How do we handle the really nasty sleazy stuff they are dishing out?

Whether you're a Dean backer or not, this is what our ultimate Democratic candidate will face (and I think most of us will back whoever that candidate is.)

I was just checking Google News and this particularly nasty headline kept popping up under the Howard Dean link:

"Howard Dean's Experiments on Children"

This was on WorldNetDaily, slime city, of course, but other outlets had picked it up. The author goes on to talk about homosexuality in such a mean spirited way that I was so turned off, I must have missed where Dr. Dean was injecting innocent kids with evil serum, which was what a doctor's "experiment on children" had stirred up in my imagination.

My question is this - do we repeat these things to debunk them? Or just bury them - never click on the stories & never discuss them & thus never give them the attention the authors crave. My thinking is that the sort of people who believe this stuff are hopeless. So why not focus on building up our guy (whoever he may be) instead of entertaining such things.

They use Drudge for a source. What does that tell you? I don't even read their crap. Ever.

Don

Do we debunk it or let it lie, that's what I'm wondering.

(I did run into that particular story you're talking about... it was revolting.)

I do think it is important to consider the credibility of the source, and the people who read it. If a story is completely whacked and the source is read mostly by partisan right-wingers, it's probably not worth spending a lot of time on -- of course you would want to have the facts on hand to debunk the basic lies in the piece, but you wouldn't want to bring any attention to it by publicly saying "These are lies and this is the truth." Just file it away in the "baseless smear" file.

Am I making any sense at all? ;)

I was feeling particularly low after reading that. I knew they were going to be nasty, but for some reason, didn't think they'd go that low.

...Limbaugh was talking about the other day and look at the person like they are nuts. If it ever gets to the mainstream media which I dout it ever, we will deal with it then.

Don

I like it, Don. I hope I remember to use that line. lol

thank you

You can spend all your time rebutting lies and nobody will ever hear the end result. The candidate will be drug through the back alleys of churches, loading docks, diners, and graveyards in whispers that he is a gay, child eating pedophile hell bent on bringing Satan into your backyard after claiming your house under imminent domain. They will say he has the mark upon him in the Bibble belt and swear the candidate is in bed with corporate interests along the liberal hotbeds. They will slander his wife (of any) and children and even the family pets. You should be sure to keep your eye on the family pets. Oh, and be sure to know your pilot and your plane very very well.

So, what is a candidate to do? There is in fact only one thing to do, look forward and hold your head high. NEVER EVER EVER FLINCH. It's called leadership and right now America wants to be led. Let the garbage roll of you like water off a duck, cuz honey, it sure is going to rain down hard.

Peace,
Teresa

Thanks you guys I feel much better. I'm usually a little more thick skinned than this, but that was just plain nasty.

Karl Rove and his team will see to it.

of intelligent voters out there to realize their self interests are on the line in this election, and to take part in the process.

The Bible thumpers and freepers are a minority. We shouldn't waste time or money trying to get dogmatic ideologues that don't think for themselves to suddenly become enlightened with the ability to reason.

We should aim the message at those who are intelligent enough to understand cause and effect, and deliver a message that will attract the vast number of people that haven't been voting.

The number of people that do not engage in political action is much greater than the number that do. We should focus our energies on reaching them with a motivational message to gain their participation. Forget those whose minds are so closed to reason, and moral comprehension is so non-existent that they will never act on principles based on freedom, compassion, and understanding.

Don't let the spin turn your head or you will just be walking around in circles....

The issue is whether some of the misleading info they are spreading may influence some people who might otherwsie vote for Dean.

If it could be believed by someone, then debunk it.

These boyz will have you on the run believing things that might be believable to others. Ever been snipe hunting?

Don't Blink. And never give a whit of credence to anything they say. Ever.

Really, these guys are master at wasting your time and money.

A long time ago a very wise man took me aside and whispered some sage words of advice in my ear. He said "don't waste your time explaining and never apologise."

For example:

Chris Wallace (by way of example): Governor Dean, how do you answer the charges that you experimented on children in Vermont?

Governor Dean: I'm not sure I know what they're talking about. I imagine they're talking about my getting medical coverage for all of the children in my state when I was governor. You know, it is amazing how this Bush administration has managed to twist the facts about children's health. Why even in Texas, where Bush claimed to have done such a great job for children it turned out he never funded his big plans and the programs had to shut down. In fact, he rarely funds any of his big projects, whether its hydrogen cars or world AIDS help or even his so called no child left behind act. You know, like a lot of Bush's promises, that is really an act,

and so on and so on and so on...

just a suggestion

Mmmmmmmmm. Perfectly worded. Are you running for something?

With your approach, you never sink to their level. They expect you to sputter out a defense, or sling back a "Well, your guy did THIS..." Instead, you keep it polite, but turn it around so fast they lose their footing. But all in the guise of doing them a favor by covering up their faux pas.

So the steps are:

One,

Speaking of {pull something out of what they brought up that YOU want to talk about}...

Two,

My guy has really good plans for how to adress that...
and/or
Your guy has really made a mess of that...

So with the "experiment on children" thing:

Speaking of children, I'm really concerned about their fate under the Bush Administration. Did you know what's really happening with Bush's "No Child Left Behind" bill? That's a largely unfunded mandate, and schools are really having a hard time coping with the demands. And did you hear about how Bush is going to let polluters get away with increasing the output of toxins in the air? That's especially going to hurt the health of children. And about Head Start, did you know Bush wants to gut it? Statistics have proven how valuable it is to society - and this early investment in children is well worth the savings in the long run. My candidate has great plans to address these things, he's going to...

Now, I am for Dean or nobody.

Fuck all of them.

but the experiment thing is too outragious.

I'm done with the Democratic Party after this one if Dean does not get the nomination.

but that is where it's coming from).

then out it. The vast middle is turned off by patently ridiculous slander. Tell your friends about the ridiculous pro-Bush story you saw.

I can envision a counter-ad. Bin Laden is still out there, there is a threat. Why is George Bush wearing a flight suit playing hide and seek with Saddam Hussein when the REAL terrorists are making plans to take more American lives?

We need a president who can keep his eye on the ball.

to deal with such craziness. I usually have a joke or two waiting on these types. Just laugh it off. Noone believes that stuff .

We should first of all avoid giving them clicks. Second of all, I would suggest never repeating the stories to debunk them. However, if you hear such a story, it is fine to debunk it calmly or even to have a snappy joke that laughs it off. But mainly you just ignore it as being beneath your dignity.

It would be better in my humble opinion to focus on getting the dirt and possible dirt out there about the dark side. I am not above reporting rumors if there is some evidence, even if it isn't courtroom quality evidence. I am satisfied that the Whistleass and Victor Ashe had a thing going on. I don't have a problem with repeating that. I am satisfied that Whistleass is drinking like a fish. Don't have a problem with repeating that either. Whatever it takes. Unfortunately, our side doesn't want to believe badly of anyone unless they perform the dirty deed live on national TV and even then we think it's in bad taste to report on someone's misdeeds. The Whistleass slurs and stumbles on live TV, and we are still pretending he's a dry drunk???

So we are at a severe disadvantage. It is time to take off the gloves.