TPMcafe: Did you see the VoteVets ads? OMFG!

[TayTay]

That is one of the most effective ads I have ever seen. I had never heard of VoteVets until I got an a-mail appeal for funds for 4 Dem candidates from John Kerry yesterday. At the bottom of the e-mail was this:

P.S. There's one other critical way you can help veterans running for office. Support VoteVets.org, a political action committee formed by Iraq veterans to support Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who are running for Congress. VoteVets.org is providing campaigns with training and support and running TV ads critical of candidates who support the failed "stay the course" policy of the Bush administration.

So, in addition to supporting our four candidates, I hope you'll consider standing with VoteVets.org.

Ahm, yeah, the check is in the mail. That is an incredible ad, we have to use it for others.

Go see this ad: http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/13/va_sen_blistering_new_ad_hammers_allen_over_body_armor_vote

[Avalux]

1. Holy Crap! Awesome Ad!!!

It can't get much plainer than that, can it? :applause: :woohoo:

[Aviation Pro]

13. Plain speaking, yet....

...profound at the same time.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spiffarino]

76. Ah...Tenacious D

Good times.

[ocd liberal]

86. that rocks the fucking house and kicks some ass

be still, my heart

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

117. I love hearing Jack Black rock out! Great video, too.

MKJ

[rrasile]

135. Great Ad But..

Americans are so screwed up that I'm sure that there are Republicans fighting in Iraq that won't believe that ad. It takes the experience of years before these people realize how wrong they were.
With the speed of todays world terrible things can happen over night and if we don't find a way to enlighten these hard headed people we are never going to be free from terrorism.

[kelliebrat]

2. HOLY CRAP!

I'd say thats pretty damn effective!:applause:

[whistle]

3. How many other reThuglicans voted the same way on that issue

[poverlay]

4. Finally. A simple truth presented so that even morans can understand.

This is how it should be done. More! More! More!

[Demit]

5. Wow. I hope everyone is Virginia sees that ad. Makes one point and makes

it powerfully. Great ad.

[welshTerrier2]

6. check out this review of the VoteVets ad ...

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200637#2975

[Tinksrival]

7. Board of advisors include:

Wes Clark, Bob Kerrey, and Paul Hackett. :)

[Auntie Bush]

47. Good, I just knew Wes must have something to do with that video.

Wes Clark, Bob Kerrey and Paul Hackett...What a team!

[Mark E. Smith]

8. Stunning.

Just stunning.

[ProSense]

9. One of the group's

leaders endorsed Kerry's withdrawal plan:

When Will the Bush Administration Get It?
By Jeremy D. Broussard

[Pierre.Suave]

10. Great Ad

but I have an issue with one of the comments on that site.

The truth is NOT an attack. Dems should NOT run attack ads, they should run TRUTH ads. The truth will hurt more than any attack ad ever would.

[cboy4]

16. This is a truth ad. We need more ads like this, because allowing ourselves

to be "Swift-boated" is a political death sentence.

[Pierre.Suave]

39. I agree,

this is a truth ad, we need more like it.

[tomreedtoon]

20. Why are you afraid to attack Republicans?

Jasonc said:

The truth is NOT an attack. Dems should NOT run attack ads, they should run TRUTH ads.

Why shouldn't Democrats run attack ads? Were you one of those guys raised on "pro-social" kid shows with the message that you should never, ever fight?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with attacking someone who has done you and your nation harm. That means the Republicans, and DINO's as well.

And (if I may digress) it also means attacking the terrorists. There is a book by Peter Beinart, "The Good Fight," which says that only liberals can effectively fight a "war on terror" against Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists.

Republicans have claimed that Democrats are on the side of the terrorists. In fact, we are more against their religious and social totalitarianism than Republicans. We do not support a woman getting a face full of acid for not wearing a burkah, any more than we believe in bombing abortion clinics. They're the same kind of intolerance. But exactly who on the Democratic side has made that statement? Nobody...because Democrats are afraid to "attack."

A Democrat with courage (I haven't seen any Presidential candidates yet who have it) could win a war on terror without our troops being slaughtered, without eliminating our freedoms at home. The sad part is that most Democrats are afraid to "attack."

That's why I will continue running Bartcop's picture of the Pink Tutu Democrats. I hope that someday it will build a fire under some Democratic candidate, somewhere, so they will no longer be afraid to "attack."


"Attack our Daddy Dubya? We'd rather tour-jetee!"

[Pierre.Suave]

41. I am not afraid

Attacking turns people (voters) off. The truth however, such as this particular ad, is a fantastic way to get the message across.

the truth hurts more than any attack ever could, so use it.

[muntrv]

92. Attack ads drove people to vote for the Republicans in 2004. While we

may hate attack ads, they work.

[BootinUp]

66. who are you going to accuse of bombing abortion clinics? n/t

[leesa]

77. Terrorists.

[BootinUp]

80. ok,

so then the suggestion is that republicans are terrorists?

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

110. In line with your post: People who push homophobic, sexist photos

are terrorists.

[BootinUp]

112. Its rhetoric (to most people)

Whether you can make case or not is not the be all end all of politics. Its whether people will swallow it. THe case about using terror politically has been made ad naseum, do you really think its necessary to raise the pitch by calling them terrorists?

I refer you to this example (even though it applies to the other sides rhetoric.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2130403

[donco6]

119. WHAT??

"Elementary and secondary school teachers who abuse their students for their own pleasure, which I believe is at least fifty percent of all American teachers, are terrorists to me. They have no love for learning, they just look for a young face into which they can smash their boots and into which they can scream their soul-destroying hatred."

50% of teachers abuse their students? WTF?

[Name removed]

120. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

125. I AM a school teacher.

I hope you're not too creeped out and nauseated. Other than that, I'm not even sure how to respond.

[BootinUp]

132. I guess I didn't even read that far.

geez.

[donco6]

134. The guy obviously had . . . issues.

I've been on this board for years and have rarely seen a statement matching that one in absurdity.

[Tigress DEM]

78. SPEAKING THE TRUTH TO POWER IS NOT AN ATTACK.

YOU SAID:

Republicans have claimed that Democrats are on the side of the terrorists. In fact, we are more against their religious and social totalitarianism than Republicans. We do not support a woman getting a face full of acid for not wearing a burkah, any more than we believe in bombing abortion clinics. They're the same kind of intolerance. But exactly who on the Democratic side has made that statement? Nobody...because Democrats are afraid to "attack."

IF SOMEONE SAYS:

DEMOCRATS
are more against their (the terrorist's) religious and social totalitarianism than Republicans. We do not support a woman getting a face full of acid for not wearing a burkah, any more than we believe in bombing abortion clinics. They're the same kind of intolerance.

THAT ISN'T AN ATTACK.

TELLING THE TRUTH IS POWERFUL. THE REPUBS ARE AFRAID OF THE TRUTH. EVERY BIT OF TRUTH THAT GETS OUT AND IS PERCEIVED AS "AGIN" THEIR "TALKIN POINTS" MAY BE PERCEIVED AS AN ATTACK, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO BECOME ANIMALS FROTHING AT OUR MOUTHS TO DEFEAT THEM.

IN FACT IT'S MORE POWERFUL IF WE SIMPLY SPEAK OUR TRUTH PLAINLY, BECAUSE THEN THEY LOSE CONTROL AND THE PUBLIC SEES "INSANE LIAR" OR "CALM AND RATIONAL PERSON SPEAKING THE TRUTH" ---- WHO GETS THE VOTE THEN?

The problem with the rethuglican way is that it grows old after a time and the people keep hearing "wolf", "wolf" and it turns out to be a false alarm and eventually they stop listening.

The problem with the DEM way of dealing with it honestly and without attacking is that it SEEMS to not be effective because people will be fooled for a time.

I AGREE THAT WE CAN BE MORE HONEST AND EVEN MORE FORCEFUL, BUT IF ANY RETHUG CALLS TELLING THE TRUTH "AN ATTACK" THEN MY RESPONSE IS, "IT'S ONLY AN ATTACK IF YOU ARE SELLING THE LIES."

[tomreedtoon]

106. In other words, you're talking religion, not practical politics.

I'm sure you want to go to heaven, and you believe that the only way you can do that is to tell the absolute truth, even if it doesn't have any real world effects and people continue to suffer.

I personally believe that exaggeration, emphasis on irrelevant facts (did this Republican really rape his daughter? What are the real facts?) and other things are valuable, and if it stops Bush or his successor from killing more black people, it is a holy cause.

We were talking two different things. I was talking about winning an election for a good cause, and you are talkinga about moral superiority that will keep your soul pure. You may or may not be formally religious, but in this matter, you are talking about a religious matter - one of faith - which cannot be proven in the real world.

[ProSense]

111. No you are talking about lying

for "a good cause." Very Republican to believe lying, being sleazy and breaking the law are justified means to achieve their "good cause."

It's not about moral superiority, it's about having morals period. You want Democrats to become like the immoral Republican bastards "for a good cause."

[tomreedtoon]

121. Again, you're talking "morals," not "effectiveness."

This is one of the major reasons why Democrats have consistently lost to Republicans. Because they believe their ideals to be a "religion," rather than a philosophy.

Too many people decided, "We won't call Bush on his drug or alcohol use, his AWOL status, or his incompetent business career. That would be unfair to him. We'll simply claim our ideas are a little better than his, and our moral superiority will naturally win out over his moral inferiority."

And in came the Swift Boats, all the photos of Dukakis in a tank, the endless Clinton blowjob jokes, Limbaugh's lies. (Don't try to tell me that Limbaugh's lies were independently whipped up. If you truly believe this, I have some lovely land I can sell you in Florida, which just needs a little draining.)

