Kerry's New Old Idear

Kerry has rounded a corner in his campaign and is finally starting to sound like what you'd expect from a liberal candidate. I guess this is his way of absolutely taking off the gloves.

Playing from the same, tired play book of fear-mongering, Kerry suggests that Bush wants to re-instate the military draft, rob senior citizens of their medications, soil their quilts, and step on their chickens.

By the way, is anyone else amused by people that consider themselves to be intellectuals and pronounce idea with an R?

Comments

[Horace]

First things first, the pronunciation of "idear" is a region thing. Was JFK not an intellectual? There are such things as regional accents. You mis-pronounce things, too, seeing as though you live in Texas and more than likely have a Southern drawl, although it's much less pronounced in the urban areas of Texas.

More importantly, it's mind-blowing that you can't see the forest for the trees. Bush, and more importantly, Karl Rove's Big Red Press-Manipulating Machine, have been in the business of fear-mongering for this entire campaign, with their talking points and assaults on the new outlets. What exactly does Dick Cheney do, if it's not fear-mongering?

[Stemper]

Rankings: Percent of People 25 Years and Over Who Have Completed a Bachelor's Degree and their current electoral-vote.com lean. Trend?

1 District of Columbia - Strong Kerry
2 Massachusetts - Strong Kerry
3 Colorado - Barely Bush
4 Connecticut - Strong Kerry
5 Maryland - Strong Kerry
6 Virginia - Barely Bush
7 New Jersey - Weak Kerry
8 Vermont - Strong Kerry
9 Minnesota - Weak Kerry
10 New Hampshire - Exactly tied
11 Washington - Weak Kerry
12 New York - Strong Kerry
13 California - Weak Kerry
13 Rhode Island - Strong Kerry
15 Kansas - Strong Bush
16 Hawaii - Barely Bush
17 Illinois - Strong Kerry
18 Delaware - Weak Kerry
19 Alaska - Strong Bush
20 Oregon - Weak Kerry
21 Utah - Strong Bush
22 Maine - Weak Kerry
23 Montana - Strong Bush
24 Georgia - Strong Bush
25 Nebraska - Strong Bush
26 Florida - Barely Kerry
26 North Dakota - Strong Bush
28 Texas - Strong Bush
29 Arizona - Strong Bush
29 Michigan - Weak Kerry
29 North Carolina - Strong Bush
32 Pennsylvania - Barely Kerry
33 Missouri - Weak Bush
34 Idaho - Strong Bush
35 Wisconsin - Weak Kerry
36 New Mexico - Exactly tied
36 Wyoming - Strong Bush
38 South Carolina - Strong Bush
39 South Dakota - Strong Bush
40 Ohio - Barely Kerry
41 Iowa - Weak Kerry
42 Oklahoma - Strong Bush
43 Tennessee - Strong Bush
44 Louisiana - Strong Bush
45 Alabama - Strong Bush
46 Indiana - Strong Bush
47 Nevada - Weak Bush
48 Arkansas - Weak Bush
49 Mississippi - Weak Bush
50 Kentucky - Strong Bush
51 West Virginia - Weak Bush

[Jeff]

I considered taking the political commentary off the site, since it's obviously not focused on that, but since I got some comments on a post I wrote 5 weeks ago I'll stay that decision for now.

Yep, for you, Horace. I'll bite.

The question was an honest one. I figured it was a regional thing, but wasn't sure since I've only heard one other person pronounce idea with an R (the actor formerly known as Ricky Schroeder). I kinda lost track of him after Silver Spoons. I wonder what he's up to?

I couldn't answer as to if I considered JFK an intellectual or not as I didn't pay much attention to politics prior to my birth. Seeing as how he pronounced Cuba with an R, I figured JFK said "idear" as well... but it would be unfair for me to make that assertion without having heard any audio of him pronouncing idear.

Speaking of unfair assertions. I have to chuckle at your characterization of me. You presume, first, that I'm FROM Texas... that I must have a drawl, and then triumphantly conclude, from that, I must mispronounce things too.

You'd be right on the first count (and what Texan wouldn't admit that), wrong on the second, and you may well be right on the third... especially if you consider "idear" the proper way to pronounce idea.

As for Bush, Karl, and Cheney's fear-mongering and "talking points and assaults on new outlets," perhaps you'd like to elaborate the vague rhetoric for this unenlightened Texan?

[Horace]

I errantly left off an 's' at the end of what should have been news.

The reference to the Rove Machine is that for the first three or four news cycles after a story hits (whether it's critical of the Bush Administration or the Kerry Campaign), members of the Bush Camp, such as Rice and Karen Hughes, grab every minute of time they can on every news outlet they can only to put out the same message, many times word for word. In any such news day, you'll more than likely see someone from his entourage on each morning program and then the marquee programs on the cable news outlets reciting the same rhetoric in a barrage on the public's perception.

