Presidential War Records Part II

I don't usually watch TV at 4 o'clock on a Tuesday morning, but the howling winds of the typhoon prompted me to head downstairs and stuff a few plastic bags into the hood scoop of my car. After returning, I turned on the TV for a typhoon update. After verifying that the typhoon was indeed on course to batter my town, I switched to the satelitte channel where they were rebroadcasting an ABC news program "This Week" hosted by George Stephanopoulos. The discourse centred around the Republican Convention and focussed on using the Vietnam War Records as a central issue in the campaign.

Mr. Stephanopoulus interviewed Senator John McCain. Although I am not too familiar with the Senator, he continued to denounce the ads that attacked Senator Kerry's war record and asked for everyone to move on and put the events of 30 years ago behind and focus on the future. Later, a political strategist with the Bush campaign continued the same theme of how Bush is forward looking while Kerry continues to harp upon his past.

I do agree that the debate over presidential war records should merit only minor consideration when it comes to chosing the president. However, I cannot help but feel that the Bush campaign is again using dirty political tricks to discredit Senator Kerry while appearing to be "above the fray."

I recall reading, perhaps in Al Franken's book, about the political tricks employed by the Bush team during the 2000 election and during the transition. One trick was the insidious push-poll where pollsters would phone up potential voters and ask a hypothetical question. For example, they would ask whether they would be more or less likely to vote for Senator Kerry if he had lied about his war record. Although there is no basis in fact for the statement, the seed of doubt is planted and the voter may be inclined to believe it as true. Another trick was used during the transition between the Clinton and Bush administration. Rumours spread that the Democrats were vandalizing and damaging the White House in an attempt to thwart a smooth takeover. When asked about for more details or concrete evidence, the Bush team responded that they would not produce it because they did not want to involve themselves in dirty politics. They were, again, "above the fray". Both of these tactics allowed the Republicans to plant seeds of doubt and distrust in the mind's of voters and then portray themselves as holier and purer than their opponents by refusing to discuss the issue any further since they did not play such dirty political games.

The same strategy seems to be in operation now. After bringing up Mr. Kerry's war record, publicly questioning the validity of his decorations, accusing him of lying to receive his medals, the Republicans now want to move on before the discussion of Bush and Cheney's lack of war records becomes too heated. The damage to Senator Kerry's reputation has been done and now the Republicans want to portray Senator Kerry as someone fixated on the past and unable to focus on the future.

Whether or not Karl Rove and the Bush team was directly involved in the making of the ads that attacked Kerry's war record is a rather moot point. The ad was politically motivated and it worked to undermine the public's trust in Kerry. Now the situation is ripe for the Bush team to take advantage by denouncing the ads, giving the appearance of virtue. Furthermore, they are now able to criticize Kerry as a leader fixated on the past as he attempts to defend his past, while Bush (who conveniently doesn't discuss his war record) looks to the future and a war he cannot win.

Politics is a dirty game and the team that plays it the best is often the winner. Karl Rove and his team seem to be the most able to manipulate stories, twist the truth, and convince voters that Bush is the best person to lead the country while the Democrats seem to have trouble capitalizing on all the blunders and miscues that Bush and his handlers make.

May the best marketing team win!