*

*
Politics Extra
Enquirer reporters give the scoop on what your politicians are doing


Jessica Brown,
Hamilton County reporter


Jon Craig,
Enquirer statehouse bureau


Jane Prendergast,
Cincinnati City Hall reporter


Malia Rulon,
Enquirer Washington bureau


Carl Weiser,
Blog editor


Howard Wilkinson,
politics reporter

Powered by Blogger

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

McEwen launches attack ad

Thank goodness all of these stories attacking Rep. Jean Schmidt were published in the Enquirer:

"Schmidt's degrees questioned: Staff says she has hours, if not parchment" (April 1, 2006)

"Schmidt, Chabot spar over support: He says campaign Web site citing his endorsement is wrong" (March 8, 2006)

"Schmidt in a war on words: Rookie lawmaker's 'coward' remarks ricochet" (Nov. 22, 2005)

Because Bob McEwen, who is challenging Schmidt in the May 2 GOP primary, used all of these stories in his new ad, which starts off attacking Schmidt for voting "to raise the sales tax and the gas tax and a new tax on personal services."

Showing the Enquirer stories, the commercial says: "Jean Schmidt also boasted of a college degree she hadn't earned and endorsements she didn't have. She even implied this decorated marine was a coward. And Jean Schmidt wants us to believe in her?"

Then the music changes and McEwen is shown with children and veterans in what looks like a spring picnic, as the narrator says: "On May 2nd, let's elect a conservative congressman we can trust."

We can't wait to see which Enquirer story Schmidt uses in her attack ad on McEwen.


37 Comments:

at 6:31 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just wanted to post a transcript courtesy of BizzyBlog from Bouncing Bob's appearance on Cunningham's show last week:

"McEwen: I have not engaged in any negative campaigning. Negative campaigning is when you attack the person and not the policy or the position. I have not done that, and you have seen who is the negative campaigner.
Cunningham: Well then who is bringing up this stuff about her education?
McEwen: Not me. Not me.
Cunningham: The Enquirer?
McEwen: Not me. I’ve only talked about the issues and the taxes and the concerns of what kind of representation we will have. And you know that Billy."

Who is the liar now?

 
at 6:38 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

That was such a lame attack ad. I can't believe that they would waste time to attack her on Murtha, when most voters in OH-02 liked what she said!

 
at 6:42 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

On Bill Cunningham's show Bob McEwen, when asked about negative campaigning said and I quote: "I have not engaged in any negative campaigning. Negative campaigning is when you attack the person and not the policy or the position. I have not done that, and you have seen who is the negative campaigner." Then Bill asked who the negative campaigner was, Bouncing Bob's response? "Not me, not me." Then Bill asked if he would blame the Enquirer. The bagger's answer? "Not me, I’ve only talked about the issues and the taxes and the concerns of what kind of representation we will have. And you know that Billy." By the way Bob, his nickname is Willie. So who's lying? Bob said that on April 20th, sent out negative literature in the mail on April 21st, and now releases a negative television ad. This is sad, so sad. I think it's safe to say whose campaign is going down the drain. Thanks to Evans-Novak for confirming this.

 
at 6:45 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a McEwen supporter I'm disgusted this has turned negative. I hope this doesn't backfire. I'm surprised their campaign is acting in desperation.

 
at 6:48 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh My God! When I saw that this morning, I thought it was a Democrat ad! Why on earth would McEwen use an issue that pushed Jean to the spotlight in the Greater Cincinnati area? Way to go Mr. Harlow, remind everyone about what made her name recognition fire up into the high 80's.
Who on earth is advising Bob? They should be fired. They must all be drinking "Liz's famous kool-aid" .

 
at 6:54 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sweet, they should just play the video over again and make every Republican fall back in love with her. I was hoping I could be there saying the same thing, at least we all know that McEwen doesn't even have the balls to say something like that, but he also doesn't think it's ok for anyone else to do. Liz might get angwy, awww.

 
at 6:58 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

S.O.S. McEwen's ship is sinking!!! Let me rephrase, his raft is deflating! Harlow, Pick, Burgess, Jenkins, Lizzzzzz and Co. are falling into irrelevance!

