"Ah! If you took away from my original post the idea that there were more anti-Bush ads than anti-Kerry ads, that wasn't the message that I was trying to convey."
Oh.
I was responding to this: "But the net result of this is that we've got an incredible proliferation of attack ads which -- up until fairly recently -- came primarily from groups that (charitably) don't like Bush."
And yes, I took your statement to mean that there have been more anti-Bush ads than anti-Kerry ads. I mean, it seems like a reasonable interpretation of the sentence.
Clearly the various rules different groups can operate under clouds the issues.
BTW, Kerry's latest respond ad is here. I was able to get it to run in my browser. Sadly, I don't think it's all that good. Things like the New York Times article and the essay by the rebuttal by the Chicago Tribune guy are much more effective, although they won't be seen by nearly as many people.
no subject
Oh.
I was responding to this: "But the net result of this is that we've got an incredible proliferation of attack ads which -- up until fairly recently -- came primarily from groups that (charitably) don't like Bush."
And yes, I took your statement to mean that there have been more anti-Bush ads than anti-Kerry ads. I mean, it seems like a reasonable interpretation of the sentence.
Clearly the various rules different groups can operate under clouds the issues.
BTW, Kerry's latest respond ad is here. I was able to get it to run in my browser. Sadly, I don't think it's all that good. Things like the New York Times article and the essay by the rebuttal by the Chicago Tribune guy are much more effective, although they won't be seen by nearly as many people.
B