGé¼-¥ said Webb spokesperson Kristian Denny Todd. +óGé¼+ôGeorge Allen and his hate-mongering consultants continue to use lies and distortions in a pathetic effort to stop George Allen+óGé¼Gäós political freefall. Virginians know better than to fall for these cheap political stunts.+óGé¼-¥
Then, the Webb campaign's crack research time refutes, point by point, Allen's entire ad. See all the lies debunked on the "flip."
Allen Ad: "20 years ago, fiction writer James Webb served in the Reagan Administration."
Truth:
Jim served in the Reagan administration for four years. He served for three years as Assistant Secretary of Defense, and one year as Secretary of the Navy.
Note: I would also point out that Webb writes great non-fiction too, including the history of hte Scots-Irish in America, "Born Fighting."
Allen Ad: "After ten months, he quit."
Truth: "Ronald Reagan disagrees with George Allen+óGé¼Gäós characterization of Jim+óGé¼Gäós service. In accepting Jim+óGé¼Gäós resignation President Reagan wrote:"
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.
Allen Ad: "Webb attacked Reagan policy."
Truth:
Webb+óGé¼Gäós resignation was based on principle. He resigned because he could not accept congressionally mandated cuts to the Naval budget. Many military and political commentators agreed with Webb+óGé¼Gäós move.-Upon Jim+óGé¼Gäós resignation, George Will wrote a piece entitled, "Navy Loses a Warrior." In it, Will argued +óGé¼+ôWebb is a casualty of a conservative administration's misrule. Reagan's deficits are strangling Reagan's defense program, including the part that, as recently as Cap Weinberger's farewell ceremony, Reagan cited as a particularly glittering accomplishment -- the 600-ship Navy. That goal now goes a glimmering.
The number 600 should not be treated as a talisman, but the defense budget, and especially the Navy, should be tailored to the nature of the nation's security needs, not budgetary convenience. The Navy is especially central to recurring American controversies.+óGé¼-¥ (Washington Post, George F Will, 2/28/1988)
White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater, commended Webb for doing the "honorable thing" in this matter. (2/24/1988, AP)
Republican Jack Kemp, wrote: +óGé¼+ô... [it was] a terrible mistake accommodating...to the mindless cuts in defense. I think the wrong man resigned. It shouldn't have been Webb. It should have been Carlucci.+óGé¼-¥ (AP 2/24/1988)
Allen Ad: "Now, Webb is running an ad implying Reagan+óGé¼Gäós endorsement."
Truth:
George Allen has used Ronald Reagan wherever he can, using a photograph of President Reagan on both his Senate and campaign websites and in direct mail pieces recently sent out.+óGé¼+ôAllen's campaign also has tried to capitalize on Reagan's popularity, mailing brochures featuring a photo of a much younger Allen standing beside Reagan. The same image appears on Allen's campaign website.+óGé¼-¥ (Roanoke Times 9/9/2006)
Allen Ad: "Close-up Shots of Reagan letter." "Shot of Virginian-Pilot article."
Truth:
The letter sent is clearly a form letter and misidentifies Webb+óGé¼Gäós ad as a negative ad, which it is not, nor does it imply an endorsement.+óGé¼+ôThe letter also suggests that the video is being used for a "very negative" ad, when it actually is part of a biographical spot on Webb.+óGé¼-¥ (Roanoke Times 9/9/2006)
Allen Ad: "Webb campaign advisors call Reagan 'ignorant fool'."
Truth:
George Allen+óGé¼Gäós campaign advisors are hate-mongering hypocrites:Dick Wadhams, Allen+óGé¼Gäós campaign manager, who in 2004 was campaign manger to John Thune in 2004 called a sitting U.S. Senator a +óGé¼+ôchickenshit+óGé¼-¥
+óGé¼+ôAccording to the release, Dick Wadhams, Thune's campaign manager, approached Jeremy Funk, 25, a Daschle staffer videotaping Thune's remarks at a Sioux Falls forum on Friday, and said Daschle was "a chickenshit. You know that, right?"
Later, Wadhams again used the term in talking with Funk.+óGé¼-¥ (The Associated Press State & Local Wire, August 14, 2004)
Chris LaCivita viciously attacked John Kerry+óGé¼Gäós military service as the Chief Facilitator of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign. (New York Times 8/25/2004)
Scotty Howell, Allen+óGé¼Gäós media consultant is notorious for the negative ads he produces. In 2005 he alleged that Tim Kaine would not execute Hitler and in 2004 Howell was accused of race baiting for an ad he produced, which showed a pair of black hands receiving food stamps. (Richmond Times Dispatch 10/22/05; The Fix, Washington Post Blog 2/13/2006)
Lies, lies, and more lies. That's the Allen team for you. Oh yeah, and vicious, personal attacks. Great stuff, huh?
Lowell Feld is Netroots Coordinator for the Jim Webb for US Senate Campaign. The ideas expressed here belong to Lowell Feld alone, and do not necessarily represent those of Jim Webb, his advisors, staff, or supporters.
Oh yeah. The whole "honesty" thing. Intellectual dishonesty is not very becoming. You should stop now.
As a barometer of hate, intolerance and dishonesty, you are doing a "heckuva job". Here's hoping you get more upset real soon.
This is a great example of the deceitful commentary we have come to expect from you. Nothing new, nothing true.
Speaking of debate, that's a great one-note song you are singing all the time.
Stick it, 'big guy'.
Don't let the facts confuse you.
Here's your chance and you simply state "the ad is spot-on"? Where's your arguments for why you don't believe the Webb campaign's counter points?
Now I know why the pro-slavery party was called the No-Nothing Party. Sheesh.
Then again, gubmint lawyers usually come from 4th-tier schools, and they have very low entrance requirements.
Carry on.
One of the major candidates offered Virginia voters a ringing tribute from the grave -- archival footage of former president Ronald Reagan praising the candidate in a television commercial. In a conservative state such as Virginia, those words are worth a million dollars.
***But in attacking the ad so vigorously, the Allen camp might have made a mistake.
Trailing in fundraising, Webb had spent very little money on the Reagan ad, paying for it to be seen just a few times in Roanoke and Norfolk and on some Northern Virginia cable stations.
Webb's campaign was counting on what consultants call "free media" -- newspapers and news programs on television -- to produce articles about the ad, giving it a broader reach than it would have on its own.
That worked initially. The ad got a spate of news reports when the Webb campaign announced it.
But that media coverage pales in comparison to the coverage the ad got once Nancy Reagan asked that it be taken down. Suddenly, the ad and the controversy surrounding it was in the newspapers again and on the local news -- for free.
Will voters react by chiding Webb for running the ad? Or will they see a Democrat being endorsed by a popular ex-president? We'll probably know Nov. 7.
Thanks to the Webb team for your preparedness, fighting spirit, and willingness to take on the Rovian filth.
I predict we will witness the END of Rovian smear as Jim Webb is elected the next US Senator from Virginia!
Republicans are planning to spend the vast majority of their sizable financial war chest over the final 60 days of the campaign attacking Democratic House and Senate candidates over personal issues and local controversies, GOP officials said.
Volunteer now. Make sure our candidates have a rapid response team. Don't forget Hurst's field team is doing double duty for Webb in NoVa.
This happens frequently to ipub who then whines and accuses Lowell (incorrectly) of deleting his posts.
I was getting a little worried about the thread at NLS talking about deleted posts at the B-team web site, and I thought, "well, that's happening here too" but its our votes. Ha. I'll be sure to rate more posts.
Suggest, perhaps, in a single line, that a story is breaking, then sit and write a *thoughtful* response to it and post it the day after or whenever you're ready. There's no reason why a "conversation", about a particularly interesting/meaty subject can't be going on for days. But 3-4 conversations, on the same subject, going on simultaneously is a waste of time and energy (not to mention bandwidth). It's like "how do I love thee? Let me count the ways...". I don't work (nor am I a paid troll, making a bit of extra on the side, in case I.Pubic is ready to jump in), but even I find it difficult to keep up with this blog, given that I want to read other stuff as well.
If there are updates (such as photos, videos, or a "new wrinkle"), they can be added to the same thread (as, sometimes, they are) and the new comments (nicely "starred", so you don't have to fish for them) can be added also.
IOW, quality, rather than quantity ought to be the rule of the day, at least for the "diaries"
2) I am *very much against* muzzling opposition (deleting messages), whether it's via up-top decision (admin) or via the democratic process of rating postings (a process which I still haven't figured out and hadn't had the time to ask about
a)By eliminating unwelcome comments, you are denying other readers of the blog the chance to judge for thmselves. Doing it post-factum (the message had been posted and *then* yanked off) is especially irritating to those of us who joined the conversation too late to be "in the know". You also deny those of us who like to do it the chance to practice our troll-shooting skills :) If IPubic gets into your hair too much, scroll each starred (new) message till you see the sig and then scroll right past it.
b) With trolls multiplying as they seem to, who's to say they won't do the same thing to you, especially if your message is convincing? Repubs have never been shy of using below the belt tactics (lies being their particular area of expertise) and denying accesss to info is as good as lying.
All this being off my chest...
Allen's ad is weak (though naming Webb as a "fiction writer" is inspired, IMO, from their POV), mostly, a lie, and needs to be debunked. Once, but thoroughly :) If you can get the attention of the MSM outlets, it'd be nice though, as I'd said elsewhere, "don't hold your breath"