Dem House ads give Ryan leading role -- as villain
Paul Ryan is about to get a leading role in some commercials about House races -- and he's cast as a villain. Politico reports:
The ads are aimed at sharpening their depiction of Republicans as steadfast supporters of Ryan’s controversial budget plan and Medicare overhaul. Party strategists say the commercials go further than many of the previous ads they ran, which merely mentioned the budget but did not include the Wisconsin congressman’s picture.
The latest offensive will come today, when the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee releases a commercial casting New York Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle as a Ryan pawn.
“Only in Washington would this happen. Ann Marie Buerkle voted to increase taxes on middle-class families by $1,400. And where does the money go? To give millionaires a $265,000 tax cut,” the ad says as a picture of Ryan flashes on screen. “It’s Paul Ryan’s plan — and Anne Marie Buerkle voted for it.”
The ad was the House Democratic campaign arm’s second to feature Ryan – late last week it came out with another which showed a stick-figure-like New York Rep. Chris Gibson standing alongside Ryan.
Read more and see link to the other ad here This is the ad being unveiled today. :
HOW was the phenomenon that was Sarah Palin, eclipsed in such a short time? The GOP vetting process criteria is the root cause, I think. There seems to be no examination of basic electability included.
Paul Ryan hasn't validated the claims of his prowess, and he sacrificed his claimed integrity when he made disputable statements.
From Herman Cain to Rick Perry, we were presented with flawed candidate after flawed candidate, only to realize that the best choices were not the best, and indeed were never in contention.
Did the bar really get set that much lower in 2008?
HOW was the phenomenon that was Sarah Palin, eclipsed in such a short time?
ReplyDeleteThe GOP vetting process criteria is the root cause, I think. There seems to be no examination of basic electability included.
Paul Ryan hasn't validated the claims of his prowess, and he sacrificed his claimed integrity when he made disputable statements.
From Herman Cain to Rick Perry, we were presented with flawed candidate after flawed candidate, only to realize that the best choices were not the best, and indeed were never in contention.
Did the bar really get set that much lower in 2008?