Thursday, November 02, 2006

Harpool "Disgusted" At Champion "Attack"

Democratic State Senate candidate Doug Harpool calls a new radio advertisement by Sen. Norma Champion "disgusting."

The Harpool campaign says the latest ad attempts to tie Harpool to disgraced former Missouri House Speaker Bob Griffin.

Griffin, speaker of the Missouri House, pleaded guilty in 1997 of bribery and mail fraud. He served a 4 year prison sentence and paid a $7,500 fine.

"Fortunately for Norma, there is no legal requirement for truth in political advertising. The difference between the two of us on ethics is that I have passed the most comprehensive ethics legislation in the history of the state, and she hasn't even introduced a bill pertaining to ethics," Harpool said in a release issued Thursday.

"Any candidate who votes to repeal campaign finance laws shouldn't be talking about ethics. I renew my challenge to debate her on ethics and our contrasting records," Harpool said.

Harpool said some of the "myths" in the Champion ad include:

*The so-called "Yes on Ethics" proposal backed by Governor Ashcroft was declared unconstitutional. Harpool later passed legislation creating the Missouri Ethics Commission

*Harpool was the one who filed the ethics complaint against his colleague for doing drugs. The colleague later was forced out of the legislature.

*Missouri newspapers have called Harpool "Mr. Ethics" That isn't a name Harpool uses for himself.

"Unfortunately, I don't think Ms. Champion is very involved in her campaign. She is rarely seen in public. Even her own press releases don't quote her, just her campaign manager," Harpool continued.

"My aunt doesn't behave this way and neither do most adults. The lobbyists running the Champion campaign are behind this. She doesn't stand up to them in her campaign any better than she does in the Capitol," he said.

Harpool then went on to attack Champion's credibility.

"Champion has a history of misleading the public. At the Urban Alliance candidate forum this week, Champion did not show, but sent a message that she was teaching class. Evangel University's schedule shows that Champion has no classes in the evening. Champion also refused to appear at forums for MSU, SGA and disabled workers, " Harpool said.

"I know that Springfield voters are above ugly smear campaigns. Almost every door I knock on they tell me they appreciate my positive and fact-based campaign," he said.

For all of the professed worry on the Champion side about Harpool going negative, it's interesting to watch Champion go on the attack, especially with a 10-point lead. She certainly has much more money to spend than Harpool. It's all meant to drive Harpool's negatives up. In response, Harpool has dumped $25,000 of his own money into the last 4 days of the campaign.

3 comments:

Jackie Melton said...

Catanese quotes Harpool:

"Champion has a history of misleading the public. At the Urban Alliance candidate forum this week, Champion did not show, but sent a message that she was teaching class..."

I attended a forum at Cornerstone Church last night and picked up a copy of the paper "The Springfield Decision," paid for by Harpool New Direction Committee.

I find it ironic that Harpool accuses Champion of misleading the public while endorsing such a misleading piece of literature.

He, or his campaign, claims in "The Springfield Decision" that Norma Champion supports a "voucher program," so I asked Champion about it and she said she DOES NOT support school vouchers but would address the issue of people choosing to send their children to private schools or home schooling them in other creative ways.

I would also point out that while you quote Harpool as saying:

"I know that Springfield voters are above ugly smear campaigns. Almost every door I knock on they tell me they appreciate my positive and fact-based campaign,"

We all know that negative ads work and that is why negative ads are used. You think "it's interesting to watch Champion go on the attack, especially with a 10-point lead?"

It appears she and her campaign have had good reason to profess worry that Harpool will "go negative." How positive is a statement like this?:

"I don't think Ms. Champion is very involved in her campaign. She is rarely seen in public. Even her own press releases don't quote her, just her campaign manager...My aunt doesn't behave this way and neither do most adults."

Misrepresentation and negativity cuts both ways. I see little evidence that Mr. Harpool is "above nasty smear campaigns." Odd that you didn't bother to point that out as you expressed your surprise that the Champion campaign would "go on the attack," Because, obviously, there is plenty of evidence that he is quite capable of being misrepresentative of Champion's views and making "nasty smears," himself.

Jackie Melton said...

It's all political speech anyway, isn't it?

My main point is that it is disingenuous and hypocritical to brag on oneself on the one hand, as being all positive while bashing your opponent as negative and then turn around and state that your opponent doesn't act like an adult, would you (bull into orbit, moderate guy) agree or disagree?

I see the same thing going on in the McCaskill campaign. Over and over I hear her accuse Senator Talent of attacking her and her family, well excuse me but some things are personally indicative of a person's character and views on specific topics.

Excuse me for seeming to go off topic but I'm trying to make a point, here. One of McCaskill's spokespersons was on PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer last week and he stated that Talent "viciously attacks" her!? Huh? I'm sorry, I don't see it.

I take this as a political ploy. I think they say it over and over again trying to convince the public that they are always positive and their evil Republican opponents are "viciously" and "personally" attacking them.

In neither of these cases do I view the "attacks" as vicious or irrelevant to the character and viewpoint of their opponents.

The point is, BOTH sides are BOTH negative AND positive. For any of the Democrats running to pretend they are above reproach when it comes to negative ads and that they are only being utilized by Republicans IS disingenuous and hypocritical. Period. They can fool some of the people some of the time....

The Libertarian Guy said...

"return to what the GOP is supposed to be about, the party of small government and personal freedom"

Still wouldn't be enough to make me want to "waste" a vote on them, even if they DID return to those lost ideals. I'm just that picky.

The day BOTH major parties renounce the paternalism, creeping socialism, and nanny-statism - among other ism's - will be the day America starts climbing out of the abyss of treating us like children and more like citizens. I don't see that happening anytime soon, though.