Sunday, November 02, 2008

District 72 disappointment: A straight denunciation of attack ads without qualification? Sadly, perhaps too much for us to expect.

Disappointment?

Bluegill, that makes two of us … and I suspect the number will be growing.

Thanks to my co-editor for pointing to this earlier today. In Disappointed. Already., he describes viewing a political attack ad on television:

In the middle of it, I see Richard Nixon. And Elvis. And an old photo of Bill Cochran smoking a cigarette. Apparently, I was supposed to be outraged that taxes have been raised since 1974 and believe that dead people are somehow forced to write checks posthumously to pay them.

Recognizing the text and images as the same tripe that's been stacked in my mailbox lately, the only outrage I felt was directed at the state Republican party for not honoring Ed Clere's request to stop the insulting cannonade.

Then I saw "Paid for by www.edclere.com" at the bottom of the screen. And that wasn't funny, either.


I don't watch television, so my personal disappointment came a bit later. I stopped laughing over morning coffee and the Tribune, where reporter Daniel Suddeath brings the general public up to date on the Indiana House Republican Campaign Committee's snail mailings on Bill Cochran, to which we’ve already devoted much discussion in the blogosphere.

Below the belt in Indiana District 72?, by Daniel Suddeath.

A knife dangles from an outstretched hand. Dirty fingernails clasp around its handle. This menacing image might encourage New Albany residents to lock their doors out of fear. But it’s not a scene from a horror movie. It’s a photograph slapped onto a political flier attacking District 72 State Rep. Bill Cochran for a 1994 vote against House Bill 1335. The bill, among other amendments, included stiffening sentences for convicted cult or ritualistic child abusers.

Previously, Ed Clere discussed the mailings in a statement at NAC.

Clere: "I am interested in substance, and no postcard can change that."

I had no prior knowledge of the postcard featuring a dirty, knife-wielding hand, and my immediate reaction was visceral. I’m sure that was the intent. The piece was conceived, produced and paid for by an arm of the Indiana Republican Party, and I did not know it was coming until it arrived in my mailbox.

I have been trying to run a positive campaign. Anyone who has heard me talk will agree that my focus is on what I would do, not on what Bill Cochran has or hasn’t done. A particular 1994 vote (the subject of the mailer), whether right or wrong, is of little relevance to me or any other reader of this blog. We are concerned about the future, and we vote based on substantive information, not scare tactics.

Far too many voters, however, vote based on misinformation and exaggerated, out-of-context claims. Our discourse is reduced to sound bites and colorful postcards that inflame rather than inform. In August, I challenged Bill Cochran to a series of debates, and he declined. The vacuum that remains is filled with assumptions, prejudices, “name recognition” and, yes, postcards.

I have contacted the state party and expressed my concerns about the mail piece. I don’t know what else, if anything, may be on the way. I hope any future pieces will focus on me and what I hope to accomplish in Indianapolis. I can’t guarantee they will.

Obviously, they haven’t stopped, but Rovepublican politics as usual is not the reason for my personal disappointment. It is these comments by Clere in this morning’s Tribune article, suggesting that the candidate is becoming more comfortable with the idea of the state committee sliming Cochran from afar (italics mine).

“I had no prior knowledge of any of the mailings. At the same time, I’m thankful the state party has taken an interest in my race,” he said. “I would have perhaps chosen to communicate the message in a more positive manor. But the message itself is based on his record.”

And …

Clere said the fliers could be a vacuum effect from lack of debates. He said Cochran would not agree to any debates, though Clere claims he first requested three to be held in August.

Hmm. It's not about his record, but it is, and anyway, it's his fault for not debating.

As an alternative, maybe "the mailings are disgusting, period" might be a more succinct way of expressing the truth of the matter, but that leaves unexplained the paid television ad, so leave it to the incumbent, Cochran, to see matters with crystal clarity (italics mine).

“It’s all just half the truth,” (Cochran) said. “I don’t even want to acknowledge [the fliers]. It will probably energize my supporters more than anything else.”

Yep.

Conversely, among thoroughly annoyed Clere supporters like me, and in spite of the last-minute nature of the process, it may well initiate the great District 72 rethink of 2008 ... and that's a gut-wrenching thing, indeed.

23 comments:

Highwayman said...

