New spots from Macpherson & Kroger

In the Attorney General race, both candidates have unveiled new TV ads.

Discuss.

Comments

  • Eric Miller (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Who do you trust to be Oregon's Attorney General? An insider running on status quo who is willing to distort his opponent to gain office, or a former marine with integrity who has run a clean campaign on positions that are exactly what Oregon needs?

    Greg is a great legislator--this doesn't translate into being a great AG. He should stay where he has been effective. After all, he has no courtroom experience. John knows the courtroom and has the motivation and innovation to make Oregon a better place.

  • (Show?)

    I don't think you need a lot of courtroom experience to be AG, but I do think that the Oregon Department of Justice should not be a wholly owned subsidiary of Stoel Rives. I would like to see an energetic newcomer with a fresh eye come in to DoJ and John Kroger is just the guy.

  • Young and maybe stupid (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I still think whoever suggested that Macpherson parody the PC Mac adds missed the mark. They just look like a poor attempt at humor, praying the Novick magic will strike again.

  • (Show?)

    "a former marine with integrity who has run a clean campaign"?

    Yeah, that squares with running a misleading ad taking out of context an Oregonian quote about his opponent's integrity without mentioning the Oregonian endored his opponent!

  • Jason Skelton (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Last night on the TV, I saw the Mac and Kroger ads back-to-back. The MacPherson ad looked even more lame when contrasted with Kroger's ad. It is not that Kroger's ad was especially fantastic; it is that Mac's ad was especially annoying.

    It also provided a neat contrast between the two. Kroger had blurbs about his career as a prosecutor and Mac had blurbs about his career as a legislator. Experience as a prosecutor is good for a job as a prosecutor.

  • (Show?)

    I saw both ads on tv last night as well. The sad part was at the same time there were multiple Mac/Windows commercials running alongside those ads, which made Macpherson's ad look all the more stupid.

  • Matt (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Litigator wrote, "Yeah, that squares with running a misleading ad taking out of context an Oregonian quote about his opponent's integrity without mentioning the Oregonian endored his opponent!"

    Litigator, here's a link to that Oregonian piece: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_reinhard/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1210373710314010.xml&coll=7

    Here's the surrounding text that this ad used: " ... In the other (ad), Macpherson suggests Kroger has never practiced law anywhere -- that he's some kind of recent law school grad. Not only has Kroger done legal work here in Oregon as a federal prosecutor in the Enron case, but he's prosecuted mobsters and pursued terrorists for Uncle Sam.

    Macpherson should be ashamed of these low and dishonest ads. If he's not, he may lack the integrity and judgment to be Oregon attorney general. ..."

    So, how exactly did Kroger take this out of context?

  • (Show?)

    Matt--

    Okay, so on a Democratic blog you're quoting David Reinhardt -- NOT the Oregonian editorial board or a news article -- but David Reinhardt!!! to back your contention about Mac? You also ignore JK's ethical breach in leaving the clear implication that the Oregonian doesn't wholeheartedly endorse his opponent!!

    Let's facce it partisans have defended whatever their candidate's ads have done in this space. I've at least conceded Mac's ads are a bit lame. It would be nice if those of you drinking the JK Kool Aid just once admitted (a) the job of Attorney General is NOT a prosecutorial job, (b) JK has only pracitced law for 6 years and that IS a legitimate point of comparison, (c) JK has NEVER set foot in an Oregon Court (let's not get into the false distinction about whether, having set foot in Oregon while admitted elsewhere is "practising" law in Oregon). Bottom line: but for the 2003 PERS bill, JK would have no significant support, the unions, from whom Mac get 100% ratings, would be behind him, adn JK would be just another law professor. Wayne Morse, at least, was Dean of the law school when he sought office...

  • (Show?)

    If Kroger partisans are drinking "Kool Aid", Litigator, you've skipped the flavored powder, and are quaffing the poison straight. The Macphearson's ads are a combination of distortions and flat out lies. Hell, if even Reinhard notices this, it means it's obvious to a child.

    Second, you - like the guy you admire - can't do anything but continue to throw out negative smears. I watched this race from the start, and it was obvious even at the beginning who had ideas, and who didn't have a clue what he wanted to do with the job. Instead, Macphearson's campaign, like Novick's, has been one long constant barrage of reasons why you shouldn't vote for his opponent. In his case: 1) Kroger ain't from around these parts, 2) Kroger hasn't been in the Oregon legislature, 3) Kroger hasn't passed bills into law, like legislators do, but Attorney Generals do not.

    The few ideas that Macphearson does have for the actual job of AG, are clearly cribbed from the mind of the guy he says isn't qualified for the position. I know this because I saw it as this campaign developed.

    As someone who openly defended Kulongoski and the necessary reforms he had to make during the first half of the Bush recession - including PERS - let me tell you flat out that Kroger would be very close to exactly where is today without the union issue. The money his campaign is receiving is nearly equally offset by the negative publicity he gets in some voter's minds from being associated with unions unwillingness to recognize reality.

    Kroger is the best candidate for the job - period. You may not think being a "prosecutor" is part of the job of being Attorney General, but you are wrong. No one who hasn't been in law enforcement can sell the badly needed policy reforms to Sheriffs and DAs who actually implement them. They'll simply ignore ivory tower types. And that includes Macphearson, especially after the sleazeball campaign he's run.

  • Susan Shawn (unverified)
    (Show?)

    As a vital sidebar, for those who haven't made up their minds yet about the AG race, I recommend you get and quickly read "Convictions", John Kroger's new book about the ethical, legal and moral landscape inside the job of a Federal Prosecutor, a position John held for a number of years in New York. Here's a man, a philosopher, who looks with compassion and depth at himself, criminals, fellow prosecutors, and judges and comes out of this experience of holding immense power deciding to leave, and offering suggested solutions for ways to better the criminal justice process itself. It's riveting, enlightening, and resonates completely with a man I have come to respect and trust.

    We need this level of talent and passion to turn Oregon back into being a leader.

  • Jack Sullivan (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Susan -- I've got the book, but I have one question: Why is the cover photo of John blurry? Was it a printing error? Or did some graphic designer get carried away trying to be hip?

  • (Show?)

    It's always trouble when the rebuttal ad is better than the attack. Mac's ad is just pathetic. Kroger's is pretty standard setup, and it's true that it's cheeky to quote the bad bits from the O while they endorse Macpherson, but he effectively paired his two best points: he's going to actually go after people who break the law in this state in a coordinated fashion, and his opponent has spent the entire TV season making crappy ads that just whale on pretty tangential questions of AG quality.

open discussion

connect with blueoregon