The result of this morality? The debacles of September 11, Katrina, No Child Left With A Behind, and the American dead in the Iraq War about to surpass the number of the World Trade Center victims.

Democrats have kept their moral superiority. OF course, to do so, they aided and abetted Bush in all those deaths. Perhaps it's one of those Puritan/evangelical/Taliban kinds of moral superiority; we don't care if the child dies, because to have saved him from death would have entailed "lying," and that's wrong, m-kay?

[Greeby]

91. Methinks that picture needs to be edited

Now that Loserman has gone full-bore Repuke

[WildEyedLiberal]

100. And Kerry HAS BEEN ATTACKING REPUKES for quite some time now

That picture is disgusting, sexist, and homophobic, and I find it highly ironic that the poster would attack Democrats while ranting about attacking Republicans.

:puke:

[tomreedtoon]

107. Today's lesson: DINO: Democrat In Name Only.

Kerry is on that poster because he refused to fight against the corruption that lost his election, and he hasn't done anything aside from plead for more money so he can lose for the Democrats again.

At least Gore seems to have learned something, and has applied himself to practical causes. That's why he's not on the poster...I think...you'll have to go to http://www.bartcop.com and ask Bart about removing Lieberman. Possible replacement: Hillary Clinton.

And the homophobe charge is in your own head. The Pink Tutu Democrats are people who dance to Bush's tune, don't argue with him, and offer token or NO resistance to what he's done. And that fits Kerry to a T. Or, rather, a tutu.

[ProSense]

109. There may be something to the "homophobe charge"

You are one of those people who just make shit up in your head to keep complaining about Democrats. Using Gore to attack other, more liberal, Democrats is only done by sleazy Republicans like Rove or Democratic Party detractors who constantly harp on BS because they have no clue!

Get a clue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2824772&mesg_id=2824772

[TayTay]

115. Nice to see you doing everything possible to help Dems lose

by re-enforcing stereotypes about how Dems don't fight back and don't have spines.

Welcome to the ignore file. Have fun there! I have about 3 people in the ignore file right now. They are the ones that are not worth fighting with, talking with or interacting with in any way. They are simply not worth my time or effort to talk to or interact with in any way.

People whose sole purpose is to suck the life and hope out of others are generally worthy of only being ignored. And so it is.

[tomreedtoon]

122. Well, farewell, DINO. Enjoy Kerry's next loss.

There are none so blind as those who have no eyes. Or people who believe that just because a politician has a D behind his name, that he actually supports progressive causes or wants to win.

For the record, I am convinced that Kerry has never supported the causes he claims to support. If he did, if he had genuine passion about ending the war, restoring the environment, or any of the rest, he would have been more vocal and accusatory.

On the other hand, Albert Gore has learned something in the six years since his loss. He may never be President, unless the party really wants him back and convinces him to run. But he's the only one of the "big three" that has looked inside his soul and come to some solid conclusions.

There are other good Democrats running out there, but so far they haven't pushed ahead of the Three, and a big part of this primary business is passion. They're running out of time for 2008, unless they start making their moves and staking their positions soon.

[WildEyedLiberal]

101. Bartcop is an idiot and that picture is pure garbage

Funny you should attack Democrats while claiming to attack Republicans. Disgusting Rovian tactic, that is.

[Richard Steele]

32. When it comes to LIARS, we don't need to "give them hell".

We need simply give them the TRUTH, and it
FEELS like hell to them.

The Repubs are as comfortable with the TRUTH
as vampires are with garlic enemas.

[Pierre.Suave]

42. Agreed

the truth will set us free.

[aquart]

85. Excellent meme: Truth ads.

Republicans run attack ads. Democrats run truth ads.

[TayTay]

11. I understand that Gen. Clark and Paul Hackett are on the advisory board

of VoteVets. Nice, nice work guys!

Wow!

I am forwarding that to everyone I know. It says it all.

:applause: :spray:

[Texas_Kat]

27. Yes, and General Clark was key to getting Hackett involved

He's everywhere supporting the Democratic cause.

[TayTay]

33. Excellent. I am happy to see this

We need all the Dems on board for this. I know there are several supporters of Sen. Kerry who are involved in The Patriot Project, which defends Veterans against the attacks of the ChickenHawk brigades. http://www.patriotproject.com/mission/

It is so wonderful to have Kerry, Clark and so many other Vets fighting for our troops and for their needs both during and after the their time at war. Bravo!

[Ganja Ninja]

12. Take that Senator Macaca!

Let the whining begin.

[Auntie Bush]

50. LOL

[lumberjack_jeff]

14. Perfect.

[Mister K]

15. Link to how everyone voted on this in the Senate

Pretty much split on party lines. This is the vote to table the issue.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00116#position

[LA lady]

30. hmmmm

This could be used against a lot of people. Might not be so great.