Call it naive but my take is this.

All of the candidates (local, state, & national) would have been well advised to say nothing during the last week leading up to election day save "Go the the poles & vote!"

Every issue at all levels has been regurgitated ad-nauseam to the point of it being (you guessed it) nauseating.

All that is being accomplished now is causing folks who were going to vote (many for the first time) to second guess it being worth their time to do so.

But then maybe that's the point.

G Coyle said...

Do I remember a long discussion on these pages recently whereby many defended Mr Clere's integrity? Has Mr Clere responded to this latest campaign tactic/flyer issue? I'd be interested to hear his explanation.

ecology warrior said...

how about bill cochrans lack of integrity by drawing a paycheck from indiana university southeast and voting on an appropriation bill for IUS? Or hpw about his lack of integrity by using his position as a legislator to try and lean on the NA sewer board to forgive sewer tap fees for the new lodge dorms for IUS?

His voting record does matter and even though Ed produced what some here think is a negative ad, Cochran does not deserve re-election

Eric Schansberg said...

I don't know Cochran's record on tax increases, so I'm not in a position to comment on that angle in Clere's ad. The two points of the ad seemed to be Cochran's longevity (ok, I guess) and his vote for tax increases (not sure how much of that he's done).

Clere and others should criticize others who run nasty ads on their behalf. (See also: The asinine and deceptive DCCC ads against Sodrel should have been condemned by Hill.)

Cochran and others should be criticized for not engaging in debates. (See also: This is even more true at the national level, where Hill should be criticized for limping into one debate after repeatedly demanding [and getting] multiple debates from Sodrel in 2006.)

maury k goldberg said...

Dear Roger,

I find the TV Ad distasteful and in the same manner that Sen.Mitch McConnell,R-KY uses in his attacks on his democrat opponent. I find Mr. Clere's protestations not convincing. Surely, this ad did not come as a surprise to him. The whole incident leaves a distaste in the public's mouth in an otherwise fair campaign by both sides.

Maury

ecology warrior said...

give me a break Maury, you doth protest because its an ad attacking a Democrat and you are 100% partisan, what if clere were the incumbent and Cochran were the challenger running ads exposing his record? As far as Mcconnells ads, Lunsford is throwing it too.

It's called politics maury and believe it or not so called negative or attack ads resonate with a majority of the independent and undecided voters.

How about an intelligent indepenent party to end all the democrat vs. republican idiocy? And no Eric, not libertarians!

Iamhoosier said...

I found it interesting that the day Mr. Clere responded on this blog that he never responded to my questions. He was obviously reading the blog or someone was keeping him informed.

I had asked, that if there were several negative mailings, why was he just now protesting. And, if he doesn't have enough "juice" to stop a branch of his own party from doing what he, allegedly, opposes on his behalf, what "juice" will he have as our representative. No answers.

Like bluegill, I too saw the TV ad and very purposefully watched for the credit at the end. Not personally knowing Mr. Clere, I was somewhat swayed by some of the opinions expressed here by people I respect. I still don't personally know him but my opinion is that he is slick salesman who has been good at hiding his two faces.

I'm not wild about Mr. Cochran but, in a way that he didn't expect, Mr. Clere helped me make up my mind. Maybe he can use the time to make more soccer ball cakes. That is a nice thing to do, assuming that he actually did!

The New Albanian said...

Ahhh ... so Mrs IAH got that soccer ball cake mailing, too?

Eric Schansberg said...

EW, as much as an independent party might be preferred in the abstract, it would almost certainly be unable to establish or hold its membership. As difficult as it is to accomplish, it will probably take an ideologically coherent group-- like the Greens or the Libs.

That said, we've seen modest, short-term success in recent years from the "Reform Party" under Ross Perot. But that was much more cult of personality than a political party and was not sustained.

At Lib conventions (not taxpayer subsidized like the Reps and Dems), one always has the choice of NOTA (none of the above). Perhaps something similar could be employed in elections. Or maybe we can start the LOTE party-- the lesser of two/three evils.

William Lang said...

I think people seeking a third party would have a lot more success by instead forming a caucus within one of the two major parties, and influencing its positions and candidates thereby. The major parties can and have changed substantially in their platforms, over the decades.

