This Time Its Personal

Personal attacks are nothing new in politics but this year I've noticed something slightly different.  Personal attacks seem to be the only thing in the Democratic Party's play book this year.

I can see why.  Obama's deficit levels are dwarfing the Bush deficit they campaigned against.  The stimulus plan is considered a failure since unemployment levels remain hovering just shy of 10% and the only jobs anyone can point to created by the buckets of money pumped out are temporary government jobs.  All you have to do is mention ObamaCare and instantly you see a majority of voters against every politician that supported it.  Democrats have even lost their advantage on the wars they used in their campaigns back in 2006 and 2008 since they haven't changed anything.  The withdraw from Iraq is following the plan Bush signed off on right down to the letter.

And even here on the state level things aren't much better.  We've got a state budget with a $600 million dollar deficit and a governor who refuses to even admit it.  We've seen state Democrats stripping away parental rights giving children even as young as 13 or 14 the ability to walk into an abortion clinic and get a possible life threatening medical procedure done without their parents ever having to know.  These same children are not considered mature enough to be able to get an Advil for a headache or receive medical treatement for a cut without parents allowing for it but it's ok for them to get abortions? 

What's the most frustrating to me though at least from the point of view of someone involved in local town government is that Lynch and company continue play shell games passing the buck by shifting costs of state mandated services down to town levels.  Of course Lynch does this to give the appearance of a balanced budget all while keeping state property taxes somewhat stable meanwhile your local government has to either start cutting away or they end up being saddled with the blame of raising your property taxes.  Nothing more then passing the buck.

But look at the ads being run right now about Frank Guinta, John Stephen and other republicans in the area.  They aren't defending Carol Shea Porter's and John Lynch's records because they can't.

Christen O'Donnell is another perfect example.  They pull a foolish quote she made back in 1999 and have made a whole campaign about her use of witchcraft.  By the way, if you've ever used a Ouiji board then you too have dabbled in witchcraft.  The entertainment liberals have jumped at every chance they get with this one ranging from a spoof ad from Elvira (which is really funny by the way) to SNL mocking her every chance they get.  In the case of SNL with their character assassinations, this isn't the first time.  They've successfully blurred the line between the real person and their "comedy skits" with Sarah Palin.  Just look at how many people honestly believe Sarah was the one who said "I can see Russia from my house".  It wasn't, that was said in the SNL skit.  Here's what Sarah actually said:

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Tina Fey was the one who made the comment everyone now attributes to Sarah.  But blurring the line between reality and what they want you to believe is typical of liberals.

Another perfect example was an article just emailed me this morning, you can read it in full HERE.

Here are the key statements in the article:

A Tea Party-backed candidate who allegedly murdered two unarmed Iraqis could win a seat in the House of Representatives, The Guardian reports.

Thirty-nine-year-old Ilario Pantano, who is running for North Carolina's 7th congressional district as a Republican, was charged with the premeditated murder of two Iraqi civilians in 2005 while serving as a second lieutenant with the US Marines.

Wow, sounds terrible right?

Read it again slowly.  Two words jump out at me, "allegedly" and "charged".  You can charge anyone of anything.  The charges against him were in 2005.  So being a thinking person I knew right away something didn't add up.  If a charge of murder made against someone in 2005 was valid what are the chances they would be free walking the street just 5 years later?

A quick Google search proved out my suspicions that once again partial truths and incomplete stories were used to attack a Republican candidate.  You can read the details HERE.

Pantano served in the first and second wars in Iraq. He came to national attention when he was accused of premeditated murder in the killing of two detainees during a unit mission near Fallujah, Iraq on April 15, 2004. An article 32 hearing found no credible evidence or testimony for the accusation and declined to prosecute Pantano, dropping all charges. The day after the charges were dropped, forensic evidence from the autopsies of the two Iraqis corroborated Pantano's testimony - that he shot them as they moved toward him

Of course the fact that the charges were unfounded and out right disproven with evidence that doesn't stop liberals from using it against him and avoid any chance of having to run on their own records.  Better to use half truths and disproven claims.  I guess that says something about their records, doesn't it?

And now we even see actions of supporters being used against candidates such as in the case of what happened with Rand Paul.  A woman wearing a wig and was clearly in disguise came rushing toward Paul as he got out of a car waving something in her hand.  Security did what it would do in the case of protecting anyone running for a federal office and brought her down to the ground subduing her.  Now what crossed the line is one of Paul's supporters apparently kicked her in the head or at least put his boot against her head.  While that isn't acceptable assuming she was already subdued and no longer presents a harm to the candidate, the actions of someone in a crowd are not and should not be viewed as one and the same as actions of a candidate themselves.

But I suspect as desperation continues we'll see more and more attacks from the left using anything and everything they can dig up to make it personal so they can avoid having to run on their own records.