By Scott Withycombe
Contributing Writer
It is amazing how quickly this election year is heating up. Although the presidential election will not take place until Nov. 2, President Bush and Sen. John Kerry are now fighting furiously for the hearts, minds and votes of what appears to be a nation divided 50-50 at the polls.
The attacks on Bush are not new. Democratic partisans and candidates have been blasting him for months now. During the primaries it seemed the men and women seeking the Democratic nomination were more concerned with defining Bush as evil than they were as defining themselves as capable candidates.
Perhaps this is why flip-flop Kerry, Karl Rove’s new favorite liberal-elitist, actually won the nomination rather than a more moderate candidate like John Edwards or Wesley Clark.
Until Kerry emerged as the frontrunner, the Bush-Cheney camp kept a pretty tight lid on their $200 million war-chest and refrained from unleashing their very effective political machine. Now, as Kerry takes both the reins of the Democratic Party and a few more cheap shots at Bush, the Republicans have begun to respond.
The first ads out of the Bush-Cheney headquarters were meant to highlight the president’s leadership during tough times, including the ailing Clinton- economy he inherited and the horrific events of Sept. 11, 2001. Bush’s leadership capabilities are, after all, something that his Democratic assailants abhor and his supporters respect and admire. Pointing to the challenges the president faced as a leader and the successes he achieved should be the purpose of his campaign. In fact, doing this effectively will be the cornerstone of a triumphant Bush campaign.
Bush’s new television ads show images of the aftermath of Sept. 11, specifically photos of Ground Zero and the president addressing crowds in the days that followed. Of course, the use of these photos did not settle well with his opponents (remember, these are the people who a few weeks earlier wanted to run ads comparing the President of the United States to Hitler). There was a lot of shouting by these individuals and their political supporters about how Bush’s ads were not sensitive to those who suffered as a result of the attacks, and a lot of calling upon Bush not to “politicize” Sept. 11.
These concerns are not difficult to understand, but they are not truly motivated by compassionate hearts or desire for sensitivity.
Rather, they are a result of a fear, not only of the president’s heroic leadership during the months following Sept. 11, but also of national security issues that strike at the heart of Democratic campaign strategists. Pollsters and strategists know that time and again voters will turn to the Republican Party on issues relating to national security, not to mention on issues of patriotism. The problem for the liberal opponents of these ads is not that Bush is politicizing Sept. 11, but that he is running his campaign on the platform that resulted in astounding mid-term election victories for the Republican Party in 2002.
Bush is building an image that reminds the American people not only of the dangerous world we live in, but also of his ability to lead and his plan to protect America and its citizens from those who wish to harm them. He is reminding Americans of an event that I wish we were reminded of more often, so that we may never forget the horror of that day, our fallen brothers and sisters or the realities we face in an uncertain world.
He is defining himself in light of his accomplishments and as the antithesis of Kerry, who routinely voted to cut defense spending and programs.
The ads aptly point out Bush’s strengths, his accomplishments and his connection to common American experiences. In this case, Sept. 11 was an experience that defined not only the current history of our nation but the presidency and vision of Bush.
In this respect, the president has every right to use these ads, as these images depict his character, achievements and vision for America.
The attacks of Sept. 11 will continue to shape our future, which is why it is vital the Bush campaign makes sure this message reaches the American voters in the clearest fashion possible. The development of our national security programs and the success of the War on Terror depend upon the outcome of the November election.
Similarly, the Democratic Party has every right to attempt to refute Bush’s claims and argue otherwise. It does not seem that it is doing this effectively and thus, as a last resort, has turned to attack ads that point out what voters see as the party’s weaknesses. This achieves nothing. No one is protected, there is little political gain and valid issues are not addressed.
What should be more disconcerting to American citizens than these ads is not only the lack of actual dialogue on real issues but the early start of attack ads and negative campaigning. This problem is not particular to one party or candidate. Rather, it is a problem that plagues American elections and takes the place of the more important messages candidates should be addressing in this very important election cycle.
Campaign tactics meant to defame the opponent rather than portray a candidate as having certain qualities or characteristics that make him or her eligible for election, simply disgruntle voters without playing a role in creating intelligent dialogue on issues of concern. The fact that the attack ads have started in early March is somewhat disturbing, as they lead me to believe that the upcoming election is going to be a long, nasty period of attack and counter attack rather than a time of reflection and honest debate.
It is time to go back to the basics. It is time for the Democrats to get off the President’s back simply because they do not like an ad that effectively portrays the President having qualities their candidate does not. It is time to put the issues before the voters in an honest and intelligent fashion, to let them make decisions based not on hate and anger tactics, but on facts, principles and vision.
I believe the Bush ads are fairly basic, in that they do just that. They successfully point to the President’s experiences, accomplishments and vision for America. If the Bush-Cheney campaign sticks to this line of advertising, they will march to victory in November.
Submitted March 25, 2004