GOP says it will "bury" name-calling candidate, Paul Hackett, Iraq war veteran

E-Z-B

E-Z-B

CAGiversary!
GOP Says It Will 'Bury' Name-Calling Candidate

By Dan Balz

Sunday, July 31, 2005; Page A05

Paul Hackett doesn't fit conventional political profiles. He is a Marine Reservist and an Iraq war veteran who opposed the war before the U.S. invasion and remains a harsh critic of President Bush's policy there. He is also a Democrat battling to win a special House election in Ohio in a district that has been in Republican hands for more than three decades.

On Tuesday, voters in Ohio's 2nd Congressional District will elect a successor to former representative Rob Portman, who quit Congress to become U.S. trade representative. Hackett hopes to beat the long odds by defeating Republican nominee Jean Schmidt, a former state representative, by stressing his military service and independence.

PH2005073001093.jpg

Paul Hackett -- an Ohio Democrat, a Marine Reservist and an Iraq war veteran -- has attracted GOP ire by criticizing the president. (By Tom Uhlman -- Associated Press)

Hackett told USA Today that Bush's taunting line, "Bring 'em on!" was "the most incredibly stupid comment I've ever heard a president of the United States make." He also told the newspaper that, while he was willing to put his life on the line for the president, "I've said that I don't like the son-of-a- that lives in the White House."

Both the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee have bought TV time for commercials over the weekend. "He called the commander in chief a son-of-a-," said NRCC spokesman Carl Forti. "We decided to bury him."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/30/AR2005073001092.html

"Bury him"? That probably means they'll deploy him to Fallujah. As always, the GOP picks which troops they want to support.

Paul Hackett is a Marine that returned from Iraq earlier this year and he is running in Ohio's special election (to be held next week on August 2nd) as a Democrat. The contest has really heated up and the Republicans are running scared, which is why they have decided to dump $285,000 in ads this weekend in Ohio (more here ). They are involved in all sorts of dirty tricks, including attempts to Swift Boat his military career .
 
How simple would it be to put up an ad on a dating, gay, fetish or BDSM site with a spoofed email address? Pretty damn simple.

When I was living with a roommate he was a UNIX admin that did HP-UX installs and tons of other stuff (Solaris, Novell, MS enterprise solutions.) for a living. We had 5 machines or more including an FTP and email server. I could send out emails that said [email protected] or [email protected]. It's not tough to do.

You're going to have to come up with stuff that's a bit more damning than "OMG his email makes him a perv!". This stuff can be faked by script kiddies for Pete's sake.
 
From blog mentioned above
People googled this AOL account and apparently found that the same email account being used for the Schmidt campaign was also being used for a profile on a BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadomasochism -- think of the pawn shop in Pulp Fiction) website used by freaks to meet other freaks.
Click to expand...
:shock: :shock: :shock:
I'm not sure I needed hear that. I'm glad that blog didn't have a picture of that guy. I don't want to imagine that.

I wouldn't mind seeing that veteran win that spot in the House. I haven't been that thrilled with the Republicans lately.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']How simple would it be to put up an ad on a dating, gay, fetish or BDSM site with a spoofed email address? Pretty damn simple.

When I was living with a roommate he was a UNIX admin that did HP-UX installs and tons of other stuff (Solaris, Novell, MS enterprise solutions.) for a living. We had 5 machines or more including an FTP and email server. I could send out emails that said [email protected] or [email protected]. It's not tough to do.

You're going to have to come up with stuff that's a bit more damning than "OMG his email makes him a perv!". This stuff can be faked by script kiddies for Pete's sake.[/QUOTE]

Have they denied it yet?
 
http://www.growohio.org/story/2005/7/13/12441/5526

http://www.swingstateproject.com/2005/07/oh-02_jean_schm_4.php#more

http://www.dispatch.com/topstory.php?story=dispatch/2005/07/08/20050708-B1-00.html

Regrettably, this part of the country is notoriously conservative; the wealthy part of the area, Indian Hill, is the #2 largest contributor to the Bush-Cheney relection campaign (measured by zip code, and just shy of Beverly Hills, CA). I'm afraid that the few people expected in this special election (10% of all registered voters are expected) will have a knee-jerk reaction to seeing an "R" in parentheses (unless that 10% are the only educated voters who know that, by electing Schmidt, they are further contributing to the downfall of the Republican party, given the scandals in the area (OH gov Bob Taft, Sec'y of State Kenneth Blackwell, coingate guy Thomas Noe, Jean Schmidt herself, and real closeby, all the KY GOP'ers in trouble for the "loyalty for good jobs" scandal, starting at the top with Governor Ernie Fletcher).

The argument here shouldn't be "Does Joe Braun get off to medical exams?" Save that for another day, given its significant juxtaposition to Schmidt's sexual traditionalism. The question should be, "why in the world should we elect a candidate who is knee deep in GOP corruption before taking any major office?"
 
the results are in, Hackett lost. That outta teach rest of the veterans a lesson. As Pittsburgafterdark would say, they are not fit for any politcal offices since they must've commited some form of treason like John Kerry and John McCain. The traitor did garner a nice 48% of the vote however.
 
