Skip to comments.Bin Laden Rehash Exposes Its True Political Plans
Posted on 05/02/2012 2:22:44 AM PDT by Making_Sense [Rob W. Case]
If the entertainment industry has taught me anything, its that no film or popular TV program is as popular the second time as it was in its first-run release. In other words, there is nothing new in a re-run. Please bear with me on this. Lets take the recent re-release of Star Wars Episode 1 for example. In 1999, when the film was first released, it caused a lot of excitement, fanfare, and marketing campaigns that re-energized the Star Wars franchise. In 2012, when the film was re-released under the 3-D format, the urge to see it under a new format was the main draw to attract people to seeing it again, but it was nowhere near as popular as it was in its first release. After all, the film still carried the exact same content it did in its first release, and there was nothing new in the film that would warrant somebody to want to pay money to see it again unless they really wanted to see it in the 3-D format, or take someone who may have perhaps never seen the movie to experience it for the first time in that fashion.
Anniversaries that Justify a Re-Release: If the entertainment industry has taught me another thing, its that anniversaries can warrant a re-release, and thus rally some excitement towards its most ardent fans. What immediately comes to mind is the 30th anniversary edition of Grease, the 30th anniversary of Saturday Night Fever, the 20th anniversary of E.T. (back in 2002), and so on and so forth. However, usually in an anniversary re-release, normally an array of bonus features tend to accompany the re-release to the film offering something new, along with what has been already seen. The Disney people are geniuses when it comes to this. But what I dont understand is, how come President Obamas usual Hollywood loyalists (and there are many of them) and promoters didnt help him out at all with the marketing campaign for the one year anniversary re-release of the Bin Laden killing that took place one year ago?
The Ratings and the Sales System: After a movie or TV program is re-released, its ratings are recorded just as they were during their initial release. And depending on the campaign, the hope is to rake in as much growth as possible to it. This is where Obama comes in. When the Bin Laden news hit the airwaves a year ago, Obama enjoyed an 11 point jump in his approval ratings. For the re-release, his approval ratings jumped a few points compared to last month as he, in the words of the activist media, reminds voters of the successful raid on the al Qaeda leader. Yet in a political science perspective, it is not difficult at all to realize the real reason why this is being brought up again. The reason as to why this is being re-hashed is an attempt to score enough political points to stay either at or above the 50% mark in his approval ratings. You see, in politics, the main indicator for an incumbent to have a feel for whether or not he will be re-elected is if he at least stays or goes above the 50% approval rating mark. If the President is at least at 50%, and if you factor in undecided voters, then the opponent will get the rest, and the incumbent, if all goes well, will be led to victory. This is nothing more than a tactic for President Obama to essentially stay above sea level.
When Re-Releases Go Bad: Again, using the entertainment industry to illustrate the dynamic occurring here, re-releases that end up becoming not as successful is when you take something away from the product that was once there. I am going to use the DVD releases of the TV shows ALF, Roseanne, and In Living Color to illustrate my point. When these series were re-released in the format of DVD, the studios that released them released the syndicated versions which were versions that were edited down to fit more time for commercials. In applying this dynamic to the Bin Laden anniversary, the president practically took the integrity of the original event that was there a year ago, and severely cheapened it, which may in fact prove to cost the few points hes gained rather than earn more. When the president implied that if Mitt Romney was in that position, he would not have got Bin Laden, was petty and insolent. Not only that, but according to people who have been involved in American SEALS teams, scolded the President for making this issue a political one all about himself. And yet you dont really hear anything about it from the American media (surprise! Surprise!). According to the UK Daily Mail ..
(Article is linked from my website)
The Bottom Line: The real objective for using the Bin Laden killing once again is for the Obama 2012 campaign to divert attention away from his dismal record (which he cant run on), offer little to nothing in a possible second term, and keep doing what he has been doing already (tax, spend, and buy loyalties that benefit him politically) for four more years. Yet Bin Ladens death does not create jobs, put gas in the tank, free up monies to stimulate the economy, or help pay the bills.
If Hollywoo had really been involved in packaging the OBL one-year anniversary, we’d have seen a docu-drama starring Tommy Lee Jones in blackface as the Kenyan Muslim Commando, who HALO-drops into the compound with a crew-served weapon in each hand, kicking every door in with his forehead, and shouting phrases from “Das Kapital” at Bin Laden (hey, it was May Day after all) before stuffing a flash-bang grenade into his burnoose.
The docu-drama would have to have been supported by the special-effects people at Dreamworks SKG, of course.
The TSA should inspect Obama’s luggage as he re-enters the country.
This is a couple of years old, but what a difference.
George & Laura Bush at Dallas Ft Worth Airport
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.