[ProSense]

34. Yes, every Republican, Allen is the poster boy. Perfect ad! n/t

[Richard Steele]

36. You have a very ODD idea of "not so great" ...at least for a 'DEMOCRAT'.

Only one (D) was against this: Miller(GA)

So exactly WHO are the "a lot of people" you are worried
that this could be used against, HMMMMM?

Which REPUBS are you so worried that this TRUTH will hurt?
ALL of them in general, or do you have particular favorites?

[LA lady]

40. Get a grip

What I read on Fact Check implied other Democrats were against this.

http://www.factcheck.org/article155.html

Did Kerry Vote "No" on Body Armor for Troops?
Yes, along with $87 billion worth of other things. But Bush didn't send enough in the first place.

"No" on Body Armor?

Nevertheless, the bill Kerry opposed did contain $300 million requested by the Pentagon to buy best-grade body armor for all troops in Iraq, and also contained additional combat pay and health benefits for reservists called to active duty.

[krispos42]

52. Now comes the logic-chopping

And it is soemthing we should definately be aware of. Those huge budget bills contain a LOT of stuff, and cherrypicking will be done on both sides.

What we need to hammer home is that the REPUBLICANS have had control of the entire budgeting process, from inception to reconsilliation. If there was a poison-pill or three in those budget bills, it's because the GOP put them there, not the Dems. We have to make the voters aware of that.

For example, a TV ad that goes like this:

"Republicans are accusing me of voting against funding for the most modern body armor available for out troops. Well, that's not quite correct. The bill that the Republicans created, that both the House and the Senate voted on, and President Bush signed, DID contain money for the body armor, but it did it without pork. What I voted against was passing a bill that heaped tax-credits onto rich corporations. The body armor section was a small part of a corporate givaway bill that the Republicans wanted to pass for their big-business masters. I voted 'no' because it shouldn't cost the American taxpayer $10 in corporate welfare to get $1 of Kevlar on our fighting men and women overseas. I'm Joe Schmoe, and I approved this message."

For example. I don't know the specifics about the various spending bills in the last 5 years, but you get the idea.

[Tigress DEM]

81. Your post gives me an idea.. "Citizen ads...." cool concept.

Take away the politician from the mix....

"DEMOCRATS are being accused of voting against funding for the most modern body armor available for our troops.

If you look at the bill and see the breakdown of what was ACTUALLY being voted against, you begin to understand the term "poison pill" in the legislative sense.

DEMOCRATS were ready to approve the bill that the Republicans created, that both the House and the Senate voted on, and President Bush signed, DID contain money for the body armor, before the "poison pork" was added.

DEMOCRATS voted against passing a bill that heaps tax-credits onto rich corporations.

It shouldn't cost the American taxpayer $10 in corporate welfare to get $1 of Kevlar on our fighting men and women overseas.

DEMOCRATS are standing up for fiscal responsibility and AGAINST corporate givaway bills designed to appease Republicans big-business masters.

I'm Joe Schmoe, just another American like you, and I approved this message."

[Virginian]

103. and I approved this message."

Only the candidates have to say they put their stamp of approval on a message, but I like the idea of average American, not running for anything, doing an ad. Problem is, ads cost money to run. Average American can't afford to air a message like that. He would have to take up a collection. Before you know it, he would have to file as a 527 org or a political action committee.

[krispos42]

113. Ah, excellent

"Everybody wants our troops to have the best equipment. The Republican majority in the House and Senate decided to include in this budget bill tons of pork spending, simply because they have the power and are beholden to big corporations for campaign donations. Democrats don't think it should cost taxpayers like me $10 in welfare, tax breaks, and giveaways for giant corporations to get $1 in Kevlar on our fighting men and women overseas. I'm Peter Ellis, I'm an average hardworking American, and I approve this message."

Oooo, I like that! Somebody call Howard Dean!

[Richard Steele]

53. Hey, way to twist this thread into a dusty old SLAM at John Kerry.

FYI: You could have saved time and just yelled "flip flopper", y'know.
Cuz that's all I'm hearing.

Odd: This thread wasn't ABOUT Kerry, it was about Allen...
But I STILL haven't heard a frickin WORD from you against that racist
sack of monkeyshit Allen. Now why is that?

Seems like you have other talking points you'd prefer
to ALMOST say out loud...but not quite.

[LA lady]

54. I can't stand Allen!

I am just saying it almost sounds like blackmail that these guys say whoever donates gets to decide who it used against!

[Richard Steele]

55. Then why give him a pass so you can cheap-shot Kerry04's dusty corpse?

Very odd behavior for a year 2006 DEMOCRAT, IMHO.
But perfectly normal for YOUR pattern of posting.

[Tigress DEM]

82. Could be we are talking two different instances.

The armor thing has been around a long time and I don't see this was a slam against Kerry rather an attempt to see the WHOLE bill and understand why the votes go the way they do.

