Friday, October 10, 2008

Bill Who? sends me mail

Bill Who? Dew sent me a piece of campaign advertising (great targeting of mail Bill, I am sure the Avenues is a voter rich target for culturally based attacks) that pretended to be a newspaper "Congressional Times" it called New York Times style font. The "cover story" was that a month ago, Mitt Romney endorsed Dew. There's a shocker. Too bad Mttt's kid was too chicken to run against Matheson, then we might have had a real news story when he endorsed his own son.

Anyway on the back there are a series of votes where Dew claims Matheson voted against "Utah Values" and that were Dew in Congress, he would have voted the other way.
A review by The Salt Lake Tribune of the votes Dew cites, though, show the Republican's allegations are in many ways misleading.
Dew's mailer - which cites the wrong dates for two congressional votes - uses several protest votes offered by House Republicans to cast Matheson as against "Utah values."
When cornered with this fact, Dew spokeswoman has a retort on the ready.
"Just because a vote is procedural doesn't mean it is inconsequential," said campaign spokeswoman Tiffany Gunnerson. "These votes tied the hands of the House Republicans trying to bring tax cuts and energy drilling to the floor by any means possible. Voters deserve to know that Bill Dew would have helped these efforts while Jim Matheson did not."
In other words, voter should know that a Republican would vote with his party on procedural party gimmick moves, while a Democrat didn't.

The mailer could have been a lot shorter if he had just had his face next to an equals sign next to a GOP logo and Matheson's face next to a equals sign next to a Democrats logo. Because that is all he is saying, not how Matheson stands on the issues. Afterall, Matheson voted the way Dew claims he wishes Jim had on things like drilling.

No comments: