FactCheck.org The “Willie Horton” Ad Of 2004?

Republican group’s ad shows Osama, Kerry. It appeals to fear, and twists Kerry’s record on defense, intelligence, Iraq.

Summary

An ad by the Republican group “Progress for America Voter Fund ,” mostly funded by wealthy GOP donors, suggests Kerry can’t defend against terrorists “who want to kill us.” It shows images of Osama bin Laden and the attacks of September 11, 2001.

The ad claims Kerry has “a 30-year record of supporting cuts in defense and intelligence,” misleading charges that we’ve de-bunked before. It also accuses Kerry of “endlessly changing positions on Iraq,” a claim that is without factual basis.

Kerry responded with his own ad, quoting a New York Times editorial calling the Bush campaign’s recent statements about Kerry and terrorism “despicable.”

Falwell says evangelicals control GOP, Bush’s fate By Scott Shepard, COX NEWS SERVICE

The Rev. Jerry Falwell said yesterday that evangelical Christians, after nearly 25 years of increasing political activism, now control the Republican Party and the fate of President Bush in the November election.

“The Republican Party does not have the head count to elect a president without the support of religious conservatives,” Falwell said at an election training conference of the Christian Coalition.

Falwell said evangelical Christians are now “by far the largest constituency” within the Republican Party, their route to dominance beginning in 1979 with his founding of the Moral Majority, a precursor to the Christian Coalition. …

Falwell expressed confidence in a Bush victory over Democratic Sen. John Kerry, adding, “You cannot be a sincere, committed born-again believer who takes the Bible seriously and vote for a pro-choice, anti-family candidate.” …

The speakers included:

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who said Bush’s re-election is critical because “the next president is going to appoint two, perhaps four, Supreme Court justices,” making it possible to reverse the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion-rights ruling.

FactCheck.org Bush Ad Twists Kerry’s Words on Iraq

Selective use of Kerry’s own words makes him look inconsistent on Iraq. A closer look gives a different picture.

Summary

Kerry has never wavered from his support for giving Bush authority to use force in Iraq, nor has he changed his position that he, as President, would not have gone to war without greater international support. But a Bush ad released Sept. 27 takes many of Kerry’s words out of context to make him appear to be alternately praising the war and condemning it.

Here we present this highly misleading ad, along with what Kerry actually said, in full context. [read more]

DodgeGlobe.com:Harris: Kerry’s message needs to be ‘It’s America, stupid’ 09/25/04

The real message is that Bush’s obsession with Iraq has left America off the radar in terms of our security, economy, health care and the rest. If Kerry can drill this point home, even if things improve in Iraq – and there is no indication that they will – things will get worse for Bush as voters react not with gratitude but with a wholly reasonable – and selfish – question: “What about us?”

Kerry can argue convincingly that for every dollar spent improving the lives of Iraqis, an American state, town or family has been shortchanged. And if terrorists strike again before the election, the ultimate effect of Bush’s misdirection of effort and money will be vividly apparent. Kerry will not have to say a word.

In short, Kerry’s message should be “It’s America, stupid.” It’s short, sweet and memorable, and it pivots well off the enduring ambiguity many Americans feel about the shifting justifications for the war in Iraq. …

In essence, Kerry should attempt to convince voters that he and Bush are effectively running for two different offices: Kerry for president of the United States, Bush for president of Iraq.

Bush still master of debating game – The Times of India

The biggest danger for Bush is no doubt his own syntactical slip-ups and factual vagueness. Several times during a press conference with Iraqi prime minister Iyad Allawi on Thursday, he referred to the “Afghan army” when he meant “Iraqi”. He confused terrorists Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas and even spoke of the “Soviet dinar” as the currency in Saddam’s Iraq.

Economist.com | America and Iraq

Is Iraq part of the war on terror? Yes, says Mr Bush. At the Republican convention, he asked: “Do I forget the lessons of September 11th and take the word of a madman, or do I take action to defend our country?” No, says Mr Kerry: the war is a distraction from al-Qaeda and has created the very terrorist havens that the administration claimed to be acting to destroy.

On this question, voters are undecided. The number of those who think Saddam and al-Qaeda were linked has fallen; just over half now say the war has not reduced the chance of a new terrorist assault on America; but roughly equal numbers think the Iraq campaign has strengthened and weakened the war on terror.

Duybya wasted money, time and other resources on Iraq and abandoned the pursuit of Osama bin Laden. In the process, he turned created a breeding ground for terrorists. Every Iraq killed has a family ready to kill — and die — in revenge. Bush’s actions were unbelievably, unforgivably irresponsible. mjh

Economist.com The comeback Kerry

“Mismanagement”� certainly offers a less thrilling rallying call. … But in this particular case, it surely offers Mr Kerry a better line of attack.

First, it is a far less contentious charge to prove. By any reasonable standard, the White House has a mind-boggling record of incompetence in Iraq, from the lack of post-war planning to the disgrace of Abu Ghraib. Mr Kerry can tap into the sense that Mr Bush is out of touch with what is happening on the ground, especially in Iraq’s no-go areas. The more Mr Bush repeats his mantra about the march of liberty, the more he risks sounding like a Texan version of “Comical Ali”, the Iraqi propaganda minister who declared that the infidel dogs were in retreat even as American troops rolled into Baghdad.

Second, Mr Kerry can broaden the theme of mismanagement. Look, he can argue, the same idealistic incompetence that has dogged the Iraq war can be seen throughout the administration’s policies: witness, for instance, its fiscal recklessness in cutting taxes while increasing spending.

Lastly, focusing on mismanagement allows Mr Kerry indirectly to deal with one of his biggest handicaps — the likeability gap. Most Americans have a soft spot for Mr Bush (and recoil from assertions that he deceived them into an unnecessary war). But many also have a sneaking worry about his competence. Is the amiable frat boy really a match for our dangerous times? Or is he being manipulated by ideological zealots? If Mr Kerry can use Iraq to reinforce doubts about Mr Bush’s competence, then he has a chance of pulling off a Reagan; but like Hubert Humphrey, he does not have much time.