Thursday, July 27, 2006

Kline's Crybaby Defense

It appears that the ever so big Colonel Kline is turning to the ‘cry baby’ defense in his race against Coleen Rowley. Rather than an honest debate about his past voting records, Kline and his spokesperson finds it easier to run crying foul claiming that the Rowley campaign is smearing Kline!

Kline has the worst voting record in the state on environment, education, disabled veterans and working family issues. At a recent event Coleen Rowley referred to Kline’s terrible voting record on issues that she specifically selected for their nonpartisan nature.

"The 2nd District is Republican-leaning, But these issues are all things that any person should find important and Kline has done nothing to support them."
The Minnesota Daily has a Kline spokesman saying Rowley campaign is smearing them by trying to address Kline's voting history. Imagine that, using the facts of Kline's voting record is 'smearing' Kline's record!

“Marcus Esmay, spokesman for the Kline campaign, described Rowley's campaign as a "smear" against Kline's record”

Definition of the word:
- Smear- to smirch, spot, stain, slander or defame,
- Slander- a false and malicious statement or report about someone.

Kline is trying to dodge the real issues by claiming that attacking his voting record is the same as attacking his military record. Kline was a good soldier who can follows orders. However, a good soldier who votes 96% of the time with Bu$hCo does not make a good Congressman for Minnesota as his voting record shows.

The crybaby defense is a sad and pathetic attempt to avoid real debate with substance. It’s no mistake that Kline wants to divert the discussion back to being a good soldier given his vote record but unfortunately he’s not running for the office of soldier. It’s time for this old soldier to fade away.


klinefan said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
klinefan said...


"Non-partisan nature"...HA!!!

She lists such non-partisan organizations as the AFL-CIO, the League of Conservation Voters, the NAACP, the UAW, Citizens for Global Solutions, and the Council for a Livable World.

That would be like John Kline listing rankings from the NRA and the National Right to Life Committee and claiming that he has broad non-partisan support. But he doesn't do that. Do you know why? Because stretching the truth that far would be un-ethical...

klinefan said...

P.S.S. You suck at photoshop ;)

eric zaetsch said...

You say challenging his voting record is characterized by him as if it were challenging his military record.

Do we really know what it was?

His voting record IS easier to track. Public, with statistics kept.

You see some of the stuff coming out of Gitmo, Iraq, so if Kline ever got swift-boated, what do you think?

Swift-boating can hurt, but it's basically challenging a non-public record - DOD internal, secure, unless somebody stoops to dredge up dirt as was done against Kerry. If it happened to Kline who really know what might shake out. Other than Kline.