The issue is strength. The contest is joined. One guy will walk away as the winner with the other guy on his hands and knees trying to figure out what just happened to him and what is this warm, thick, red stuff running out of his nose? Republicans are ready for the fight. Democrats are checking their pocket protectors.
More after the break...
In the end, as voters, we aren't as concerned with who is smarter. What matters to us is, "Who is stronger?" So far, the Republicans have sharper teeth. The Democrats have really cool calculators. By the second week of November, there may well be a lot of nifty Democrat gizmos smashed in the mud.
Republicans claim that Democrats are, "...weak on security, weak on defense." The primary issue is not Homeland Security. It is not defending our borders or anybody else's. The issue is "Weak". As a strategy, "The Democrats are weak" works because the Democrats appear to be too weak to fight back.
In recent years the Republicans have proven to be be weak on morals, weak on spending, weak on protecting good jobs for Americans, weak on emergency services, weak on war planning, weak on military execution, weak on foreign relations, weak on education, weak on energy policy and there is more. However, they have shown that they have a certain tensile strength in their party backbone.
Case in point, the ad running in Tennessee in support of candidate Corker implies a romantic connection between a blond floosy and Harold Ford, his opponent. In the racially sensitive South, in the midst of a racially sensitive contest, the Republicans release a racially charged advertisement as a smear of the Democrat. The issue now becomes, are the Democrats strong enough to stand up and call the Republicans out?
Mr. Corker stated on CNN yesterday (Video WMP, Video MOV) that his campaign, despite all of his best efforts, has no control over the airing of this ad. He states that the ad does not reflect his or his campaign's values or desires. Yet he is being represented by the ad. Something called an "independent expenditure" firewalls the ad from his influence.
What Mr. Corker did not say is who is responsible for the ad. So, let's play Mr. Wizard and step into the time machine, shall we? Maybe we can find some clues by identifying similar situations with similar, if not the very same, players. The year is 2004 and the presidential election is on the horizon. John Kerry is attacked repeatedly for issues revolving around his military service in Viet Nam. The attacks come primarily from the now infamous 527 groups, soft-money depositories for political activists. "Swiftboaters" were a brand of 527 that attacked John Kerry on Mr. Bush's behalf, but, according to Mr. Bush, not at this bequest.
Mr. Bush's campaign was represented by powers not under his control, or so we were asked to believe. Mr. Corker is represented by powers that directly oppose his values and intentions, or so we are asked to believe. The Republican Party appears to have built and is perfecting a system whereby they can produce and air ads of dubious intent and content. The entities that pay for the production and airtime are arms length from the official campaigns. In 2004 they were 527's. This year they are "independent expenditures."
At the end of the day, the Republicans are airing smear materials. Those ultimately responsible are cloaked in leglise razmataz. The Republican attitude toward the Democrats is, "Yeah, what are you going to do about it?" The Democrats look at the ground, mumble about things being unfair and adjust their pocket protectors. They may go so far as to wipe their glasses.
The crowd follows the kid that made off with the other guy's lunch money. Either the Democrats take their lunch money back or they can watch another batch of realistic election hopes go down the drain, much like a prized gameboy swirling down the locker room toilet.
Until the Democrats stand up and tell Mr. Corker, as Kerry could have told Bush in 04', "You are an ineffectual puppet. We have enough `yes men' in Washington. You can not even represent yourself. You do not deserve to represent Americans as an agent of the government. You seem particularly qualified to work in the lobbying field as you appear to not comprehend the boundaries between what is right and what is wrong. You are showing America the lack of discipline and character in your campaign. This is an accurate reflection of how poorly you would perform in office if you won this election. Thank you for showing us all your true colors. They are not red, white and blue. They are all sorts of yellow."
Either the Democrats throw down and claim their lunch money or they can console each other on the curb in the rain with the Republicans going back to work dominating the Congress of the United States on November 8.