When Kerry was accused of voting against a bill that included body armor I believe that was around 2004. And the poster explained that it was more about the PORK added to the bill that gave tons of money to the rich that caused Kerry to change his mind.

THIS time around Kerry did not vote yea or nea, but either abstained or was somehow not able to cast on the day of the vote.

[DuaneBidoux]

79. Well, don't know except that Kerry isn't in a close race

The real check needs to be on races that are close and IF the dem voted yes when the reThug voted no. If they both voted no it's neutral. Both yes it's neutral. The question is how everyone voted in races that actually have a chance of going our way.

[aquart]

88. Who was the jackass in Georgia?

This pretty thing can be used across the nation, wherever an incumbent Republican is running for the Senate, put in the name and let 'er rip.

Truth. That beautiful thing that's been missing from the Bush administration. Welcome home.

[redqueen]

17. FINALLY!

This is just the sort of ad we should be running...

:bounce:

[Hawkowl]

18. This is IT!

The Dems need to put this ad on in every applicable Senate race in the country! Then before the rethuglicans have a chance to recover, another attack ad. It is just like being in a street fight. Throw combinations, attack, keep your opponent off balance, attack, and don't stop kicking him when he's down...only after he's stopped moving.

With multiple ads like this, the Dems could really win the ephemeral landslide.

[Surya Gayatri]

19. Wow! Right in the solar plexus...

30 seconds of plain-spoken, unmitigated truth. This ad should be used

against all Repubs who voted for & have continued to support the war, but

have refused to exercise oversight to ensure that our troops are given the

best protection money can buy. SG :wow:

[myrna minx]

21. That is devastating!

Wow. :wow:

[emmadoggy]

22. Geez Louise!!! That is a powerful and extremely effective ad!!

I hope they plaster it all over the tv dozens of times a day so that ALL the voters there have a chance to see it. Excellent!!!

:kick: :woohoo: :applause:

[IWantAChange]

23. donated to them and damn proud of it

because I still believe Truth is more powerful than (Rovian) spin.

[David Zephyr]

24. Now this is campaigning with courage! K&R!

A proud kick to the top, too!

[blm]

89. They're building a NEW Dem infrastructure, DZ.

Fighting Dems, Patriot Project, and VoteVets.

Cleland, Clark and Kerry have been tireless with this. They intend to change the mindset of this country - the media has lied long enough to the people - the GOPs do NOT support the troops and are NOT the party of the military.

Here's more:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-kerry/a-friend-of-mine-jon-sol_b_29364.html

I wish the Dem infrastructure had developed groups like this after 2000.

[David Zephyr]

126. Agree.

By the way, Cleland, Clark and Kerry. I like that crowd.

Of course, the Chair of the Party, Howard Dean, is doing a great job, too.

[blm]

129. Dean is doing what Terry Mac failed to do from 2000-2004.

I think he's doing it for the same reason KerryClarkCleland are - they all went around the country in 2003 and 2004 and SAW FOR THEMSELVES how weak the infrastructure was, and even collapsed in many crucial states. I applaud Dean for stepping into that job and support him when I can. (I even worked one of his events here in NC a few months ago - don't faint)

They have all been tireless working to shore it up, and I have been proud of them all. They found weaknesses and are going about proactively to change them to strengths. What I like is that they don't attack the rest of the Dems while they're doing it - they just do it without pointing fingers.

Heh - I'm not noble - I point. ;)

[tinrobot]

25. Run that ad in EVERY state....

...where a Rethug voted against body armor.

[TayTay]

26. I saw that this is what they intend to do

They need some money in order to run it everywhere and against every Senator who voted not to fund body armor for our troops.

Send 'em a couple of bucks if you get the chance. $5 or %10 bucks from many people adds up.

From the votevets.org website: http://www.votevets.org/

New TV Ad Deployed in Virgina
Senator George Allen voted against giving our guardsmen and reservists proper body armor. The voters of Virginia must know their Senator voted against the troops.


But Senator Allen isn't the only one that veterans are holding accountable with this ad, just the first. Help us continue to run this ad by donating now. Those who donate will get a say in where this TV ad runs next and who is held accountable.


Oh my shit, take a look at this from their home page: http://www.votevets.org/storage/votevets/documents/printad9-7.pdf

Run that against lieberman, it's gold.

[Adelante]

46. That print ad against Lieberman

Is a hurt on him, for sure.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. Where's the ad?

Did they take it off that page?

[TayTay]

31. Front page of DKos

www.dailykos.com

Also go to the votevets.org site. You have see their anti-Lieberman ad. It's just great.
http://www.votevets.org/storage/votevets/documents/printad9-7.pdf

[Adelante]

45. On YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0ngLMU_6J0

[Punkingal]

29. Wonderful ad, but....

I am outraged that they even VOTE on a thing like this. It should be a given, safe body armour for our troops. Anything less is CRIMINAL.

