I love when Democrats are dumb enough to tell us what they really believe.
For years, I’ve heard Democrats spew garbage like “Campaigns should be about issues” and “It’s the Republicans who champion hateful rhetoric”.
Democrats, you see, are loving, peaceful, tranquil sorts who are only looking out for the little guy, as long as he’s not little enough to fit in a womb.
Then along comes Sen. Mamie Locke, expert politico and Professor of Political Science and Dean of the School of Liberal Arts.
She was quite disappointed that Gary McCollum, who lied about his military record and was paid six figures by Cox Cable to take the year off to campaign, lost against Sen. Frank Wagner.
Want to know why McCollum lost according to Locke the brilliant one?
McCollum wasn’t negative enough.
I know. How clueless can she be?
Mailboxes were filled for two months with negative attacks from McCollum accusing Wagner of polluting water with uranium, spilling oil all over the coast, Wagner’s companies billing practices, abortion, and just about everything else.
McCollum lauched tens of thousands of dollars of advertising attacking Wagner’s Dominion Power bill (which Locke voted for, too).
A million dollars of television was bought by McCollum and the ads were negative attacks on Wagner from start to finish.
In fact, I can’t remember any ads by McCollum talking positively about anything he would do as Senator.
But Locke says the trouble wasn’t the lack of any positive message by McCollum. The problem was he wasn’t negative enough.
“Locke echoes other Democrats who said Democrats should have been more aggressive in highlighting the weaknesses of incumbent Frank Wagner’s record in the Senate.
“Wagner had no record of important achievements,” said Locke. “But he ran ads stating that he was good friend of public education.” (NJAG)
Wagner ran positive ads???????? Egads!
I don’t know how much more negative McCollum’s 100% negative campaign could get, but maybe the Prof can help.
Maybe Sen. Locke can add to the courses she teaches at Hampton University. Maybe “Lying in Mailpieces 101” or “Mudslinging in Media 235”. Perhaps she teaches a senior course in “Character Destruction”.
I at least give her credit for being public about her support for hateful, disgusting negative campaign attacks. Maybe now the press can realize who the real negative forces in today’s politics really are.