EARTH TO MCEWEN, when you swing to make-up 20+ points, make sure they hit!!! You're confusing your supporters and the "unbelievable undecided 3%" by attacking her with the Murtha comment!
Obviously, things are a bit different than when Bobby and Lizzzz ruled D.C.! Campaign strategy these days says to stay ON MESSAGE and positive.

 
at 7:00 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

CLEARLY McEwen is losing this one.

 
at 7:18 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am taken back by this one. I've been at two forums now where Bob has personally said to me that he would not go negative and would not make this an issue of anything but what I and I hope others want to hear, the REAL issues. I don't care about what the two have done, I watn to know what they would do. I have less than a week to see exactly who's for real in this race, and I thought it was McEwen, but I just do not know anymore. The outrage seems to be spreading fast and I'm not surprised. I voted for David Smith last year because of DeWine and McEwen's campaigning, now McEwen looks like he's gotten a big head again. Maybe Deborah Kraus is for me. I don't know.

 
at 8:19 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok now I love all of the made up names that were used in this blog. It is funny to see but I think the same person wrote many of those.
The person who said they were a McEwen supporter is for sure a Schmidt supporter. Anybody can see through that. Schmidt people have nothing better than to play games like that. We have seen before where they use the name of a Mcewen supporter and it is proven that the McEwen supporter did not write the response.

McEwen said he had not campaigned negatively but now he has no choice. Schmidt hires democratic lawyers to file Bogus lawsuits against Bob. There will be more. Talk about negative. Why don't you let the voters decide instead of using the courts to throw up Bogus claims and lawsuits. Good job on the hire of the Democratic # 1 fund raising lawyer.

Now what really hurts the Schmidt people is that everything is the ad is TRUE. She did lie about a degree she did not have. She did claim endorsements she did not have, she did make those statements on the floor of the house(and it was not just the statements, it was that she did it there, it was no place for that and it shows her poor judgement.)
Now all of these and more are true. So what if Bob brings it up?? Does the truth hurt??
Negative is not showing up and debating and answering questions from the voters who pay her salary. Negative is trying to win the election through a smoke screen on lawsuits. If Bob's ad is negative at least it is the truth.

 
at 8:27 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

You should be ashamed. You just compared Bob to Scott Petterson. T(he guy who killed his wife in CA) Listen we may like one canidate or another but you crossed the line. We can talk about issues or records of the canidate but it is sad that a Schmidt supporter made that comparison. I do not like Jean but I have repect for her as a person and as on representative. I think Bob would represent us better but I will not go down to your level. Is this really how the Schmidt people resond to a commercial that seems to tell things that are actually true??

Instead of calling McEwen a murderer why dont you remember this is a political race and nothing more.

Show a little class.

And one more thing remember as a Schmidt supporter that none other than Jean Schmidt said in 1992 that Bob McEwen did nothing wrong in the House Banking Scandal. It is public record. Besides the fact that Bob was completly exonerated of any wrong doing. But hey you compared him to a murderer so you will lie about the house banking scandal also.

 
at 9:06 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Collin you have not seen any ads yet? I have seen both Schmidt and McEwen ads many times.

Trying to say that there is no McEwen ads?? Trying to tell another half-truth??

 
at 9:34 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Schmidt folks are in a state of panic (sign wars, lawsuits, spending out the ying-yang), why? Why would they be flooding these blogs and papers w/anti-McEwen propoganda? Maybe they know something we don't know. Could the race be closer than they will admit? If Schmidt has such a huge lead why not float along until Tuesday and stop making such a big splash in the political pond? I find it odd yet reassuring.

 
at 10:49 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Collin:

Well there are several of us who know who you are. Collin Rink. You have a direct connection to the Schmidt Campaign. Your actions are more than SAD. It was you then led Bob McEwen outside last night so he could get served with the Bogus lawsuit(that your democratic lawyer) filed. Of course it was dis-missed, because it is a complete joke and the worst kind of political stunt. And there you are right in the middle of it. Heard you ran and jumped in a car and sped away. What you had to run. You are the same person who showed no repect at a Republican gathering in your comments and yelling down of Bob.

You have shown your true class by being directly involved in this bogus lawsuit stuff. You earlier claimed that Jean was ahead by 20% points. Not sure why you would need to help with a Lawsuit that is a bunch of crap if you were ahead by 20 points.

Is that all you have been up to Collin?? I bet not!!!!

But we see you are turly going to spin everything you can for Jean and do alot more.

 
at 11:07 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Remember, when Bob said he wasn't negative campaigning, the flyer you speak of wasn't out yet.

I've also heard that he was advised that negative campaigning is when you make false accusations, distort the truth, or basically lie about the other candidate--usually on matters that are completely irrelevant to the candidate's position on the issues.

All the attacks on Bob during this year's campaign are made up, unsubstantiated, and speak mainly to where he lives, not what kind of person he is, his character, or his position on political issues. Thus, Jean's campaigning would be discribed as negative. Also, she is hiring lawyers to make the trumped up charges.

On the flip side, the things his campaign are reporting are facts--she did lie on her resume, she did claim false endorsements, she did make a fool of herself in Congress (she admits this because she RETRACTED her own statement, thus acknowledging her error). Bob did not have to hire lawyers with campaign dollars to find this stuff out nor did he or would he make stuff up. Private citizens and organizations saw the proof and brought it to light.

If the Enquirer had only reported facts, the Schmidt stories would've been on the front pages and the McEwen allegations would have only contained quotes from the Schmidt campaign, with the reputable reporter noting that these were only allegations and that Mr. McEwen maintains his innocence. At the very least, they should have given his side on the stories. Now, he either points to her flaws, or has to advertise the false accusations made against himself while noting why they are false. Neither are great options in this day when information is gathered in sound bites, but obviously the former ends up being the sensible choice.

 
at 11:32 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, mny of you are taking cheap shots at Jeff Hardin. Betterwatch out. Hardincan freeze the bllod inyourveins with nothing more than a look. What is wrong with Mcewen pointing out that Scmidt has lied about herself her entire political career. She had more than one degree because her opponents had only one. She taught for four years with that second degree,remember. Then in her deposition she claimed she never persued a second bachelor's degree. She is unsure but she thinks she was persuing a master's degree. She is also unsure but she thinks the teaching experience she was quoted as having was a semester at Withrow for herstudent teaching.Then she stated she taught "Morality " at a local Catholic Elementary School for three years for an hour once a week as part of a CCD progra.
Does the Catholic Church teach the ten commandments Jean? Isn't "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness" one of those commandments,Jean?

Pointing ourt that Jean has trouble telling the truth about herself and her endorsements fair game after Jean walked behind a banner in her last campaign that mocked Pat Dewine saying "Character Counts." If that is true,Jean, you are unworthy of being elected.
Like in the campaign against Tom Niehaus, Jean and her supporters, Thea and Collin, are lying to obfiscate the truth. The only thing stated here that is close to the truth is that Duffy Beischel has two phat,single daughters. Shame on you for mocking the lovely lasses and for intimating that Hardin is a lechrous old man. Have any of you any morals? Maybe you took Jean's morality class and have no idea of right and wrong?
Right Allen and Barry?

 
at 11:43 PM, April 26, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Attn: Anon 6:58

You are right things are ran different in D.C. now days and thats why the American public hates you guys! Have you ever looked at Congress' approval rating? Oh wait, you probably don't trust polls. Wait, that's all I hear about from you guys.

 
at 12:28 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Exactly right. If Schmidt was up 20 points, the logical move is to stay quiet, poll like crazy to make sure you're really up 20, stay quiet, keep polling, stay quiet, keep polling, do your GOTV, stay quiet, and then have a victory party while claiming you coasted to victory.

Instead, she rolled the dice on a VERY risky move to hire $tan Che$ley in what some might construe as an attempt at disenfranchising Bob McEwen.

Even if you don't like McEwen, it's pretty hard to stomach any candidate suing their way to victory.

This Chesley thing was an act of desperation - that much is obvious. The only question is whether the race is neck and neck, or if she knows McEwen is ahead.

Oh, wait. That's right. She could even be up 5 points, but she knows that tomorrow's ruling that she LIED on her resume for 16 years is going to evaporate that lead.

Ah, yes. Now it all makes sense.

 
at 6:14 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I win this primary...

and I just might win this primary...

I will be running against Jean Schmidt...

Does that Mean that I will be Running Against a LIAR in November?

 
at 8:11 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems Jim Parker(who I don't think has much of a chance of winning) would like to see Jean win. Why would that be. Because the Dems showed last time how close they were to beating her and they know they can beat her this time. Jim and the Dems are rooting for Schmidt. That should tell you enough right there.

 
at 8:27 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Collin:
Be very careful in how you lie. Don't let one lie lead to another. You were the one that helped serve the lawsuit on Bob. Rink you can lie but its not going to work. I thought you might be proud of what you did, guess not!!! You love Schmidt and I assume support what she has done so go ahead and take credit for it.
Take credit for your part in one of the worst political stunts of all time. I love your lame story about driving through the parking lot.
I would be careful about lying. Is there anything eles you have said or done that you have lied about or may have to lie about??

 
at 10:58 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am curious why the enquirer just keeps giving her a free pass. Each lie is minor but when grouped together it becomes major but just gets burried. I thought the job of credible news sources was to report the news, not try to make it.

 
at 11:05 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Negative ad? I don't think so. It simply points out the truth and makes more people aware of the stories on Mean Jean. The truth hurts.

Now there aren't any more negative than Mean Jean using the Enquirer and TV with Liberal Stan Chesley to create negativity around McEwen.

I ashamed of both, but more on Schmidt because she created an unholy alliance with the liberal democrat to go after her opponent and his family.

 
at 11:17 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

The desperation of the Bob McEwen supporters on this blog is palatable. You guys should be worried - Jean Schmidt has already defeated McEwen once before! Do you think voters in Clermont, Pike, Adams, Brown, and Scioto counties care about message board mudslinging? They're going to vote for the incumbent. The people who have posted anti-Schmidt comments on this board come across like a bunch of grade school kids taunting a classmate on the playground. Give it a rest!

 
at 11:41 AM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

anon 11:07, he lied on Thursday, the flier arrived in mail boxes on Friday. I don't know if you're familiar with the Postal Service, but it's not a one day thing, you usually have to place the fliers a day or two before. Oh, and you're also quite bogus because McEwen, I'm sure saw them. I mean, they have to be made, printed, recieved, postmarked, sent out... I've never known a candidate who did not know the day before they were goign to send out negative lit.

To whoever said that Schmidts desperation on these blogs shows. There are like four people posting, you guys are a LOT worse and have been for a long time now, and truly it's just fun now beacuse your panties are getting all in a bunch. Do you think we take this seriously, I mean come on. Phil McKrevis, Sharon Peter, Jack Hinoff, all the wonderful Jeff Hardin names. This is just a fun way to say, we're winning, get over it.

 
at 12:04 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Schmidt's complaint to the Ohio Elections Commission over McEwen's residency was thrown out with a 4-0 vote.

Another one of Schmidt's desperate acts has failed.

Face it, she's not up in the polls, she's in the hole and when she is found guilty of telling all these lies this afternoon, she's going down even more.

Pointing out your opponent's lies is the issue in this campaign. So it's not negative campaigning.

If we are voting over lies, Schmidt has lied much more so that makes her the loser, or should I say just reinforces she is a loser.

 
at 12:09 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dayton Daily News endorses McEwen. At least there is one news organization that is objective and thinks Schmidt is a poor choice to represent this district.

 
at 2:01 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous appears to be the only person who consistently backs Mrs. Schmidt. Real people prefer Bob McEwen by a great preponderance.

Negative advertising is what has been going on in the Gubenatorial race. It is not negative advertising to expose something actually reprehensible. Negative advertising distorts--such as having an ambulance racing attorney file and then withdraw a spurious law suit. But it is not negative advertising to expose an actual lie; to show that your opponent has voted for unnecessary tax increases; to show that she cannot articulate the values that we Ohioans hold sacred.

The cry of negativity by the anonymous shills will convince no one. The voters want the facts, and the fact is that Bob McEwen is eminently qualified, and Mrs. Schmidt is clearly not. Those of us who were veterans in the fight led by Ronald Reagan, have had our eyes on Bob McEwen for a long time. He is the real goods: A man of character, integrity, who articulates the values that made America great. That is why I was personally approached to work for him by one of the Reagan campaign managers.