Obviously, the left spews its own partisan rhetoric, but rarely does it incite as much fear as that of this administration. Cheney has repeatedly inferred that the election of Kerry would be an endangerment to the security of the American public--that Kerry's election would somehow make us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. When Bush is stumping, he does the same. Additionally, Ridge and crew at Homeland Security raise the terror alert level at conspicuous times, which strangely seems to affect the President's polling figures when he had been slumping in the polls. While it certainly could be coincidental, it does, at the very least, raise eyebrows. And technically, manipulating the terror alert levels to instill insecurity in the American public would be the height of fear-mongering.

[Jeff]

I appreciate the clarification.

I do understand what you're trying to convey. I just don't buy it. If Rove is so effective at manipulation and squashing dissent we wouldn't hear of any criticism of Bush from the press... and that's simply not the case.

The press is free to accept or decline any interview or coverage. In fact, they have. I can remember in the past year (perhaps a tad longer), the big 3 declined to air a presidential address; a speech Bush was making on Iraq. Not airing a presidential address on public airwaves? Heaven forbid we "miss" an episode of Friends.

Maybe it's because I'm in a "red" state, but I haven't seen or heard Rice or Hughes on the public stage at all for the campaign. They may be out there, but they're certainly not dominating the cycle.

Regarding the terror alert levels:

Why is it that when there's an increased terror threat (or perception of one), Kerry's numbers go down? What does that say about him?

It's only been raised nationally once during the campaign right? I believe it was raised in March, and lowered after about a week. It was raised in August, but only specific to financial institutions (and for good measure, bin Laden's stated goal is to bankrupt America). To my knowledge, there's no evidence that this has been manipulated.

You'd at least agree that's a sticky situation? It wouldn't have been unreasonable for Ridge to have raised the alert as a response to the recent bin Laden video. He can't dare do that this close to the election or he'd be accused of "playing up" bin Laden for Bush's political gain. On the other hand, if anything does happen (God forbid), there will be a witch hunt into why the dots weren't connected and the alert wasn't raised!

What about Kerry saying that George Bush will bring back the draft if elected? The only folks talking about a bringing back the draft were both democrats. It's an old tactic, but it's clearly scared a lot of young people and their families. It's one thing to be the topic of college-targeted spam, but from a candidate in a stump speech?

[Jeff]

My bad, the alert level was raised in March 2003, not this past March. So, it would appear that the alert level has only been raised once this year... in August, and specific to financial institutions. The best I can tell, it still has not been lowered.

[Horace]

I live in the very same "red" state as you. Condoleeza Rice makes the rounds routinely. Countless times over the past few months, Rice, Hughes, McClellan (not in press conferences at the White House Press Room, either), and the Assistant Press Secretary (his name escapes me right now) go on the three network morning shows and at least one high-profile program on all of the cable news networks and say exactly the same thing. "The Daily Show" (not that it's a source for legitimate news) shows clips from these usual suspects routinely making the rounds throughout the day that has just passed. These reps make sure to get the same talking points in. I'll be the first to admit that the news media has been failing us for quite some time by not questioning either candidate on anything, instead relegating themselves to being podiums to get their propaganda (both right and left, but seemingly more and more right) out to the masses without any analysis or, say, journalistic scrutiny. This has all dominoed since Reagan repealed the Fairness Act requiring all networks to give both sides equal time. That enabled the right-wing radio shows to take over the AM airwaves, which in turn brought us Fox "News", ushering in a new era of "newscasts" driven by partisan politics and a media that has forgotten what investigative reporting is.

By the way, Ridge comes out making bland, non-descript statements saying that they've received some intelligence that there may be planned attacks somewhere in the U.S. more often than you'd like to think. He doesn't always raise the terror level. My uncle actually works in Counter-Terrorism, so it's not like I don't understand the need for secrecy if such cases occur, but many of the instances in which Ridge held a press conference to warn us of these vague threats happened to coincide with a drop in the polls. Your argument that Kerry taking a hit when the public is incited to fear by the current administration just shows how efficiently Rove & Co. manipulates the apparatus.

[Horace]

Fox News just reported that the terror alert has been raised.

[spidle]

To take the two of you down a different road I present a couple of links. The first is classic Rove, less squashing dissent than pure manipulation.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041101/ap_on_el_pr/misleading_voter_calls

Yeah. That's what Kerry is up against. It is what John McCain had to deal with in South Carolina. It is hardly surprising. It is moral mongering and it, rather than mongering of the fear variety, is the difference between the two political camps. This election is largely driven by fear. Both sides are guilty to some extent; the main issues that are driving people to vote are scary ones. Bush thinks that he can lead a better war on terrorism and thus the Cheney "fear of a Kerry presidency." Likewise, the democrats believe that, because of a lack of coalition building, that our army is overextended and the possibile draft arguments followed. Are both sides going over the top? Yes. Probably. However, the Bushies are also following a tried and true formula of moral division. They (the "blues") are the gays, the abortionists, the INFIDELS. We value God, family, and freedom.

Now here is a great little op-ed that... well... read it.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/10/31/walking_the_walk_on_family_values/

So there you go. The red states preach family values while the blue states actually have them. Is this why the moral wedge is so effective in the "red" states? "Massachusetts liberals" have high levels of financial, marital, and educational success when compared to the national average. They also have the reigning world series champions. I guess a lot of citizens of the "red" states have developed an inferiority complex and have thus turned to God, gay-bashing, and flag waving to feel better about themselves.

