20060105 Enemy Imaging

Enemy Imaging

January 5, 2006 by Kevin Dayhoff (1,127 words)

Former Georgia Senator Max Cleland (D) has resurfaced in the news once again. In Maryland? What the heck is going on here?

Last month Governor Robert L. Ehrlich announced hiring Bo Harmon to be his political director for his re-election campaign. The Baltimore Sun ran an article on December 10, 2005, which said, in part:

“Maryland Democratic Party spokesman Derek Walker said he was shocked that the governor would hire Harmon, and compared the political director to Joseph F. Steffen Jr., the former Ehrlich aide who was fired after admitting to spreading rumors about Mayor Martin O'Malley.

Democrats here and in Georgia immediately criticized the hire, saying Ehrlich is bringing to Maryland a virtuoso of nastiness who attacked the patriotism of Cleland, an Army veteran who lost three limbs in Vietnam.”

The Sun continued its criticism by calling the readers’ attention to a negative ad run by Senator Cleland’s opponent in the 2002 Georgia Senate race.

The ad used, what is known in the business as “enemy imaging.” Identifying an opponent with a nefarious character. Sorta like, running a picture of Governor Ehrlich with a fired state employee – Mr. Steffen.

The only difference is that after many folks, understandably, criticized the Chambliss campaign ad, the ad was taken off the air, changed and ran without the nefarious character images.

In the MD4BUSH–Steffengate saga; long after it has been revealed that MD4BUSH was a political dirty trick by democrats for which it has been suggested that several members of the Maryland Democratic Party have lost their jobs; the Sun is still running the negative ad which ‘enemy images’ Governor Ehrlich with Mr. Steffen.

So what is the rest of the Senator Cleland story? He lost his 2002 senate re-election bid because of his liberal voting record while serving in the senate and representing a conservative constituency.

Rich Lowry, writing in National Review on February 20, 2004, “Max Cleland, Liberal Victim,” put it best.

Democrat Senator Cleland “was on record supporting countless tax increases, and voted with his party's leadership against protecting the Boy Scouts from a campaign to keep them out of public schools and against banning partial-birth abortion. In many of these votes, he parted ways with his more conservative and popular colleague Miller, thus creating a major political vulnerability. He lost fair and square.”

This is what happened.

Senator Cleland returned home from Vietnam terribly wounded with injuries that would stop anyone but Superman. But he didn’t let being disabled stop him and he worked hard to recover and continue to serve his community and his country.

It was said best in a poignant Washington Post article on July 3, 2003, entitled “Political Veteran.”

After Mr. Cleland returned home from recovering from his injuries, in “1970, at 28, he became the youngest person ever elected to the Georgia Senate. In 1977 President Jimmy Carter appointed him to head the Veterans Administration. In 1982 he was elected as Georgia's secretary of state” and served until 1996.”

In 1996, when Senator Sam Nunn (D) decided to retire from the U.S. Senate after serving 24 years, Georgia Secretary of State Cleland tossed his hat in the ring. Senator Nunn had always been strong on national defense and Vietnam veteran Max Cleland seemed a perfect replacement.

He wasn’t.

In 1996, Mr. Cleland narrowly defeated his opponent, businessperson Guy Millner by 30,000 votes. He only got 49 percent of the vote.

Slate published an article by Michael Crowley on April 4, 2004 called: ““How the disabled war veteran became the Democrats' mascot.” It is not a poignant or deferential piece. Mr. Crowley wrote, “There was little reason to expect Cleland to be a star senator, and he wasn't.”

Of his 1996 campaign, Mr. Crowley wrote:

“In that campaign, Cleland made up for his lack of political skill—the Atlanta-Journal Constitution noted that he "has never been known as a deep thinker" and was prone to "platitudes" in debates—by harnessing the emotional power of his war injuries…”

After six years in the Senate, Senator Cleland’s re-election was in deep trouble at home. Although he could serve his southern constituency well enough on local Georgia issues, “Cleland's undoing was that he couldn't negotiate the dilemma facing many Southern Democrats — how to vote liberal in Washington while appearing conservative at home.” (Rich Lowry, February 20, 2004, “Max Cleland, Liberal Victim” National Review)

In the 2002 election, Senator Cleland was challenged by four-term conservative Republican congressman Saxby Chambliss, “who'd been elected in the "Contract With America" class of 1994.” (July 3, 2003, “Political Veteran” Washington Post)

Mr. Crowley wrote: “Most of Chambliss' attacks were based on Cleland's most "liberal" votes on social issues like partial-birth abortion. But in the race's closing weeks, Bush and Chambliss hammered at the fact that Cleland was voting with Senate Democrats against Bush's proposed Homeland Security Department because of its infamous provision limiting union rights. The message was that Cleland was kowtowing to big labor at the cost of protecting America.”

Then came those “GOP television ads.” They crossed the line. They were unnecessary and inappropriate and should have never been aired.

In the Washington Post July 3, 2003 article it was noted:

“both sides ran attack ads, but none was as controversial as Chambliss' homeland security spot. It opened with pictures of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. "As America faces terrorists and extremist dictators," said a narrator, "Max Cleland runs television ads claiming he has the courage to lead. He says he supports President Bush at every opportunity, but that's not the truth. Since July, Max Cleland voted against President Bush's vital homeland security efforts 11 times!"

After both democrats and republicans condemned the inappropriate ad, the ad was removed from the air.

Which brings us full circle. Since the Sun has brought it up. Beyond the issue of comparing how many articles the Baltimore Sun ran on MD4BUSH-Steffengate with how many articles it ran about the alleged criminal identity theft of Lt. Gov. Michael Steele’s personal financial records by Senator Schumer's staff at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee…

Now that MD4BUSH has been outed as a democratic dirty trick, the Sun needs to do a reality check and realize that by continuing to run the picture of Governor Ehrlich with Mr. Steffen on their web site, they may think that they are cleverly perpetuating a negative “enemy-imaging” ad on Governor Ehrlich.

What they are really doing is perpetuating a reminder of despicable gutter politics at its worse.

It is a rule of classier political practitioners that the family of an elected official or candidate for office is off limits – out of bounds. No matter what party to which they belong.

When is the Sun going to take the picture off their web site?

Just asking.

Kevin Dayhoff writes from Westminster. E-mail him at: kdayhoff@carr.org
####