You state:
Bush can't attack the Dem ads because they are telling the truth.
Better look again, o dim one:
No, I think you better look again. There is very little there there to criticize. The items you posted at best nitpick and stretch their position a little further than they should. However, to placate you I will go through each one.
Pro-Kerry group’s ad claims “Bush says he's going to help companies outsource jobs.” But Bush never said that.
factcheck.org;
Actually, it was Snow and Mankiw who made those statements. Last time I looked they both worked for Bush and therefore, represented his thoughts and position. This is what they said:
<font color=brown>"Snow said in an interview with The Cincinnati Enquirer that technology is allowing U.S. companies to downsize and become more efficient by linking contract workers through the Internet.
"You can outsource a lot of activities and get them done just as well, or better, at a lower cost," Snow said during a stop here Monday. "If we can keep the American economy strong and growing and expanding, we'll create lots of jobs."
Snow's comments on outsourcing followed remarks on the same subject last month by N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, who stirred controversy by suggesting that shipping U.S. service jobs overseas could be good for the economy.
Mankiw was forced to apologize for his comments after they were attacked as being insensitive to the huge job losses the country has suffered over the past three years. Bush himself addressed the issue, saying he knew people in America were looking for work "because jobs have gone overseas.""
<font color=black>
crn.com
Or perhaps this one:
The Democratic National Committee released an ad Aug. 6 saying 2.7 million manufacturing jobs had been lost under Bush. That's true, but ignores the fact that manufacturing jobs started their decline three years before Bush took office.
factcheck.org;
Their argument is ridiculous.....they admit that 2.7 million manu. jobs were lost under Bush but then they try to minimize that huge loss by saying that jobs were lost under Clinton. First of all, we're talking about Bush, not Clinton. Secondly, if there were manu. jobs losses under Clinton, and I doubt that, given 8 years of economic expansion, its no where near 2.7 million. In fact, the Dem. fact sheet below states that 257K manu. jobs were CREATED under Clinton:
ndol.org
Or perhaps you would like this one:
Moveon.org Voter Fund falsely attacks Bush, who comes back with a misleading ad about Kerry.
factcheck.org;
How slimy......I can't believe you used this as one to support your position. Bush vetoes the temporary storage solution which suggests he's against using Yucca for nuke dumping ground but then flip flops and approves the use of Yucca for permanent storage. What slime!
Or this one:
The latest TV ad from the Moveon.org Voter Fund says "George Bush wants to eliminate overtime pay for 8 million workers," referring to new overtime rules that the Department of Labor has proposed. The 8-million figure (hotly denied by the Bush administration, of course) comes from a study by the labor-funded Economic Policy Institute.
Ridiculous nitpicking........the difference is so subtle no one would understand it........except some disgruntled Rep.
Or maybe this one:
In what it called the first salvo in a $10-million advertising campaign aimed at defeating President Bush, the liberal group Moveon.org released a TV ad it said would run in 16 cities in 10 states starting Thanksgiving week. The ad states that “George Bush is going to be the first president since Herbert Hoover to lead an economy that loses jobs. …Didn’t George Bush say his tax cuts would create jobs?”
The ad is misleading on several counts. It falsely implies that tax cuts failed to create jobs, falsely implies that the economy is still losing jobs, and exaggerates the severity of an historically mild economic downturn.
How is the ad misleading. It was true at the time......under Bush the economy lost more jobs than at any other time since Hoover. Its says nothing about tax cuts or the severity of the downturn. Its a fact that stands by itself. However, the GOP is CHOOSING to read other junk into it.
And just for the record, its also true that job formation under Bush has been lackluster and much slower than for any other recovery. Its also true that most of the new jobs have been low paying ones.
Furthermore, I can show you twice as many economists who say tax cuts do little for the economy other than benefit the rich than economists who say tax cuts are a job boon for the economy.
This has been a common theme among several Democratic candidates, who have not always gotten their facts straight
factcheck.org;
The GOP article that criticizes the Dem ads also said the following:
<font color=brown>"The ad’s central claim – that Bush will finish his term with the economy employing fewer people than when he took office – probably will turn out to be correct – but barely. Private economists are projecting that the economy will continue to gain jobs over the next year, according to Blue Chip Economic Indicators, a survey of private economic forecasters. The average forecast is for a gain of 146,000 jobs per month, which would leave Bush at the end of his term with an economy employing nearly 400,000 fewer workers than when he took office. On the other hand, the most optimistic private economists see the economy gaining enough jobs between now and the end of Bush's term to leave him with a gain. Ten of the 51 surveyed predicted an average gain of 213,000 jobs per month over the next year, which if continued through January 2004 would leave Bush more than half a million jobs to the good. That remains a minority view, however."<font color=black>
In fact, the economy has produced 166k jobs per month this year which suggests that things are doing better than expected. However, that average is misleading......in the last two months, only 78K jobs were created in June and only 32K in July. In fact, it looks like jobs peaked in April and since then, every month has seen the increase become smaller than the prior month. At this rate, some economists are predicting we will start losing jobs in October.
All and all, these 'attack' pieces are pretty lame stuff, and their criticisms silly and anal. Its why Bush has not gone out with his guns blazing. His complaints would be so subtle very few Americans would understand what the big brouhaha is about.
Trust me, if Karl Rove saw gold in these attack pieces, Bush would be all over them like a bee on honey!
This has been going on for some time...deal with it!
Kerry fought in a war and came home a war hero with several medals. Bush couldn't decide whether to put a shotgun by his ear, go to Canada or join the Nat. Guard while drinking up a storm and getting DUIs.
And you talk to me about character? I don't think you know what character is!
Let's rephrase that shall we?
Kerry chooses to ignore his voting record and instead trots out his 30 year old Vietnam record as a reason to vote for him.
I know........that's what the RNC is telling you all. However, what they fail to mention is that Bush has desperately based his campaign on the war president theme. Of course, Kerry has to counter with his own military experience.......he would be a fool not to.
He then proceeds to whine like mule when American citizens question his record.
Whine? Bush's cronies are impugning Kerry falsely. I would complain too. He has an honorable rep to maintain. |
