Friday, October 05, 2007

Buhler goes negative without facts

Previously, I had labeled as a negative attack Buhler's press conference where he touted his record of "accomplishment" in the state legislature and compared it to the lack of bills that Becker has passed, claiming he would get something done and Becker was a dreamer. Some commenters claimed that this wasn't negative or an attack, just a contrast. But those of us who can look at context knew that it was an implied attack and the beginning of more to come. Today, Buhler's latest attack builds on the first.
With former police chief Rick Dinse by his side, the mayoral hopeful on Thursday laid out his second "to-do" list, which includes the installation of "crime cameras" at Pioneer Park, if he is elected in November.
[...]
Buhler also used the stage to blitz mayoral opponent Ralph Becker, whom he criticized for not passing any crime legislation during his 11 years as a legislator.
"He makes a few very vague promises," Buhler said, "but does not explain how he'll deliver."
Buhler tagged Becker's so-called blueprint on the topic, saying the only specific part is to curb graffiti.
"When it comes to public safety, he's been absent without leave."
The whole thing is ridiculous for a number of reasons. One, as I stated before, because he was the Democratic Leader in the House, Republicans in the legislature wouldn't let him pass anything. Two, Buhler was in the Republican leadership so of course his bills were able to pass. Third, a plan to violate the Fourth Amendment but do nothing for actual violent crime doesn't strike me as something that really will "fight crime." Sure those "crime cameras" might catch people dealing drugs, soliciting sex, etc. But when was the last time a person was killed, raped, shot or stabbed in Pioneer Park? The cameras idea is a gimmick. Adding 5 cops a year will barely put a dent in the problem.

Here's Ralph Becker's response.
"I'm glad to see that Dave is coming along with some proposals on what to do with the future of the city," he said. "Unlike Dave, I have been a law-enforcement officer, I have been a firefighter, and I have been an emergency medical technician."
Becker says he consistently supported legislation focused on drug enforcement, prevention and penalties for DUIs. He also pointed to a comprehensive list of city initiatives dubbed "blueprints," which he began releasing in June.
I will say it again, Buhler is attacking so often (and grasping at straws to do it) because he is down by nearly 20 points in the polls.

7 comments:

Misty Fowler said...

"Crime cameras"? What, is this the UK?

Jason The said...

"Crime Cameras"

That is honestly the funniest thing I've read this week.

Wellington said...

Having crime cameras around the city is not a new idea. I recently moved here from a large city where cameras in strategic locations did wonders for neighborhoods and the people living in them. Violent crime doesn't take place very often in the stated park true, but it seems he was just using that as an example of a location.

Buhler's comments may have some "veiled negativity" I guess, but come on, let's not split hairs on semantics here. My impression is that he's just trying to show the difference between his campaign and Becker's. The two are being respectful and gracious so far. If this were anywhere else, the "attacks" would be much more negative and much more personal.

Tyler said...

I have only lived in SLC for about 2 years and have been very proactive about studying the candidates closely. Before the primary I liked Becker and Buhler and am pleased they made it through.

However, after reading this blog throughout the summer and reading comments on the local newspaper message boards I have come to the conclusion that if these venues represent the typical Becker supporter, I will have to vote for Buhler. You complain about negativity from Buhler, but nobody in this city, it seems, is more negative than the prototypical Becker/Wilson/Anderson supporter.

"Those of us who can look at context" should be able to see that clearly.

Jennifer Killpack-Knutsen said...

How strange to vote or not vote for someone because of those blog about the candidates.

Guess we have more power than we thought.

Tyler said...

Do you not support Becker? Let's not pretend there is actual journalism going on here. Blogs are editorial/opinions at best.

Besides, it's a fact of life in politics: Candidates are guilty by association (just ask Keith). Even today, people are chiding Buhler for the fact that Dinse is supporting his campaign. I feel the quality of the people one attracts to their side is a good indicator of what that individual is about. It's not always fair to judge someone this way, but come on, birds of a feather and all that stuff, right? Mostly, I just don't respect negativity and pettiness.

Oldenburg said...

Some times I provide news, but mostly I analyze the news.

But what are you really trying to say here? That I am not up front about supporting Becker? I had a post wherein I endorsed him. Am I being critical of Buhler? Of course, I dislike his policies and current tactics. I offer a rebuttal to his talking points. Who has critiqued Buhler on the basis of Dinse?

Do Jenni and I give Becker a bad rap because we are critics of Buhler's arguments?

Rocky's support of Keith was a turn off for me, but more of my reasons for not voting for Keith were based on the emptiness of his rhetoric.

Anyway, what are you trying to say exactly?