Talk:Dirty tricks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 What, no Democrats? 2 Valerie Plame Example 3 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal 4 "See also"

[edit] What, no Democrats?

Uh Democrats do dirty tricks too, ok? Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 16:33, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For example:

I revised the last paragaph. Ellsworth 22:46, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I dispute whether the Atwater (by which I presume is meant 1988) and Rove (presumably 2000-2004) campaigns were "more effective" than the 1972 dirty tricks campaign, in that the '72 election was the biggest electoral wipeout in history (to date, although Reagan topped it in '84) whereas two of the other elections were dead heats and the third ('88) was at least a contest. Ellsworth 17:04, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Valerie Plame Example

article's claim that the standard of illegality set by the Watergate dirty tricks has never been equaled, is disputed by John Dean, among others. Hence revised that section:

The dirty tricks of the Watergate era set a standard of illegality in political campaigns that has rarely been equaled on a national scale, although other negative campaigns, for example, 1988 and 2004, may have been more vicious.

Though John Dean has been quoted as saying the Valerie Plame afffair is an example of dirty tricks that equals or exceeds the dirty tricks of the Watergate era:

• 3 October 2003: "More vicious than Tricky Dick" by John Dean: "I thought I had seen political dirty tricks as foul as they could get, but I was wrong. In blowing the cover of CIA agent Valerie Plame to take political revenge on her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, for telling the truth, Bush's people have out-Nixoned Nixon's people. And my former colleagues were not amateurs by any means."

(a) The above context relates it to electoral politics, Valerie Plame affair has nothing to do with electoral politics. (b) the quote is intended to be inflamitory, and reproducing it is inflamitory (c) John Dean must be fully qualified, as to who John Dean is, and varrying opinions given on his credibility (d) and the quote itself is useless in this context because it (1) is speculation (2) uncorroborated; further the quote itself falls on its face, becasue John Dean's status as a expert in the know falls on its face given that he has no knowledge that this so-called "dirty trick" originated in the White House, as is clearly the POV intent of invoking John Dean's name. I have no objection to inclusion, provided all the above qualifications are met, but then that leads the entire article down the path of being a forum to reproduce POV speculation. Nobs01 8 July 2005 16:15 (UTC)

The "dirty tricks" article contains hyperlinks to both the articles on John Dean and on the Watergate scandal. That should be sufficient for people to decide who Dean is, and to form an opinion regarding his credibility etc. drone5 09:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I added a sentence and link to a recent article about Dick Tuck to contrast with more destructive and malicious forms of political tricks.Hank chapot 20:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal

The 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal could be comparable to the Watergate dirty tricks, if it indeed reaches the White House, as seems likely.

[edit] "See also"

Most of the examples in the "see also" section seem irrelevant, except that some partisans might call them "dirty tricks." For example, the Plame scandal is a questionable example. Foes of Republicans say that it was the outing of a covert spy for revenge. Friends of Republicans say that it was the leak of a noncovert spy by a sloppy individual (Richard Armitage), an individual who subsequently was given the impression that he was barred from admitting that he was the man who did so. Some Republicans even go so far as to say that was the dirty trick: Withholding the truth about his role to make the administration (especially the VP) look bad. In truth, the accusations from either side of a "dirty trick" range from purely speculative to very subjective. Likewise, with the Killian documents, is the "dirty trick" Bush's alleged indiscretions, an alleged cover-up of said indiscretions, the allegedly faked documents, or calling the documents fake? These are not very illustrative examples.... Calbaer 00:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The whole article is merely a "coatrack" on which to hang issues that are covered in different parts of Wikipedia. The other areas of Wikipedia handle these topics better, I might add. Also, the fact that all of the so-called "dirty tricks" are acts of Republicans makes the whole article suspect. And finally, when any one attempts to cull the article of specific examples--to rid the article of mentions of either Dems or Reps--the attempts are reverted and nasty notes are left on talk pages. This whole article needs to go--if there is not a real effort to make the article neutral, which has not happened yet.--InaMaka (talk) 03:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)