Yesterday, I mentioned the situation in Ohio's Second Congressional district. Today, we have the emergence of smear tacics against Hackett. This is nothing more than a desperate attempt from a desperate, in-debt, weak campaign. Read the post at Ohio 2nd first, then return. I'll wait.
First off, attack man Eric Minamyer, who is advising Republican Jean Schmidt, questions Paul Hackett's supposed leadership claims the Democrat states in a TV ad. Minamyer serves up this little gem.
In the commercial Hackett says “that’s what led me to fight with my marines in Iraq”. If that does not imply a combat leadership role, English is not my native tonque.
Well, I know a Marine, and he always refers to other Marines as "my Marines." And he's not in a leadership role. Marines are trained to become a single unit; they strip away all individuality in basic training. That's what Hackett means when he says "my Marines." Geeze Minamyer, ever seen Full Metal Jacket?
As to Minamyer claims in this comment:
I only asked what his service was. How is that smearing him? I just don’t get it. The only way it smears him is if he has exagerated his duty.
What you're doing Minamyer, is called a smear by innuendo. In another comment, Eric asks:
Will you defend his phrase “that is why I fought with my marines in Iraq” if he was never in combat and never commanded marines?
He bases this question on the assumption that Hackett claims to have led Marines into battle, which I've already stated is not the case. So in summary, Eric, Hackett was over there, which means he was in the combat zone, therefore in combat, and he isn't claiming to have commanded Marines, at least in this TV ad. Nice try.