[quote name='mingglf']the results are in, Hackett lost. That outta teach rest of the veterans a lesson. As Pittsburgafterdark would say, they are not fit for any politcal offices since they must've commited some form of treason like John Kerry and John McCain. The traitor did garner a nice 48% of the vote however.[/QUOTE]

Whens the last time we hung a traitor? We need to get back to that. I want a good hangin damnit!
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']He lost because he was John Kerry only 20 years younger.[/QUOTE]

Being john kerry is a compliment if you're a congressman, not like anyone is threatening to take his job.
 
What non-Republican is ever going to hold a House seat in Ohio's second district? Hackett came pretty damn close yesterday, in an area that's HEAVILY Republican. The Republican party is definitely showing more than a little weakness right now.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']What non-Democrat is ever going to hold a Senate seat from Massachusetts?????[/QUOTE]

I dunno, it's about as likely as a non democrat being governor....... oh wait.
 
[quote name='Drocket']What non-Republican is ever going to hold a House seat in Ohio's second district? Hackett came pretty damn close yesterday, in an area that's HEAVILY Republican. The Republican party is definitely showing more than a little weakness right now.[/QUOTE]

So, you've been here before? My vote's irrelevant, since I technically live in Kentucky at the moment, but a 1 mile walk northward would put me in the 'nati. Drocket speaks nothing but the truth.

The totally ironic part about Cincinnati? I can't recall the last time their mayor was Republican (since perhaps 1980 or so). They've all be Democrats, and, with the exception of Roxanne Qualls (early-mid 1990s), they've been the kinds of Democrats you're ashamed of. Perhaps it's indicative of how conservative the area is when your Democrats have no values that would fall under the Democratic banner.
 
His ad was humourous. The one where he has a clip of GWB talking about the military, and then he says "I agree with this, that's why I joined. Our brave fighting men and women....."
Basically, "vote for me because I was in the military!" Just like Kerry. No "here's what I believe", "here's what I'm going to do", etc. It's funny/sad, when they include clips of the *other party's* most visible figure, in a positive way, in a campaign commercial. Funny and, of course, misleading.
Did he actually release any ads featuring real reasons to vote for him, and perhaps even sharing some of his views?
 
No, the press isn't biased. They have no leanings.....

Democrats celebrate narrow U.S. House loss in Ohio
1 hour, 28 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats on Wednesday celebrated a closer-than-expected loss in a special House of Representatives race in Ohio and called it a warning sign for Republicans entering the 2006 congressional elections.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Republicans cautioned against reading too much into Jean Schmidt's narrow win over Democrat and Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, saying low turnout and local issues made the race unique and kept it from being a bellwether on Republican leadership or President Bush.

Schmidt, a former state representative, beat Hackett by 3,500 votes out of more than 112,000 cast in the conservative and heavily Republican district, where no Democrat in decades had won or even managed 40 percent of the vote.

Hackett's criticism of the Iraq war and tough attacks on Bush energized the contest to replace Rob Portman, who resigned to become U.S. trade representative after regularly rolling up 70 percent of the vote in the district.

"Every Republican in Congress should consider himself put on notice," Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said of Tuesday's results.

Hackett tried to tie Schmidt to ethics allegations against unpopular Ohio Republican Gov. Bob Taft, and Democrats hope to make ethics scandals surrounding Texas Rep. Tom DeLay and other Republicans a centerpiece of their 2006 campaign.

Democrats said the close race was a sign that scandals and dissatisfaction with the country's direction were taking a toll on Republicans.

"Americans will no longer tolerate the Republicans' continued abuses of power and catering to corporate special interests," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said.

But Republicans said the low turnout, well below the nearly 300,000 votes cast in 2004, and the races run by the two candidates skewed the results.

"Special elections are unique, they don't always reflect the district's usual results," said Carl Forti, a spokesman for the House Republican campaign committee. He said Hackett's two television advertisements featured Bush and made no mention of the fact Hackett was a Democrat.

"Hackett ran as a Republican, he never called himself a Democrat," Forti said, adding Democrats had "a long way to go" to make ethics a national issue for 2006.

Amy Walter, a House analyst for the nonpartisan Cook Report, said Hackett ran a much better campaign than Schmidt and was a stronger candidate. The result, however, should give Democrats hope and make some Republicans nervous, she said.

"Republicans in Ohio should definitely be very concerned about this," Walter said, noting several incumbent Ohio Republicans, most notably Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record), face potentially tough re-election races next year.

Hackett said the result should encourage Democrats nationwide.

"We have the power to win back Congress. Yesterday proved it," he said in an e-mail fund-raising pitch for Democracy for America, the group started by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean.

"Yesterday, one of the reddest regions in America turned a whole lot bluer," Hackett said.
Link

The guy ran as Bush's best buddy on TV ads and didn't even identify himself as a Democrat. I love the headline.... Democrats Celebrate..... LOSS.

