The following is from an article at Yahoo Voices by Brian Conners:
"I defy you to find a Democrat calling a GOP Presidential candidate an un-American terrorist sympathizer. That was Sarah Palin's accusation directed at President Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign.
We don't have to look far back in US history to see how this developed. In the 2004 presidential candidate Bush 43... was not a war hero. His opponent John Kerry was. Karl Rove, Bush 43's "Turd Blossom" had a strategy. He attacked Kerry's strong point and made Kerry use time and resources defending an asset of his character. ...
... The GOP traditionally loves dirty politics. They have done the research and they realize the dirtier they campaign the better they do.
The media had to give equal time to Bush 43's slanderous attack while Kerry defended himself. Every time Kerry defended himself Bush 43's slanderous attack seemed more plausible.
How did Rove come up with this strategy? He adapted his mentor Lee Atwater's Willie Horton strategy which helped Bush 41 win the presidency by making his Democratic opponent, Michael Dukakis, expend his time refuting the claim that he would let rapists out of jail to commit crimes.
How is the GOP using this tactic now?
Katrina Vanden Heuvel in the Washington Post article "Voting rights, super PACs and the media cloud the election" writes "For too many journalists, calling out a Republican for lying requires criticizing a Democrat too, making for a media age where false equivalence is confused, again and again, with objectivity."...
On September 11, 2010, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich stated that Obama could only be understood by people who "understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior." White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs accused Gingrich of "trying to appeal to the fringe of people who don't believe the president was born in this country". Gibbs went on to say, "You would normally expect better of somebody who held the position of Speaker of the House, but look, it is political season, and most people will say anything, and Newt Gingrich does that on a, genuinely, on a regular basis."
Gibbs gave Gingrich's attack free air time by rebutting it. Newt loved that because he estimates that the people who don't like the "politics of personal destruction" wouldn't vote for him in any case and those who would vote for him could use some reminders of why President Obama is not like us....
Propaganda's definition is "information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc."
Isn't that what the GOP has done in the past and is preparing to do now?
Dukakis, Kerry and Obama haven't gotten down in the slime with the GOP which makes them look weak to the undecided, low information voter. This is the GOP's goal.
As long as the GOP can see advantageous poll results they will continue their attack of the Democrats."
Good article, but it presents the serious issue confronting the Democrats in the face of Republican attacks: If you answer these charges, you make them seem plausible. If you ignore them, it seems as though you are admitting they are true. I'm not sure what the right strategy for the Democrats is in these cases. Please read the whole of Brian Conners' article HERE.
"Was a consumer and producer. Don't know what I'll do in next. I support Democrats who protect the bottom 99%!