How To Destroy George W. Bush, Part 3 -- Kick Him In the Nuts:
This week, the Rude Pundit is opening his Big Book of Political Evisceration to give lessons to the Kerry/Edwards campaign, the DNC, and those eeeevil 527s, like Mothers Opposing Bush (whores, all of 'em), on how to wreck George Bush the President and the man. Remember: nearly all your nattering pundits on your MSNBCs, your CNNs, your Foxes are wrong. Only the Rude Pundit is right. Trust in the Rude Pundit. He shall set John Kerry free.

Today, we deal with the fear factor. Much has been made about how the Bush campaign has trafficked in fear as a tool to achieve blind loyalty to a failed leader. The problem here is that Bush has only one fear to sell: that terrorists might strike again. Sure, it's a gut-wrenching fear, one that is affirmed again and again by saying, "9/11" endlessly. But that's it for Bush's list of bugaboos. It's time for Kerry to sell fear, but he can do it on a much broader scale. Here we go. And, as usual, George Soros and the other bill- and millionaires, time to dig under the mattress, 'cause this is gonna cost . . .

The underlying message of a Kerry campaign based on fear has to be "George Bush Wants To Kill You." It's no longer that he's a poor leader who has made bad decisions that have resulted in blah, blah, blah, we're fuckin' bored, we think we'll just vote for Bush. Bush must be portrayed as an actual and real threat to the safety of Americans. In fact, Bush must be portrayed, implicitly, as someone who wants to do bodily harm to the citizens. And the beauty part? Kerry never even has to invoke the "war on terror" to do it. (Although, by most standards of international law, George Bush is a mass murderer, but, really, that ain't gonna get any votes.) All Kerry has to do is stick with issues that a majority of Americans oppose Bush on, and all of a sudden one is faced with the prospect that a vote for George Bush will bring one imminent death as surely as if he walked into one's living room and shot one in the face.

There's stem cell research. Most polls show a large majority of Americans support federal funding of stem cell research. No, we don't really fuckin' know if stem cells are gonna do jack shit, but we didn't know rockets would fly to the goddamn moon either. But we wanted to find out. Time to break out the Ron Reagan, Jr. for an ad about it. And, again, any ad on stem cell research could include quotes from Orrin Hatch, Trent Lott, and other right wingers. Explicit message of the ad: Kerry will fund research that could bring about miracles and wonders; Bush will not. Implicit message: Bush would like us all to die of horrible diseases, and, in fact, he will help those diseases kill us.

There's the assault weapons ban. It's an issue that Bush has tried to cover his ass on by saying that he would sign a bill if Congress sent it to him, but, of course, he never lobbied for it in the way he did, say, the Medicare bill. Again, a large, large majority of the country believes that, flawed or not, some kind of gun control is better than none. (And, while it ain't a winner in the election booth, truth be told, a majority of Americans supports stricter gun laws.) Easy one here: get cops out there, including cops who were involved in trying to help on 9/11, to say that the country needs the ban. Explicit message of any ad: Kerry will work to keep Uzis off the streets; Bush will not. Implicit message: Bush wants cops to get shot with AK-47s and he wants terrorists to be able to walk into gun stores to buy Uzis. And it's all because George Bush wants to kill you.

There's the environment. A huge majority of Americans support stronger environmental regulation, to the point of agreeing to roll back tax cuts to pay for enforcement. Even some Republicans are appalled by Bush's approach to the environment, which is something not unakin to making rape legal so the rapists won't go to jail. But "the environment" is an unwieldy issue. Instead, Kerry ought to focus on one thing - say, mercury emissions rules. The approach is easy: two people are needed - a mom whose child was made ill or even died because of environmental mercury and someone who made their living off fishing waters that are now poisoned by toxic mercury emissions. Explicit message: Kerry will clean up the environment; Bush will not. Implicit message: George Bush wants you to slowly be poisoned by the output of his industry buddies. If he could, he'd feed you spoons of mercury because, well, George Bush wants to kill you.

This list could go on and on. It could even include terrorism and 9/11 (with the 9/11 widows in an ad). Now, Bush supporters will say the President has taken strong stands on these issues (which is a lie, because he supported the gun ban and then he backed off on it) and that we need a President who will stand strong against the terrorists because you're afraid of the terrorists, aren't you? Aren't you afraid of the goddamned terrorists?

But here's where the Rude Pundit earns his keep. Here's why Karl Rove keeps Tums and Tucks on hand for whenever he thinks of going up against the Rude Pundit. Take Bush's most highly-touted asset and make it a weakness. There's simple tag line to anti-Bush ads that rips the throat out of Bush's campaign and kicks Bush in the nuts so hard that he'll wear his balls as earrings: "George Bush: Strong But Wrong."

Say it again: "Strong But Wrong."

Almost terrifying in how much it encompasses in three words. Gives you that feeling in your toes that says, "Motherfuck, that works, and it's goddamn catchy, too." It's a chant, it's an argument, it's a fuckin' policy statement. And it works on issue after issue after issue.

There's your talking point for the day: "Strong But Wrong."

Destructive tool #3: Go after Bush's obvious weaknesses and his perceived strength.

Tomorrow: The ultimate tool - and how it destroys the man.

Kerry/Edwards campaign, DNC, 527s, want more? You know how to get in touch: rudepundit@yahoo.com.