[Tigress DEM]

84. Ya' know if Haliburton hadn't "lost 8.8 billion" in Iraq...

maybe there wouldn't have had to be a vote.

The vote is to spend MORE of the taxpayer's money on the war. But, yeah, it's criminal how they find billions for their war profiteering cronies and keep coming back to ask for more and use those bills to slip more money to their rich and powerful friends.

Same way we have to get referrendums for school monies, but our ex-gov "found a surplus" to give back to the rich that had come from the gov before him shorting the schools for years.

[underpants]

35. OH SLAM!!!!!

HAHAHAHA

I was on the radio with two pinheads going off about Webb's ad with Reagan praising him in a speech at Annapolis. They must be doubled over at the site of this

[timber84]

37. Kick Ass

:kick:

[truebrit71]

38. Fantastic Ad.

Game over Sen. Allen....

[Divine Discontent]

64. agreed!

just keep running that and a few super positive commercials of the democrat and it's truly game over...

it's not a confusing commercial unlike what some say on the site where it's at, it is clear and easy to follow. great ad!

[DuaneBidoux]

43. This almost looks Rethuglican. We need to do this for EVERY issue.

Then the Dems will take back the Congress.

[Straight Shooter]

44. Unforgettable ad. Pete also makes a telegenic, convincing spokesman.

I rate the ad 100 percent for effectiveness, but I have a question: What Dems voted in alignment with George Felix Allen's vote?

In other words, which particular vote(s) is Pete talking about so we can research and be prepared. (Of course any Dems who voted against that same body armor probably need some serious rethinking of their priorities.)

edit oops

[Ino]

48. It's odd...

It's odd how the Rethugs will vote to give Georgie-Porgie all the "tools" he wants to fight the War on Terra, but not the soldiers themselves. But they do "appreciate" the sacrificial lives. I'm going to puke.

[Adelante]

49. Hey it's being rated down on YouTube

Rate it up!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0ngLMU_6J0

Right now only 3 stars, 70 votes.

[Richard Steele]

57. Done. Also: remember to add it to your "favorites".

I don't know how much that matters to their ranking formula,
but it matters enough that they keep track, so I assume it's
well worth doing.

[Adelante]

58. Good thought

I went back and did it. Thanks.

[derby378]

51. Excellent ad!!

Way to go, VoteVets!

:toast:

[LaPera]

56. Attack ads ONLY" turn off" moderate Democrats!!

FACT!

Republicans love attack ads...(unless they are directed at them and then they they bitch & moan screaming unfair democrats - and then the frighten Dem's politely back-off) ... Republicans though, NEVER back-off, Republicans know that attack ads are effective and WIN ELECTIONS! (And why the republicans are spending at least 60 million dollars on new negative attack ads, all across the country)...

AND to top it all off ---- Wimpy-assed Democrats get turned-off by attack ads - and don't vote...They don't vote...instead of voting, the idiot moderate democrats get turned off and refuse to vote…What fucking pin-heads!!!

Republicans love it that mousy Dem’s won’t vote and get “turned-off! While Republicans love and NEED attack ads. Republicans will make up, lie, distort, smear anything it takes to destroy their democratic opponent - They don't focus on nothing else but winning, fighting to the very end and destroying! Most Dem's aren't up to or prepared for that kind of campaigning and fighting...(and the Republicans know it).

That's all the republicans can ever run on...surely NOT republican ideology, republicans must and need to pretend to care about democratic issues when running for office during campaigns. Always. Even Bush ran twice on democratic issues,….health care, Social Security, worker concerns, wages, pension, benefits, the environment, balance budget, etc… All Democratic issues!

All while running vicious attack ads on their democratic opponents character – Because character attacks (swift boating) are extremely effective, its what people pay attention to, it’s what wins election for republicans…

And one thing EVERY Democratic candidate running can ALWAYS count on is Republican attack ads – on a democrats character.

Read!

Being Right Is Not Enough: What Progressives Must Learn from Conservative Success -by Paul Waldman (MediaMatters.org) "Many liberals are congenitally gloomy folk, and a look at the contemporary American political scene gives them plenty of cause to despair..." (More)

http://www.amazon.com/Being-Right-Not-Enough-Progressives/dp/0471789607/sr=1-1/qid=1158176376/ref=sr_1_1/104-4766204-4727923?ie=UTF8&s=books

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/0471789607.01._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_AA240_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_V62064288_.jpg

[tomreedtoon]

124. Although your post is an ad, you're right!

This is a matter that has angered some of the DU'ers I've encountered. Most recently, someone has ignore-listed me because I've pointed out how passive and useless the last two Democratic Presidential candidates have been.

It also has real-world consequences. Because Gore gave up and Kerry wouldn't fight, the Democratic Party has to accept blame for the Bush disasters going so far awry. All the dead in Iraq and New Orleans, our nation's adults and children infused with fear...and all due to Democrats being too afraid or too "moral" to fight.

