I must be the rare progressive in the middle of the debate over Jack Conway’s Aqua Buddha Gambit. Sure, it’s appalling. But the other side is waging a stealth campaign that has convinced a fifth of the country that the president is a Muslim who wasn’t even born in this country and is therefore not entitled to the position he holds. We would be within our rights to just start saying that Mitch McConnell is a Hindu who hates Jesus and practices Satanism to prove it. That would be dishonest, but, hey, we didn’t start this.
So, I am appalled by Conway’s decision to make an issue out of Rand Paul’s college-days’ atheism, but I don’t wanna hear any Republicans complaining about it either. At least Conway is telling the truth, and if the people of Kentucky want to vote for a guy who used to belong to a secret society that mocked Jesus, that’s their right. Personally, that’s the last thing on my list of concerns about Rand Paul.
I have mixed feelings about the ad. I think there’s many other things we can attack Paul for. It’s certainly not the ugliest and most illiberal ad of the season as Chait says, but I hate going after people’s religious beliefs. I often wonder why people mock O’Donnell for her witchcraft bullshit when a.) I find Christianity to be just as ridiculous as Christianity and far less dangerous because it’s not taken seriously and b.) she has other things to attack her over such as her legal problems.
To same with Paul. There’s plenty of material out there.
Christianity to be just as ridiculous as witchcraft*
The worst I can say about it is that is takes away our ability to take the high road or to complain about the low road. But the high road leads to a cliff, so it’s really kind of irrelevant.
And taking the high road has gotten us where? Willie Horton? Clinton being impeached. the Teahadists.
That’s just it though. This ad shows people that Paul is just selling them a bill of goods when he uses his religion as a reason to vote for him.
What bothers me most about this line of attack is how flat it appeared to fall in the debate. It’s possible that Conway might have struck the right pitch and made a fatal or serious blow here, but he clearly didn’t, and in fact Paul appears to have come out the stronger for the exchange.
And am I the only one to notice that Rand Paul may be the first Senatorial candidate to openly use the “lie” word when talking about an opponent? Expect more of that, mostly from the biggest liars.
I have no mixed feelings.
First of all, the republicans have been doing this kind of thing to democrats for decades, and democrats typically act like claire mccaskill, bemoaning how uncivil it is, and setting themselves up for ritual huimiliation.
Second, are we in it to win it or not? the Republicans fight dirty, and i suppose it’s all very well and good to do the above the fray thing and makes everyone feel pure. On the other hand, you look awfully silly talking about how you adhered to marquis de Queensbury rules with half your teeth missing and the remaining ones in your pocket.
Third, i think it’s way too easy on Rand Paul.
“Aqua Buddha”? Has anyone pointed out that Aqua Buddha probably refers to the bong Rand Paul was hitting when he kidnapped that woman? that, in the woman’s words, “They took me to their apartment and tried to force me to take bong hits” and that “the whole thing was kind of sadistic”.
Paul’s lucky Conway isn’t running ads that accuse him of forcing a young woman to take drugs..and speculating that (even though nothing happened) the motive was sexual assault.
It wasn’t about his religious beliefs. It was about his faux piety in his campaign. Just like some other campaigns, it was meant to get under his skin and put some pressure on just to see how he reacts under pressure.
The answer: just like John McCain and Earl Perlmutter.
He could have laughed it off as a youthful indiscretion, but he got offended, defensive and impolite.
This commercial was about character. And had more truth to it than the purple heart bandaids and Swiftboating of John Kerry.
The issues that are going to hurt him more are his libertarian propensities about drug use in rural areas and his proposal for a $2000 annual Medicare deductible.
I don’t know what all the vapors over this are about. Politics ain’t beanbag.
Yes, this.
My own 2 cents: Not my favorite ad, but this is a classic example of the old-time fun of politics that people lament the disappearance of.
Like the old story of the candidate who went to every little town and crossroads of the state proclaiming, “My opponent is guilty of practicing nepotism! And not only that…my friends, he does so within his own family!!!”.
Yep, the days of George Smathers seems like the age of innocence. Reportedly Smathers’s campaign distributed a leaflet that made the following accusations of Claude (“Red” as they called him) Pepper:
I cannot say what the truth may be, but here ’tis as was told to me.
Smathers, of course, denied being the source of the ad.
Please. The only problem with this ad is that it wasn’t hard-hitting enough – every question asked is proven fact, he should have hit him harder and when called on it, hit him again.
A beautiful state that gave us George Clooney, Johnny Depp, Hunter Thompson and Muhammad Ali, not to mention Devil Anse Hatfield.
I think this ad will do just fine there. If you can’t beat ’em…