Concerning Mr. Clere's ads: I would rather not vote for a campaign that employed those kinds of ads. It would validate that campaign tactic, and we will only get more of it here in Floyd County if he wins.

Eric Schansberg said...

Reform-- such as it is-- might be attempted from the inside or from the outside. As an example, for the last two elections, I have had more capacity from the outside.

William, you voted for Hill and the far more despicable DCCC ads against Sodrel in 2008 (as well as Hill's nasty ads in 2004 and 2006). Your preferences against such ads must be exceedingly modest or selectively applied.

Daniel Short said...

When was the last time Mr. Cochran was challenged the way he is this cycle? 1988? Mr. Clere does not have two faces...he is campaigning on what he has to work with. That is the prolonged record of a man that is at least four years past his time to retire.

William Lang said...

Eric, I suppose it's your call if an ad calling Sodrel "Millionaire Mike" (and implying he wants to cut Social Security because he wants to partially privatize it) is more despicable than an ad smearing Cochran as being soft on satanic ritual child abuse. (Please correct me if that's not the ad you're referring to; I've haven't seen many local ads because I don't watch much local television.)

Iamhoosier said...

Daniel,
I understand where you and other are coming from on the amount of years that Mr. Cochran has served.

It still does not address Mr. Clere coming to this blog to plead innocence. He answered of his own free will. He did not use qualifiers here but has elsewhere. Which "position" is his true position?

Does he have any "juice"? Why no answers? His true character starting to show? Inquiring minds want to know.

The New Albanian said...

Bluegill fathomed the real issue first.

Ed denounced the committee's ads here, then when one of the same ads (albeit not the most egregious one) appeared on television, it was paid for by Clere's campaign.

Is there a difference between postcards and television ads? If so, aren't we veering into Clintonian "meaning of is is" territory here?

As long as both parties continue to point at the other and say "we'll stop when they do," the ugliness will never cease. The fact of the fingerpointing's intrinsic childishness is accepted as a lamentable given.

Eric Schansberg said...

William, I haven't seen the satanic child abuse ad (or flier?). I thought we were talking about the 1974 Elvis/Nixon TV ad.

With respect to the ads I've seen in the 9th District for 2008, it's the Millionaire Mike references, the claim that he wants to increase taxes by 23%, wants to cut SS benefits, and he thinks the economy has sound fundamentals (the same language Baron used).

B.W. Smith said...

Political power at all costs for the greater good. Isn't that what we're supposed to believe?

Eric Schansberg said...

And perhaps it's just in the eyes of beholder, but I don't know of any nasty ads/fliers from Sodrel (this time) or me (ever) in the 9th.

Jeff Gillenwater said...

For what it's worth:

Having earlier questioned Bill Cochran's physical fitness for office and indicated that Ed Clere would get my vote as a result, respect for the community here suggests that I report the opposite to actually be true.

In what was perhaps the most personally trying decision in this cycle, I voted for Cochran.

I did so before seeing the TV ad but after seeing the Mitch Daniel's endorsement postcard. The soccer letter was a curious anomaly somewhere in the midst of it.

In reality, the seemingly unrelated DNA conversation last week had more to do with it than anything.

Iamhoosier said...

I don't like the Millionaire Mike ads either. Being a millionaire doesn't equal "out of touch" any more than being poor equals lazy. Both positions are phony.

The 23% tax mentioned in the is misleading. I DON'T find the message about Sodrel's stand on SS and Wall Street to be particularly misleading.

Iamhoosier said...

Correction, should read:

The 23% tax mentioned in the AD...

William Lang said...

Eric, you have a point about the 23% tax increase.

The ritual abuse mailers were in reference to a vote by Cochran on a bill that included increased penalties for those convicted of such offenses; they showed lurid pictures of hands holding knives. The fliers were very nasty—I saw one myself (one of my colleagues found it in his mail). Indeed, Clere disavowed having anything to do with them.

Eric Schansberg said...

ok, if Clere disavowed (and you approve), then it's a shame that Baron didn't do the same...

comparing Clere's avowed efforts (Elvis/Nixon), the stuff done for Baron by the DCCC is far nastier and in a number of different commercials...

it's a shame that people tolerate this from Hill's campaign-- as we as his hypocritical (dis)interest in debating...