Paul Hackett & Karl Rove Campaign Rhetoric

Hackett campaign advisers called Brown votes on national security issues “toxic”.

Congressman and U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown voted to cut intelligence funding more than a dozen times before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a record that Paul Hackett's campaign advisers called proof that Mr. Brown could not win in November.

A consultant hired by Mr. Hackett, Mr. Brown's onetime Democratic opponent for Senate, estimated the funding cuts would have totaled billions of dollars if enacted. None were. The consultant called Mr. Brown's votes on those proposals and a dozen more recent national security issues "toxic in today's political environment," according to campaign research documents obtained by The Blade. [..]

"For Sherrod Brown, the issue of terrorism presents a big problem," a Hackett consultant wrote in an undated memo. A paragraph later, the consultant called Mr. Brown's intelligence votes "evidence that Brown would be pummeled in a general election match-up, as we already know how Republicans use the issue of terrorism against Democrats."

To be fair and balance Hackett campaign advisers also said this ...

The research concluded it was unwise to attack Mr. Brown's career voting record in a Democratic primary, because he toed the party line faithfully. It also predicts Republican attacks on Mr. Brown this fall.

Hackett campaign advisers is reinforcing Karl Rove playbook of calling Democrats weak on national security issues. If you do not vote along with President Bush and this Republican party you are not going to win a general election versus a Bush Republican.

"While the campaign obviously would like to highlight poor votes by Rep. Brown that would alienate Democratic primary voters, the campaign must know that those votes are going to be few and far between," the memo said, adding: "Given that he supports the Democratic Party line on nearly every key vote, it is highly unlikely that there will be many votes that would hurt him with primary voters."

The campaign wanted to highlight so called poor votes by Brown, but it would have alienate the same voters Hackett was trying to reach in the primary. Once again, Hackett campaign advisers is calling Democratic primary votes weak on national security issues because they support Brown votes on those issues which the campaign advisers thinks it’s a sure loser versus Republican Mike DeWine in the Senate race.

Does Hackett stand by this campaign advisers using Karl Rove style rhetoric to discredit a fellow Democrats?