At least Gore has learned something, and has redeemed himself. He's still passive (if he wants to be President, he has to step up and say so) but his long exile has taught him something of importance. I can't say the same for Kerry, who for some reason thinks he's still running in 2004 and can win by being "not Bush."

[DWilliamsamh]

59. What else is there to say?

The power of simple FACTS is amazing.

[civildisoBDence]

60. Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey, GOOD BYE

And good riddance to Delay, Allen, Cunningham, and soon enough, DUHbya and the Smirk.

Newsprism

[SDDEM06]

61. We needed an ad like this two years ago

[kevinbgoode]

62. I keep waiting for the Terri Schiavo Congress ads too. . .

and Democrats will be stupid if they don't powerfully exploit that travesty. It touched the lives of nearly every American family - and attacked marriage more than anything else in this country's history. A good ad featuring Frist and DeLay's rhetoric about Schiavo would remind voters of who the Thugs REALLY are.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[antonialee839]

65. That is one powerful ad.

[Danger Mouse]

67. GREAT ad

I rated it up on youtube...if you have an account there, go and do the same!
The truth hurts, doesn't it, Allen?
These thugs don't give two shits about 'supporting our troops.' As far as they're concerned, Iraq is just a grinder, and our troops are the meat. 'Spend money on keeping them alive? But they're EXPENDABLE!'
Every time one of our troops dies, I hope it haunts one of the twisted pricks who lied to get us into this mess. It breaks my heart to see them put in the line of fire like that for a lie. 'Stay the course'...for what? Because we honestly think we can salvage the mess that we created? When we can't even find it in our hearts to provide decent armor for our boys and girls in uniform?
I'm a longtime reader of Something Awful, and I remember how they did a big fundraising drive for one of their forum members (a soldier) whose unit was being shipped without a vital component of their body armor. They were able to purchase the necessary equipment with an incredible outpouring of generosity and support from the people at SA. That was either a year or two ago. Anyway, my point is...why should they have to do this??? What the people at SA did may have truly saved lives...but it shouldn't be up to them to play this role.
That SHOULD be the role of our government, but 'supporting the troops' isn't really a part of their agenda, now, is it?
:puke:

[Anakin Skywalker]

68. Say what? I thought only that d*ckw@d Tom Delay

can hammer people?!

[Usrename]

69. Allen is toast.

Best ad that I have seen.

[RamboLiberal]

71. Any Pennsylvanian's here - if you can donate to them

You get a vote where to run ad next. Tricky Ricky Santorum also voted against additional funds for body armor. Wouldn't you love to see this run against Ricky?

I sent them a donation.

http://www.votevets.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=127&Itemid=50

As Senator Rick Santorum prepares to address the American Legion on Friday, the head of VoteVets.org (formerly IAVA PAC) reminded Pennsylvanians to remember the Senator’s real record.
“Senator Santorum will highlight his superficial role in appropriating emergency funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs, in his speech, but his record shows he has been one of the Senate’s most hostile members to the troops and veterans,” said Pittsburgh native, Iraq War Veteran and Chairman of VoteVets.org, Jon Soltz. “Rick Santorum voted against veterans before he voted for them.”

In just the last few years, Senator Santorum turned his back on troops and veterans multiple times. Senator Santorum:

· Had the audacity to vote against appropriating a billion more dollars for procurement of proper body armor and other equipment for Guardsmen and Reservists risking their lives in Iraq, just when body armor issues were coming to the forefront. (Motion to table Landrieu Amendment No. 452, 4/2/2003)

[AtomicKitten]

72. Brilliant, awesome, in-your-face, truth-telling.

This should be run in every state against every Republican that voted no on body armor. I will gladly cough up my hard-earned $$$ to support this endeavor.

Maybe the Swift Boat lying sacks 'o shit will see this and get a clue about how the truth resonates honorably, not lies.

Thanks for posting this most wonderful ad.

[snowbear]

73. ~~~ AWESOME ~~~ And it was JUST on Countdown !!

Incredible!!

[ccpup]

74. Dems around the Nation

need to grow some balls and hit the Repugs HARD with the truth. All the time, every time, day in and day out. If they decide to be "polite", they'll lose my confidence (and my vote) for a long, long time.

[Clyde_dubyaD40]

75. OMG the freepers are going apeshit - check it

out, no one is a good enough soldier if you don't walk the Repiglican line. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700793/posts#comment?q=1

[Tigress DEM]

87. I feel kind of sorry for them in a way.

They REALLY believe the lies about no Vietnam era jackets being in "inventory" so therefore not being issued to the field.

How many families have told us about being denied benefits if their loved ones die in an armor jacket they purchase for them because the army won't?

Obviously many of them have never served or been around government systems enough to realize that if it is still usable, it gets used.

