SwiftVets.com

[fortdixlover]

This infuriating editorial was in today's Phila. Inquirer. It took a gratuitous and outrageous potshot at the Swiftvets in a way that only leftists can manage. I really am beginning to think that today's leftists are brain-damaged by either the illegal drugs they imbibed in their youth - or due to the drugs imbibed by their parents in their youth.

-- FDL

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/12362723.htm

Posted on Fri, Aug. 12, 2005
Editorial | Roberts Nomination
NARAL sinks low in attack ad

As conservative groups counterpunch over an abortion-rights organization's unfair attacks on Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr., one ad asks, "How low can these frustrated liberals sink?"

Answer: Oh, about as low as your garden-variety Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smear campaign - or any one of many below-the-belt attacks from the right on liberal causes.

How many times has the American Civil Liberties Union been pilloried and caricatured as a flag-burning, Klan- and Nazi-loving group of pointyheads for its legitimate defense of First Amendment freedoms?

For all those, then, who proclaim to be shocked, just shocked by the personal attack, the use of guilt by association, or acrobatic leaps of illogic, please give it a rest.

American political and civic discourse has been poisoned by this stuff for more than a decade - and the loyal, blue-state opposition didn't invent, much less perfect the craft.

That said, NARAL Pro-Choice America's decision to adopt these sleazy tactics doesn't make its ad right. In fact, it's dead wrong.

At Factcheck.org, the Annenberg Public Policy Center group that polices political ads and campaign statements, NARAL's Roberts ad has been blasted as false and misleading.

The NARAL television ads running this week on cable and selected broadcast markets highlight a legal stance that Roberts - then a deputy solicitor general - took in a 1991 case on behalf of the first Bush administration. At issue was whether the federal government could use a Reconstruction-era civil-rights statute to rein in abortion-clinic protesters.

Eventually, a 6-3 majority supported the Bush position, which was that the law did not apply. That prompted Congress to enact the right policy: a new federal law shielding clinics from violent protests.

Seeing the brief ad, though, viewers learn none of these details. There's not even a nod to the idea that a lawyer might support a legal principle, even if the actors in a particular case aren't model citizens. (Think Nazis marching in Skokie, Ill.)

Instead, viewers see images of a 1998 abortion-clinic bombing and survivor who says she is "determined to stop this violence so I'm speaking out." The ad concludes with the reckless charge that Roberts' "ideology leads him to excuse violence against other Americans."

Groups on both sides of the Roberts nomination need to move beyond vying to be the best practitioners of this bad tradition.
_________________
"Millions For Defense, Not One Cent For Tribute" - Thomas Jefferson on paying ransom to Muslim corsairs (pirates).

[FMBass]

Like the rest of the leftist moonbats, the editorial author is just parroting phrases without a clue.
_________________
ETR-3 USS Harold E. Holt
DE 1074 (1972-1975)

[GM Strong]

The Inquirer, like the rest, cannot understand why the circulation keeps dropping. You cannot tell the frontpage swill from the editorial page sewage. Their Staff "Cartoonist" is vicious and decidedly unfunny. I won't read the rag even if it is free. This is not a newspaper, it is a propoganda sheet of the left.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[BuffaloJack]

This rag, the Philadelphia Inquirer, appears to be no better than the Louisville Courier-Journal who slimed us the other week.

At least we made a deep enough impression on them that they won't forget us for some time. It's almost a tribute to our success. Lefties always demonize anything they can't overcome.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71)

[GM Strong]