And the color coded alert system is nothing but a manipulation device. What the hell does it mean? Honestly. It is orange: You will likely witness a terrorist attack however your chances of actually being blown up are small. Red: RUN! I do not need to know about a general, possible, we are covering our asses, chance of a terrorist attack. Give me some specifics if you have them. Better yet, get the specifics, deal with it, and don't aid in the further recession of my stupid hairline.

Your state's congressional districts seem real intuitive. I like your site. Is blogging fun?

[Jeff]

The terror alert has been raised? That's news to me. No one else has reported it... Neither Fox New's website or the the Department of Homeland Security mentions it. Maybe Rove forged a DHS Advisory and only gave it to Fox News as an exclusive. ;)

For the moment, if you're serious, Spidle, I do enjoy blogging and you can see I've been doing it for many years (before it was really called blogging). As I said before, I hesitated putting any political commentary up since the site's mainly for entertaining my extend family, but I have enjoyed the sudden (if not unexplainable) political discourse... so long as it's civil, I'll leave it up.

I'll get back to you when I've had some time read your links.

[Horace]

I was watching Fox News last night (for amusement purposes only) and on the ticker it said "Terror Alert Level Raised". I tivoed that $#!+ to make sure, and sure enough, Fox News put it across the ticker. I wouldn't make it up. I saw it at about 11:45.

[Jeff]

Good mornin' fellas (how's that for regional colloquialism).

Spidle, the Yahoo article doesn't even mention Rove, and clearly indicates it was two-sided deception. It's entirely too vague to draw any such conclusions... oh well.

As for the family values issue: I am, and have been for some time, distressed by the fact that divorce rates (teen pregnancy, abortion, etc) within the church are no different (and sometimes higher) than outside. I entirely understand how many people believe Christians are hypocrites in this regard.

This discourages me because it truly undermines the church's purpose. The sooner we admit that we are a body of imperfect people (no different than anyone else) the sooner the church can overcome that (sometimes deserved) stigma.

On the other hand, I would say that characterizing the Religious Right as hypocrites, phonys, people that suffer from inferiority complex, etc is in itself hypocritical. Likewise, it's hypocritical of the left to tout "tolerance", "inclusion", and "free speech" while trying to silence the voice of Christians (through the so-called separation of church and state, for example).

Say what you will about the economy or the War or Terror, the moral-divide couldn't be more clear: roughly 60% of those attending church at least once per week voted for Bush; 60% of those that don't attend a regular observance voted Kerry.

It's difficult for me to fathom people who see no hypocrisy in leveraging the freedoms afforded by this great country to expunge the very faith that made such freedoms possible.

[Jeff]

The almighty Rove has struck again!

He fed Osama Dem talking points for his video, planted exit polling in favor of Kerry, tricked Dems into focusing efforts on Florida, clearly brainwashed the majority of Americans, scared-up the evangelical vote, instrumented the defeat of Tom Daschle, struck down recognition of gay marriage in all 11 referendums, secured gains in the House and Senate, pressured the networks to call the election for Bush, manipulated Kerry into giving a concession speech, and personally arranged the birth dates (and career paths) of soon-to-be-retiring Supreme Court judges.

Why, I'd dare say he's been downright omnipotent! :P

[Jeff]

Still no confirmation on Fox News unilaterally raising the terror alert.

Maybe Rove operatives hacked the ticker feed?

[spidle]

The problem of tolerance:

How do you tolerate the intolerant? You can't. Never could. War on terror. War on the christian right. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were christians who openly questioned their faith (Jefferson also slept with his slaves). Slavery was also a value that our country was founded on. They thought for themselves. They came to their respective values through study and introspection. Not what Pat Robertson said on the latest episode of the 700 club. Congrats on the Publican victory. I hope they don't get carried away and ruin 40 years of hard work by imposing a flat tax or waging a war on France. That would be silly.

[Horace]

I'm not sure I read your post correctly, but were you lauding the sweeping legislation of bigotry into state constitutions. That's what the Gay Marriage Ban essentially is. I'm pretty sure that if you look at the message of Jesus's teachings, his focus lied mainly on understanding, acceptance, and more than anything, love for your fellow man. My father is a minister with a Masters in Divinity, and he can't believe that his fellow Christians are pushing agendas of such exclusion. One of Jesus's closest friends had been a prostitute. No matter what the hateful figureheads at the forefront of the Christian Right's purport as Christian values, truly "Christ"-ian ideals do not include discrimination, and I'm frankly aghast that these people call themselves Christians. They clearly don't take the time to look at what Christ had to say. The Bible is clearly an imperfect work, inherently taking on the biases of those who wrote the various books (What was the place of woman in the Old Testament?), but the message of Christ's work is clear. And citing Bible verses and saying they're the direct word of God ciphened through his prophets is just ridiculous. Almost any theologian allows for that.