Skip to main content

View Diary: Roosevelt grandson blasts GOP ad (179 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'll play Devil's Advocate (none)
    Won't the Repubs just come back with Bush saying something like:

     

    The Democrat Party is showing ads, using Ronald Reagan in them.

    (Cue crowd: BOO, BOOOOO)

    Yes, Ronald Reagan, a True American, did want to preserve Social Security. But it's a different world today.

    9/11 changed everything.

    President Reagan was optimistic about the great promise of economic reform, and he acted to restore the reward and spirit of enterprise.

    President Reagan understood there is a fundamental duty, for those of us who have been given the honor of serving the American people, to solve problems before they become acute, and not to pass them on to future Presidents and future generations.

    I like the idea of encouraging more people to say, I own my own home, I own my own business, I own and manage my health accounts, and now I own a significant part of my retirement account. Promoting ownership in America makes sense to me to make sure people continue to have a vital stake in the future of our country.

    President Reagan understood what an ownership society was all about.

    In the spirit of President Reagan, we will strengthen and save Social Security for generations to come.

    No?

    •  We can't start second-guessing (none)
      what the GOP's response will be.  The Chimp and company might say everything you've predicted, but the thing to do is then hit them right back with something else.

      Part of our problem is that we've been too quick to go "Oh, better not say that because..."   We've got to start going on the offensive.  Damn the torpedoes!

      La raison avant la passion: Reason before passion. -- Pierre Elliott Trudeau

      by greenknight on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 06:12:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You HAVE to second guess!!! (none)
        I agree, we need to be on the offensive. Just want to make sure it's effective.

        No sense putting out something that doesn't work, no?

        How many times over the campaign did they completely neutralize our offensive:

        • Kerry as Vietnam Vet? BAM -- Swift Boats for Shit.

        • Wrong War Wrong Time? BAM -- you can't be Commander in Chief if you think the war is wrong? What's that say to the troops?

        All I am saying is that Rove and Co. are GOOD. Probably better than us when it comes to marketing their cause.

        I would overanalyze everything the Dems potentially put out, figuring out as many angles as possible that the Repubs may counter with -- you know that's exactly what they do. You don't think THEY second guess before they put out an ad?

        I bet they have a staff of ten or twenty second-guessers.

        Just trying to be helpful...

        •  See your point, but (none)
          surely part of the Kerry campaign's problem was that it wasn't effective enough at smacking BushCo back when the Swifties etc. began their attacks.  Whatever you do the Republicans are going to counter it somehow.  I'm not saying don't anticipate; I'm just saying that it would be a mistake to let that anticipation lead to timidity.

          La raison avant la passion: Reason before passion. -- Pierre Elliott Trudeau

          by greenknight on Thu Jan 13, 2005 at 07:17:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  you can use 9/11 (none)
      for national security, and for war, and for pretty much any foreign policy thing you might want.

      But I don't think the most idiotic moron out there would buy a connection with a 70 yr old, totally domestic program.

      9/11 didn't alter the population demographics, didn't change the tax structure.

      If they try that, they're more desparate then they want to admit.

    •  The Ownership Society (none)
      That term has always struck me as a really stunning euphemism for slavery.

      But, flipness aside, it is another example of framing, in this case framing to discredit and destroy the idea of the "commons," that which is held in common by all for the public good.  If "legitimate" ownership can be limited to "mine" and there's no such thing as "ours," then how can we complain when "our" forests are razed and "our" rivers are polluted and "our" Social Security is funneled into Wall Street pockets?  If people can be convinced that they only have a stake in "what's mine" then the pirates can make off with "what's ours" - no problem.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (53)
  • Republicans (35)
  • Environment (33)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Memorial Day (30)
  • Culture (30)
  • Elections (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Media (24)
  • Spam (21)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Labor (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • GOP (20)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • Law (17)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • Economy (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site