They're very good at celebrating defeats. Its the one constant the Democratic party has, defeat.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.hackettforcongress.com/

Yeah, he's such a jackass for not elucidating his positions in 30-second snippets like all the other politicians.

please.[/QUOTE]

So you don't have a problem with the ad? If he didn't want to use '30-second snippets' to elucidate his positions, he shouldn't have used them to misrepresent himself. The ad I heard would be more fitting if he was GWB's VP, and again, told absolutely *nothing* about why he should be voted for.

PAD: It's amazing, isn't it--the liberal media, and many Democrats, are so negative and pessimistic in many things; then something like this happens, and they're "celebrating the loss" and it's somehow as good as a victory.
"But Republicans [said] low turnout and local issues made the race unique and kept it from being a bellwether on Republican leadership or President Bush."

Were Republicans calling this election a "bellwether"? I don't recall any Republicans calling it a bellwether for support of GWB, on the contrary, that term was bandied about by the democrats.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']No, the press isn't biased. They have no leanings.....

Democrats celebrate narrow U.S. House loss in Ohio
1 hour, 28 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats on Wednesday celebrated a closer-than-expected loss in a special House of Representatives race in Ohio and called it a warning sign for Republicans entering the 2006 congressional elections.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Republicans cautioned against reading too much into Jean Schmidt's narrow win over Democrat and Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, saying low turnout and local issues made the race unique and kept it from being a bellwether on Republican leadership or President Bush.

Schmidt, a former state representative, beat Hackett by 3,500 votes out of more than 112,000 cast in the conservative and heavily Republican district, where no Democrat in decades had won or even managed 40 percent of the vote.

Hackett's criticism of the Iraq war and tough attacks on Bush energized the contest to replace Rob Portman, who resigned to become U.S. trade representative after regularly rolling up 70 percent of the vote in the district.

"Every Republican in Congress should consider himself put on notice," Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said of Tuesday's results.

Hackett tried to tie Schmidt to ethics allegations against unpopular Ohio Republican Gov. Bob Taft, and Democrats hope to make ethics scandals surrounding Texas Rep. Tom DeLay and other Republicans a centerpiece of their 2006 campaign.

Democrats said the close race was a sign that scandals and dissatisfaction with the country's direction were taking a toll on Republicans.

"Americans will no longer tolerate the Republicans' continued abuses of power and catering to corporate special interests," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said.

But Republicans said the low turnout, well below the nearly 300,000 votes cast in 2004, and the races run by the two candidates skewed the results.

"Special elections are unique, they don't always reflect the district's usual results," said Carl Forti, a spokesman for the House Republican campaign committee. He said Hackett's two television advertisements featured Bush and made no mention of the fact Hackett was a Democrat.

"Hackett ran as a Republican, he never called himself a Democrat," Forti said, adding Democrats had "a long way to go" to make ethics a national issue for 2006.

Amy Walter, a House analyst for the nonpartisan Cook Report, said Hackett ran a much better campaign than Schmidt and was a stronger candidate. The result, however, should give Democrats hope and make some Republicans nervous, she said.

"Republicans in Ohio should definitely be very concerned about this," Walter said, noting several incumbent Ohio Republicans, most notably Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record), face potentially tough re-election races next year.

Hackett said the result should encourage Democrats nationwide.

"We have the power to win back Congress. Yesterday proved it," he said in an e-mail fund-raising pitch for Democracy for America, the group started by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean.

"Yesterday, one of the reddest regions in America turned a whole lot bluer," Hackett said.
Link

The guy ran as Bush's best buddy on TV ads and didn't even identify himself as a Democrat. I love the headline.... Democrats Celebrate..... LOSS.

They're very good at celebrating defeats. Its the one constant the Democratic party has, defeat.[/QUOTE]

Losing can still be a victory. Imagine if pre presidential bush ran against ted kennedy or kerry and lost by 4%, that would be extremely troubling for the democratic party. Or imagine if kerry ran for governor of texas and lost by 4%.
 
Did you all happen to miss the news discussion that this area of the country - and district 2 in particular - self identify as 75% Republican, under 25% Democrat?

Did you miss the news that basically pointed a finger at reality and said, "if you live here, Paul Hackett won't win"?

Should we celebrate a loss? Of course not, but please don't act surprised and bewildered if the DNC or the RNC try to spin something into their favor. Ken Mehlman and Howard Dean alike would try to turn a murdered corpse found in their respective offices into a political positive. Jesus, kids...it's politics!

As far as the ads are concerned, they certainly resonated with the kind of voter who has come to grips with the reality that Bush's policies are misleading and bumbling at best, and misleading, treasonous, and murderous at worst. That demographic would be the "remorseful Bush voter." If you consider the increasing trend in people who support leaving Iraq, and you consider that a Democratic candidate received 48.3% (and I'll include the decimal point as part of my personal spin campaign) in a part of the country where fewer than 1 in every 4 people is a Democrat, then you're recognizing that this kind of voter cohort is growing daily.

Please keep that in mind if you have any intent on winning in 2008.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top