This hilarious missive just in from Healey campaign central (emphasis in original):
The liberals are on the attack, and Kerry Healey needs your help
Yesterday, Tom Reilly began his television advertising campaign. To no oneâs surprise, his first TV ad was nothing more than a liberal attack on Lt. Governor Kerry Healey.
This was Reillyâs first set of TV ads, and itâs only July. If Beacon Hill Insiders have already gone negative, imagine what the coming months will bring.
Uh … Kerry? Let’s review Tom Reilly’s TV ads, shall we? There are two of them. The first says nothing at all about anyone except Tom Reilly and some of what he’s done as AG. The second is similar, except that it says that he “stood up to Republicans,” and that he “stood up to Mitt Romney” on auto insurance rates. No mention of Kerry Healey anywhere in either ad.
Moreover, what, exactly, is so “liberal” about either ad? It says that Reilly supports the minimum wage. So does Healey. It says that he “stood up to Mitt Romney” when he didn’t agree with him. So did Healey. In fact, Romney disagrees with Healey on one of the proposals that Healey touts in her own TV ad, namely, suspending the gas tax. Is she saying that Romney’s position is a “liberal attack” on her?
Finally, it’s quite laughable to call Reilly’s ads “negative.” They are both classic “get to know me” ads that don’t mention any of the competition by name. Healey’s own ad, in contrast, chastises “the legislature,” saying it “wastes more and more” – if anyone has gone negative early, it’s her.
Pretty weak, Kerry.
Now, THAT’S pretty funny.
<
p>
And, it displays an amazing lack of substance.
<
p>
An example of how the GOP has reduced the word “liberal” to an empty epithet. Liberal=bad / Reilly=liberal / Reilly=bad. What a crock!
Thats one of the first things I learned at Umass-Amherst. Correlation does not equate Causation. It seriously irks me that most political propaganda is based on portraying correlation as causation. Maybe we should consider teaching this concept before college, but then again, people like Kerry Healey would be out of a job and policy makers will never enact policy that adversely affects them. Until then we’ll just have to spread the word that most candidates are simply lying to the public. (I know this is not new, but what would the Founding Fathers think of our political landscape these days?) When will we realize that we need a new type of candidate? I know of one running in this upcoming general election: http://www.natekaplan.com
Reilly is a moderate democrat and, as such ,the Healey campaign fears that Reilly will attract the independent voters. Independents have been the linchpin to their success the past four elections. Republicans have decided right away that Tom’s record is difficult to attack and he must be framed as a liberal to confuse the independents. They know that Patrick and Gabrielli will crash and burn in the general election. It appears that premption of Reilly in the primary is their only chance and he will therefore be their primary target.
Actually, in talking to people and trying to get them to sign pledge cards for Patrick, the most surprising thing I’ve found is how many long-time Republicans are saying that they will vote for him. They want all the insider bums out – Romney, Healey, AND Reilly. The top two reasons they cite for going for Patrick are:
<
p>
1. He’s an outsider
2. He’s a businessman
<
p>
I think Healy is just using the typical Rovian tactic. Go on the offensive and pretend you are being defensive. Accuse your opponent of going negative before they say anything about you and make the race personal instead of about the issues. I do agree that Reilly’s stands are nearly identical to Healy’s in many areas.
but Reilly is liberal. Of course, so are Patrick and Gabs. Additionally, I’d argue that Healey is pretty liberal too.
<
p>
That’s what tends to happen when the state is full of liberals.
<
p>
In your mind, put the candidates in Iowa or Missouri, or even New Hampshire. Where do they come out on the spectrum? I think they all end up on the left side.
<
p>
Reilly’s ads weren’t attack ads, and Healey is obviously just trying to stir up the base. But, there’s no reason to run from “liberal”. Embrace it. Bathe in it. Love it.
Reilly is “liberal” as are almost all Democrats, which is why many of the even-more-liberals now use a “progressive” spectrum instead. As has been stated anbove, this looks like Healy is taking aim at the moderate candidate, hoping to have a left vs. center general election, in which she occupies the center.
<
p>
I heard the Reilly ads in question, at least partially, in a report on WBUR this morning. Reilly brags that he has “taken on the Republicans.” Who cares? Has he also taken on the invading aliens from Mars, which also do not exist? I don’t want a governor to take on the Republicans, I want a governor to take on the sleazy legislature.
<
p>
Honestly, even though his stance is well to the left of mine, Mr. Patrick is looking good so far in this regard.
Healey attacks a Dem and what do we do? As usual, go on the defensive and start debating the term liberal. Brilliant!!! We fall for it everytime.
<
p>
If I where Reilly I would counter with – “If Kerry Healey thinks that is an attack ad then she should wait and see what’s coming next.”
<
p>
Go on the offensive!
True or not, this sort of “missive” is not a bad tactic. How many readers of that message do you think have seen Reilly’s ads and/or will be aware that there’s no real attack anywhere in them?
<
p>
Instead, we’ll have dozens or even hundreds of Republicans convinced that Reilly’s gone negative already, and they’ll spread the word. Typical Rovian tactic, and far from being “pretty weak”, it’s actually pretty smart. Despicable, but smart.
<
p>
The only thing that could really counter it is prominent coverage in the media, and it’s far enough below the radar that that won’t really happen. We may be lucky enough to have Jon Keller or Adam Reilly pay attention, but that probably won’t be enough.
So the best way to get elected is to blatently lie to anyone who will listen? The GOP has been betting on that fact: that most people dont know enough to refute weak, despicable commentary about people who have worked hard their whole lives to get where they are. For example, the John Kerry “flip-flop” propaganda. An intelligent person is always re-evaluating their stances when new information is brought to their attention. George Bush got re-elected on the basis that he doesnt ever change his mind, regardless of what new information comes to light. Yeah looks like that worked well when he scattered the previously centralized-in-afghanistan al-Qaeda network. Oh yeah and it worked really well with harriet myers…and whats that other thing? Thats right: the war in Iraq that was based on completely fabricated intelligence. Let us never forget that, if you try to blow the GOP’s cover of lies: they’ll just throw you to the wolves and ruin your wife’s career, right Valerie Plame? Our government has become more invasive than ever…and GOP sympathizers are simply enablers of tyrrany and economic-class separation.
WOW. I had the general misfortune of meeting the iron box at a GOP fundraiser I had infultrated in order to see what a given GOP candidate had to offer. Not only was KH the typical Robot-type, with the same exact facial expression and greeting given to every person in the room, but she touted the candidate (who’s fund raiser it was)as follows:
<
p>
“WE LIKE LEW BECAUSE HE VOTES THE REPUBLICAN LINE…
WE NEED TO DONATE TO LEW, BECAUSE HE VOTES THE REPUBLICAN LINE…” and the candidate agreed with her about “voting the republican line”….and six months later at business association meeting, the same candidate said “I dont vote party lines..I vote how the people want..”
<
p>
Sounds like BS to me.
As far as KH’s anti-Reilly propaganda, it sounds like the desperate maneuverings of a candidate that has no chance of being elected.
<
p>