I supported government sites that still used pig iron punch card systems in the early 90's. Punch cards like the original systems that took up a whole room to do the work a Tex Instruments Scientific Calculator could do at that time. When everyone else was moving away from mainframes and onto mid-range or pc networks the government was stuck in the computer stone age.

But the freepers won't see gasbag rush telling them about the army being caught with their vests down.

Freepers are so caught up in the koolaid rush that they wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit them in the ass.

[Danger Mouse]

96. I managed to read four or five comments...

before my head started to hurt. Decided to stop there. Any further and I might've seriously been burned by all of the hot air.
Ugh. I have to say that there are many on DU that I find to be deluded or...well, crazy...but nothing compares to a freeper. They're in a league of their own. They have a perception of reality that's so hard to conceive of that trying too hard to think like a freeper might cause severe nosebleed or 'exploding head syndrome.'
Actually, have a friend stick your head in an open car door and have them slam it closed on your skull 15 or 20 times. By the time you get out of the hospital, you should have achieved the freeper mindset.
Meh.

[texpatriot2004]

83. Excellent Ad. nm

[acmavm]

90. That ad just puts the hurt on Allen. It makes the choice real clear

and simple. Vote for Allen, you do not support the troops.

Talk about turning the tables on the republicans.

About damn time.

[drm604]

93. I only have one bone to pick with the ad.

When he talks about the AK-47 he says that it's "the rifle of choice for terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan". By referring to the insurgents in Iraq as "terrorists" he's playing into the whole Repub game of conflating Iraqi fighters with the radical Islamist terrorists who attacked this country. We do NOT want to encourage that mindset. It just feeds the whole argument that the attack on Iraq was a necessary response to 9-11. That needs to be reworded, IMHO. Other than that it's a great ad!

[Danger Mouse]

95. Keeping it simple...

...for simple minds. Using 'insurgents' might confuse poor Joe Six-Pack. A confusing political ad will NOT be effective.

[drm604]

123. I didn't suggest they use "insurgents" nor that they complicate it.

It could be something like "the rifle of choice being used against us", or "those who are fighting us" or something like that. It can be kept simple without using the word "terrorists" in reference to Iraqis. They already have people purposely confused about who is or isn't a "terrorist" and about which "terrorists" are or aren't a domestic threat. Let's not encourage that any further.

Words are important here. They've been abusing language for years in order to mislead the American people.

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

108. They are doing no such thing!

The ad is clear and to the point! It refers to terrorists, not insurgents. Terrorists were and still are in Afghanistan, and have entered Iraq since the start of the illegal war. The ad didn't intended to refer to the rifle of choice of the Iraqi insurgency. Why would you suggest that they are playing the Repubs games by conflating the two?

[Major Hogwash]

94. What vote is this ad based on?

Where there other Senators that voted this way that are up for re-election this year?

[AZBlue]

97. Please please please let all Dem candidates follow this excellent example

Please!!!!!!!!!!!

[SeattleGirl]

98. WOW!

Now THAT'S an add that really says something! Great job!

[autorank]

102. Great post. Talk about hot material. This is it. Thanks!!! K&R

This is pure Webb even thought its from an independent group. Wait until Webb and Allen have
"the show down" debate. Allen will be trailing in the polls, he'll be desperate, and he's an
ass wipe. He'll blow it and Webb's counter punch will end the contest, knockout.

There are tons of military families in the Tidewater area of Virginia. Not all of them vote here
because they retain residency in their home states. But enough do and there are enough retired
military. I believe that Webb will get a ton of votes here. That might make it a real blow out.

Webb beat the less than acceptable primary opponent in Northern Virginia. He'll keep that, he'll do
well in urban areas because he cares and he's showing up. But watch Tidewater - Hampton, Virginia
Beach, Norfolk, Portsmouth. A mix of urban and suburban, it would be a blockbuster for Webb.

[eridani]

104. PLEASE let us know--

--WHO ELSE voted against this, so we can use the same info against them.

[Hippo_Tron]

114. This ad is fucking brilliant, why didn't we use it in 2004?

[wheelg7n14]

128. Because it is not true.

We can not use straight up lies. Most Army combat units had the IBA (the one that stopped the AK). The older style was from the 70s and 80s and was only designed to stop shrapnel.

[Hippo_Tron]

131. Not the guard and reserves

Senator Allen along with almost every Republican voted against Senator Landrieu's amendment for over $1 billion in procurement for the guard and reserves.

It's right here...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SP00452:

[sandrakae]

116. Please donate so the ad can continue to run.

https://secure.democracyinaction.com/dia/organizations/iavapac/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=1191&t=GoodNewOne.dwt

[Joanne98]

118. Great ad. SHORT AND TO THE POINT!

[Imagevision]

127. Excellant ad, needs more exposure...

[meowomon]

130. This is an awesome ad!

Damned Excellent!!!! The Macaca King is goin'down!

[DoYouEverWonder]

133. Wow, that kicks butt

Take that freepers and stick it where the sun don't shine.