To put it simply, anonymous makes no valid points, in this thread. Next Tuesday, those of us who are not afraid to go on record, will be heard from!

William Flax

 
at 2:33 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Jean Schmidt did the hours for her degree, how come she did not authorize UC to release her transcript to prove it? Something tells me not all the hours were completed either - yet another Schmidt/Bennett/Freeman lie.

When you're at the bottom of a hole, stop digging.

 
at 3:32 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Flax:

There is a great tradition in American political debate of publishing political diatribes under a pseudonym or as "Anonymous." Jefferson did it in his political career. Lincoln did as well. And I, "Anonymous," am proud to carry on the legacy of our Founding Fathers. I'm as real as you are. I'm not a shill. I'm just another concerned voter like you. Next time, brush up on your American history before attempting to brush off the comments of half of the posters on this blog.

 
at 8:31 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We used it for our official residence for a period of time until such time as ... We were between properties," McEwen explained.

What in tarnation does this mean!!??

 
at 10:46 PM, April 27, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

common sense:

It means they sold one residence and had to move out before they found another to buy, and in the mean time found someone else to stay with or use as a "home base" until they found a place they wanted to buy. This is a very common occurance.

Also, since it has been proven he is innocent of any wrong doing, you should stop trying to quote laws you obviously aren't qualified to analyze or apply properly.

 
at 6:47 AM, April 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to the person who made that last comment about my candidacy...

It doesn't matter to me who wins the Republican primary. I will work as tirelessly against them as I have for the last 7 months and 29 days, thousands of homes and thousands of people... My ideas for a better America WITHOUT RAISING TAXES are better than Jean's or Bob's.

And you are right... It is virtually impossible for a Democrat to win in the Ohio 2nd District. No Democrat has won in 32 years. There are 3 Republicans for every 1 Democrat in this District. The only difference is, if Schmidt wins her primary and I win mine, this became one of the most well-funded and winnable Congressional Districts in America. I didn't make it that way. Jean did. You should see the communications that I have from people all across America just waiting to see if I win this primary. And remember, the first Congressman that I ever voted for in my life was John P. Murtha. I used to live in his District.

It is possible that I will win this primary and then, people will have a political (Jean Schmidt) and a non-political but quite capable (Jim Parker) choice. My views and ideas are such that I would be an ideal candidate in November. If the Democrats of Southern Ohio vote for another representative of the extreme left wing, they will lose again. I offer you a moderate candidacy that is focused entirely on the middle class and the baby boom generation. I can do this for you but only need you to do one thing for me.

Vote for Jim Parker on May 2nd. Thank you and have a great day!

JIm Parker
Democratic Candidate for US Congress
Southern Ohio - 2nd District - 2006

 
at 8:15 AM, April 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look out folks, Mean Jean is furious and ranting and raving in her office about her lastest scandle and she has vowed she is going negative big-time with ads this weekend.

 
at 11:03 AM, April 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great just what we need MORE negative ads...For goodness sake give it up. What a joke

 
at 1:52 PM, April 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

No what we need are more ads that tell the truth. Schmidt people don't like McEwen's ads because they tell the truth. And not one Schmidt supporter can claim that what is in Bob's ads is not true.

7-0 she lied by the Ohio elections commission.

Meanwhile Schmidt makes claims about Bob that when they are heard in court or by the elections commission they are throw out faster than you can say "Schmidt raised my taxes"

Schmidt was negative from day one and did not want to talk issues or debate. Now that her lies are beening shown to everyone you cry about it being negative. Well she did this to herself.

 
at 5:10 PM, April 28, 2006 Anonymous Anonymous said...

jim parker-

Start up your own blog if you have the means. As for this blog, no one cares about your candidacy. Your just taking up space with comments that no one reads, let alone cares about.

 
Post a Comment*

* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.

By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.

<< Home


Blogs
Jim Borgman
Today at the Forum
Paul Daugherty
Politics Extra
N. Ky. Politics
Pop culture review
Cincytainment
Who's News
Television
Roller Derby Diva
Art
CinStages Buzz....
The Foodie Report
cincyMOMS
Classical music
John Fay's Reds Insider
Bengals
High school sports
NCAA
UC Sports
CiN Weekly staff
Soundcheck