Warning: Repukes have a new tactic that is working very well

[rpgamerd00d]

Rove has implemented a totally new tactic, and its working very well. All the media is falling for it, as are the Dems in congress, as are we here at DU.

They take something that is a non-issue, pretend to cover it up as if it were something bad, then let us "discover" the truth, which turns out to be... nothing really spectacular in the first place - and we look like morons and extremists.

I feel that the Abramoff photos are JUST SUCH A PLOY.

In the end, what will we find? Simple. Pictures of Bush with Abramoff. And.... then.... um..... nothing. They mean nothing. They already can explain them away. Making the photos a big deal is a BAD IDEA.

What we need is to tie Bush to Abramoff directly, thru contibutions, records, documents, etc. Not through simple photos which prove nothing except they were in the same room as each other. The photos are a RED HERRING.

The same thing happened to the Dems in the Alito hearings regarding the CAP documents. They already knew there was nothing in them bad, but then they pretended to be covering them up (Arlen Spectre totally hoodwinked Kennedy), only for Kennedy to end up looking stupid for making such a drama out of what ended up being nothing, which of course, the Repukes ALREADY KNEW.

[jimshoes]

1. Still love to plaster them all over the net

just because. Know whut I mean Vern.

[displacedtexan]

2. They also turn all bad Bush* news into an opinion poll. n/t

[Surya Gayatri]

3. Couldn't agree more, rpgamer

The photos are a red herring and prove nothing. So, * shook hands with him a few times in sight of a camera. So what? That's not what will incriminate him. A hard paper trail is required, as you said.

[KoKo]

4. I could agree with you on this...but Josh Marshall takes a different view.

Bush doesn't know him?

Abramoff was a long time associate of one of the president's top political advisors, Grover Norquist and his chief political guru Karl Rove.

Bush never made his acquaintance?

Every Republican power player in Washington knew Jack Abramoff. Many of them knew him very, very well. But President Bush never knew him? Their paths never crossed?

That is simply ridiculous.

What's more, everyone asking the questions knows it's ridiculous. The problem is that absent a 2+2=5 type statement they fon't feel comfortable calling the president out as a liar.

Pictures in themselves don't mean much. There are pictures of the president with people he knew far less well than Jack Abramoff, people he really never knew at all. But when those pictures of Abramoff and the president slip into public view, the lie will simply become unsustainable. They know that.

And that's why the White House is turning the city upside down doing everything in its power to insure they never see the light of day.

More...explaining this at.......
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007542.php

[Jai4WKC08]

11. Exactly right

Bush lied. Again. That shouldn't be news to any of us, but the American people need to hear it, with proof, over and over and over again. Until it starts to sink in. That's the way the Repubs do it (they don't even bother with proof), and it works.

And don't sell photos short. You can have all the evidence in the world in the way of documents, receipts, testimony, and it's all just so much blah-blah-blah to the average voter. If the media bothers to cover it at all. But a picture. That gets some air-time, and sticks in people's minds.

People are starting to catch on that Bush is a liar. It's a hard hurdle for most of 'em to clear--Americans don't WANT to believe they can't trust their president. If more of 'em knew what we know about his lack of character, more of them would be upset with no-warrant eavesdropping, more would question his judicial or other appointments, more would question what he says about the situation in Iraq, and torture, and probably dozens of other things that come out of the White House and the Repub Congress that rubber stamps everything he does. And IF (when) we take back Congress, more might be willing to admit that he really does deserve impeachment, and it's not just "payback" for what was done to the Big Dawg.

[Poiuyt]

5. The trouble is that Abramoff is a hero to the RW base, felon or not.

Posting pictures of Bush and Abramoff won't hurt them much.

[rpgamerd00d]

6. I guess I was right. Repukes regurgitating this post on their sites -nt

[KoKo]

7. Abramoff/Bush Photo earned $140,000 from the 2004 Bush Campaign!

Abramoff/Bush photo earned $140,000 from 2004 campaign

Ron Brynaert
Published: January 26, 2006
Print This | Email This

A photograpy studio which admitted to scrubbing at least one photograph of President George Bush and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff was paid more that $140,000 by the Bush/Cheney campaign in 2004, RAW STORY has learned.

Reflections Photography president Joanne Amos told Joshua Micah Marshall of Talking Points Memo that a "business decision" led the company to remove a photograph taken in late 2003 that is believed to feature Bush and Abramoff together. According to Amos, the photograph is "not relevant."

Another blog reported that Amos donated $2,000 to President Bush. The studio owner also gave $4,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2004. Steven Amos, vice president of Reflections, has contributed $2,000 to Bush and $4150 to the RNC. According to Political Money Line, each gave the RNC $750 on the same day last April.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Studio_that_scrubbed_photo_earned_140000_0126.html

[Strong Atheist]

8. Tend to agree. Need hard evidence, not photo-ops.

BTW: What role playing games?

[rpgamerd00d]

9. In the immortal words of John Conner in Terminator 2....

... "uh... all of em, I think."

:)

[Strong Atheist]

10. Oooookkkkaayyy .... nt.

[rpgamerd00d]

15. No, seriously, Ive played more RPGs than I can even count.

My bookshelves are overloaded with pretty much every RPG ever printed.
Of course, D&D is still king.

:)

[Strong Atheist]

18. Ah. nt.

[Jai4WKC08]

13. We need both

Hard evidence is needed in a trial (or an impeachment proceding).

But TV loves photos. They tend to ignore documentary evidence, or mention it once in passing. It's boring. Viewers tune it out. And if anyone tries to discuss the evidence in an interview, the media just air some Repub at the same time who presents with made-up or twisted evidence to the contrary. And if anyone's still watching, they decide both sides are equally dirty.

No, when it comes to cable news, a picture is worth about a billion words.

[Cleita]

12. That's been happening since the early days of DU, especially

around election time when all the non-issues and wedge issues get posted and the threads have 300 plus replies on them.

I think Skinner and the mods have gotten wise to this and there are fewer and fewer of these threads that last for very long anymore.

Thanks Skinner and mods.

[raysr]

14. The tactic that's REALLY hurting us

is whatever they're doing to scare the spine out of our reps!

[Cleita]

16. Yeah, I think there is blackmail and out and out threats to persons

and family that is at work here. I hope a whistleblower will eventually expose them and that the truth is so shocking that even the MSM can't ignore it.

[TheFarseer]

17. True, but having those pics would be nice

It ties him to Abramoff better than anything else will in the minds of the public. I agree that they are using that tactic. It's just like with Dan Rather and the Texas Air National Guard. I can't think of other examples off hand, but I know this has been happening. IF we are demanding the pictures and launching congressional hearings into the pictures, then I agree that will look stupid. I think these pics will come out anyway. It's just too hot.


btw - we should add Abramoff to the dictonary

[elperromagico]

19. Stop worrying about their *new* tactics

and start worrying about our lack of any tactic.

[slaveplanet]

20. the media is falling for nothing

at this point they are completely controlled and vetted just like China.

They'll attack when they are told to attack - (think Monica Lewinsky in the beret) where were the documents then?

You could find Bush's skidmarks in Abramhoffs shorts, won't matter...Documents don't matter because they won't report them...at this point Bush could sacrifice little doggies on the front lawn of the WH and nothing will happen...

They spin when they are told to spin

[peacetalksforall]

21. Notice that whatever the tactic - it is always lacking honesty. nt

[blogslut]

22. I disagree

with the argument that a picture of Dubya with Abraham Jackoff means nothing. If a photo means nothing then why are KKKarl and Co. trying so hard to keep them from the public?

One picture can change EVERYTHING: