Check out the mouth-breathing wingnut running against Russ Feingold, via the hardly liberal standard-bearing Milwaukee Journali Sentinel:
At the end of the ad, which is airing in La Crosse, Michels says, “Unlike Senator Feingold, I’ll fight for your right to buy safe and affordable prescription drugs from Canada.” Any examination of Feingold’s record compels the conclusion that, contrary to what the ad asserts, he has supported several measures to win this benefit. Advocates for the aged, who have a special interest in acquiring affordable prescription drugs, have attested to Feingold’s efforts on this issue.
Last year, for example, Feingold was among the original co-sponsors of a bill that would have authorized Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson to issue rules for the reimportation of prescription drugs from Canada and other countries.
It is true, as the Michels campaign says, that in 2003 Feingold voted against a Medicare bill that contained a prescription drug benefit. But, as he publicly explained at the time, Feingold did so partly because he believed the measure would provide, “at best, a minimal prescription drug benefit for some” in Wisconsin and “make others worse off than they currently are.” It is hard to believe the Michels campaign did not know this.
Tim Roby, a spokesman for the Michels campaign, dismisses all this as “a matter of semantics” and says the important question is who gets “results.” Roby acknowledged that “Feingold has talked a lot about” prescription drugs, “but he hasn’t produced results.” He adds, “We have a health care crisis in this country, and Tim will be a leader in this issue and get results.”
But the ad does not accuse Feingold of failing to produce results; it accuses him of not even fighting for them, which is very different. It cannot fairly be written off as a semantic difference; it has all the appearance of a deliberate distortion.
Those of you who think being called a liar by the newspaper will shame Michels in the least, speak up.