Anger over Bush Commercials

The American Mind ^ | 4 March 04 | Sean Hackbarth

[.cnI redruM]

Some families of Sep. 11th victims as well as Democrats are upset that President Bush used some clips of Ground Zero in his new campaign ads. Watch them yourself and see if he really was exploiting the deaths of three thousand people. They were tastefully done. There were no pictures of the planes crashing into the twin towers, and there weren't any shots of the towers crashing down.

To critics it seems Sep. 11 has to fall into the memory hole, or only victims and their families have the right to use those horrible images. Lucy Willett said, "He [Bush] should not be allowed to use those images at all." That's poppycock! Sep. 11 was an attack on all Americans. It attacked our way of life, our freedom, and our prosperity. All who witnessed those horrible events will forever be scarred. All Americans have a claim on those images and memories. Also, that fateful day changed America's foreign policy in a profound way. The post-Cold War era ended, and the nation was at war. Our national innocence was lost when we realized there were people out there with the desire and capability to kill thousands of our fellow citizens. President Bush saw this change and reacted decisively. No longer was international terrorism looked at as a task for law enforcement. No longer would the U.S. tolerate nations that harbored and helped terrorists. Because of al-Qaeda's alliance with the Taliban, Afghanistan became the first point of response. That nation's people were liberated from oppressive rule. Next came Saddam Hussein's Iraq. She too was liberated. Libya read the writing on the wall and gave up its WMD development instead of risking being another causalty to Bush's muscular anti-terrorism strategy. In any evaluation and defense of the President's first term, Sep. 11 plays the pivotal role.

For an off-beat, yet correct perspective, read Michele's post. Now, let's take Bush's critics to their logical extreme. If Bush can't use Sep. 11 images, then John Kerry has to stop mentioning his Vietnam War record. No longer should either candidate use women, children, grandmothers, grandfathers, dogs, cats, baseball games, picnics, American flags, eagles, soldiers, policemen, cars, trucks, trees, sappy West Wing-type string arrangements, celebrities, mountains, valleys, lakes, rivers, clouds, flowers, bugs, newspaper headlines, or anything else as a means of persuation. The only ads that should run are 30 seconds of static with only the candidate blandly reciting a portion of his platform. (In the case of Kerry, he can't help but speak blandly.)

Not even a whisp of "exploitation" or "manipulation" should be allowed because voters are nothing more than helpless sheep incapable of analyzing what they're watching.

[.cnI redruM]

View the ad.

http://www.georgewbush.com/tvads/

Read the response.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=1&u=/nm/20040304/pl_nm/campaign_bush_reaction_dc

http://rantingprofs.typepad.com/rantingprofs/2004/03/the_use_of_911_.html

Does this make sense to you?

Here's what another person thinks...

http://asmallvictory.net/archives/006148.html#006148

[Numbers Guy]

Bill Clinton spoke at the ruins in Oklahoma City during his 1996 campaign.

John Kerry uses footage from Vietnam, a war in which over 50,000 Americans died, in his campaign.

Sounds like selective indignation . . .

[.cnI redruM]

You know it!

[ardara]

Rush has fireman mike moran on this topic right now. he is doing a fantastic job!

[goldstategop]

You liberals are running on anger and hate. Keep it up.

[.cnI redruM]

Rush would make a great antidote to BowelMoveOn.org right now.

[Puppage]

Some families of Sep. 11th victims

Yeah.....THREE

[.cnI redruM]

It works. That's why they do it. They selected a candidate on his presumed ability to beat Bush because the need to beat Bush is the only think Democrats really have a strong alliance on. That and keeping abortion legal.

[AmishDude]

The Willets are activist RATs. The other oft-quoted one, Doyle is linked to "Bush knew"-type sites.

[Puppage]

Let's just NOT remember 9-11, shall we?

And, while we're at it let's forget...

Auschwitz or...

Ford's Theater or...

John John saluting or....

Ted Kennedy driving

[.cnI redruM]

If Jason Blair had penned the article, that 'number' would have been 'MANY!!!'.

[omniscient]

The Democrats are more upset about these ads than about 9/11 itself. And what makes them most upset of all is that it didn't happen during Clinton's term. It is driving them nuts that Bush might actually get some well-deserved recognition for his heroic reaction to the event. I hope enough voters will be able to see these Democrats for the cowardly traitors they are.

[Coop]

I agree. I got angry enough at the whiny libs to send in a donation to President Bush's re-election effort.

[freebacon]

It shows to what level they will stoop to produce even the most ineffective assault on the President. They exploit the death of a loved one to pursue a political end, and it speaks volumes about Democrats as a whole. It appears to me that Bush isn't the one exploiting the 9/11 attacks.. but the media IS. The Liberals are. And Americans see that, and they don't like it.

[.cnI redruM]

If Jason Blair had penned the article, that 'number' would have been 'MANY!!!'.

[miloklancy]

I think the Dems have been waiting for a long time to pounce on Bush. I have seen the ad in question and I can't understand how anyone, even a family member of a victim of the attacks can find this offensive. When a coffin draped in an American flag is shown, it is clearly done in a very somber way. This is pure smear by the Dems, who use a strategy of supposed indignation to try to stop Republicans from raising legitimate issues. I hope Bush holds his ground on this one. Besides the worst television ad in the history of politics had to be the girl with the flower and the atom bomb explosion, which LBJ used to smear Sen. Goldwater and which many point to in restrospect as being a turning point in the 1964 election. LBJ or the Dems never apologized to Goldwater for this ad and clearly do not have the moral high ground on whether an ad is offensive or not.

[.cnI redruM]

No doubt. One of the major outcomes of the 9/11 attack has been to make people aware of why the US keeps a large and modern armed force. The Democrats have not been able to resolve their interparty conflict over the war. The GOP has.

[vanmorrison]

The election-year antics of the Democrats have long ago gotten to the point where you can't even have a rational discussion with these people. Their entire anti-Bush campaign of blind rage and mendacity is beyond belief. Why do we find it necessary to even address these phony put-ons thrown out by the Democrats and their media shills? Aristotle once commented on the utter futility of conducting an argument with anyone who denied the validity of basic logical principles. By continuing to bite into the cow pies of the Democrats, the Republicans are doing harm to themselves. Why doesn't anyone just point out that these kinds of exchanges are completely baseless and idiotic to begin with and leave it at that?

[maggief]

Here are a few familiar names:

Family Steering Committee (FSC) members

http://www.911independentcommission.org/members.html#

[AgThorn]

Key wording being 'some families'. When I heard a 'widowed' woman speak on NBC this morning I was getting very angry .. she was speaking Democrat party lines about Bush only giving the 911 commission one hour of his time, about it happening on his watch, etc.

I absolutely agree .. if anyone is exploiting 911, it isn't Bush, it's the Demonrats themselves ... and shame on this 'widow' to let them.

[tcuoohjohn]

I would have no objection to the ad and in fact would praise it highly if it didn't contain a body. When you get right down to it using a person's body as a political backdrop is unseemly. It was a miscalculation. I make no excuses for miscalculations. The add should be withdrawn and a more appropriate 9/11 image be used.

Bad taste is bad taste regardless who uses it..liberal or conservative.

[conservativecorner]

From PoliPundit:

The Headlines

"Sept. 11 Families Disgusted by Bush Campaign Ads" -- Reuters.

"Bush Campaign Defends Use of 9/11 in TV Ads" -- NY Times.

"9/11 Images: Fair Game?" -- Washington Post.

I bring all this up as a reminder to BC04 that the lying liberal media is not on their side and never will be. Remember the Willie Horton ads? They worked. And so will the BC04 ads, if they choose to highlight John Kerry's ultra-liberal extremist record. BC04 cannot count on the lying liberal media to bring Kerry's extremism into the harsh light of day.

[SquirrelKing]

BowelMoveOn.org

Hehehe! Funny.

I come from a firefighting family (I'm the black sheep). Every one us us is squarely behind Bush and the only anger at 9-11 is directed at the guys in dishrags who are responsible.

[.cnI redruM]

I disagree. The body was shown draped in an American flag and was treated in a very respectful manner. You must not watch the nightly news very often, if you think that the depiction of dead bodies is inherently disrespectful because of the fact that they are shot through a TV camera.

[conservativecorner]

From HobbsOnline:

Attack Ads
Here's Dean Esmay on the Democrats raising a stink over the fleeting image of 9/11 in a Bush campaign ad:

You know what? I wish John Kerry would mention 9/11 in every single campaign speech and in every single one of his campaign ads. I wish Bush would mention it more often, for that matter. It's not only appropriate for them to do so, but I find it rather inappropriate that Kerry doesn't bring it up more often. A lot more often. His failure to do so is yet another indicator of why I'm uncomfortable with him, and having a very hard time taking him, or members of his party, seriously (although I want to, I really do).

Democrats have become a party of bitter, mean, angry people who stand for nothing except "Bush sucks" and "Republicans are evil." It's really quite revolting to watch. Ideas? Principles? What matter those, when the more important task of tearing apart Bush, never giving him credit for anything and blaming him for everything possible, is so much easier?

If this is how Democrats run the rest of their campaign, Bush is going to destroy them in November. Absolutely destroy them.

Yeah, that's about right. Democrats aren't serious about the War on Terror. To them, it's a distraction from the War on Bush.

[.cnI redruM]

Agree. Bush should run a lot of comparative ads. Ads that compare Kerry's positions as a Senator, to the one's he has temporarily assumed from now. Senator Kerry and Presidential Candidate Kerry could have a rather intense debate with neither Bush nor Nader in the room.

[.cnI redruM]

>>>>Yeah, that's about right. Democrats aren't serious about the War on Terror. To them, it's a distraction from the War on Bush.

That's about correct.

[flying Elvis]

Correct, this is all a Democrat subterfuge planned well in advance to counter any ad Bush runs on his record as a war leader. The Dems want to run against his conduct of the War on Terror and will scream in unholy horror if he reaps any political benefits from the WOT.

[Joe_October]

The Media should expose the President by playing these ads every hour on the hour on every television station.

The American people will see the exploitation and will vote for GWB!

Rats lie.

[1Old Pro]

There were 20,000 people directly effected by 9/11. The media found two who were upset, that's .0001%, hardly enough to generalize.

[.cnI redruM]

There you go. Let's see the media actually run the ads, the entire ads, and not just excerpts. Then, if they think they have a legitimate bitch, let's hear their criticisms.

[AppyPappy]

In what way?

[GraceCoolidge]

On another thread, someone posted a link to John Kerry's advertisement run in Iowa... he mentions that he "alerted the world to the danger of terrorism long before 9/11" or something like that. He also (big suprise) has a lot about his Vietnam experience. So who is exploiting what again????

[.cnI redruM]

They've 'mistaken' an anthill for a ground swell.

[jmstein7]

Express YOUR outrage over media - manufactured outrage against Bush Ads

[omniscient]

You were actually offended by a nanosecond-long flash of a flag-draped coffin because it was part of a political ad? Would you rather sanitize 9/11 into complete meaningless symbolism so that it can be swept under the rug and forgotten by Americans, so that Kerry can concentrate on the more substantive issues like overtime pay for union members? Please get real.

[rabidralph]

I hope the president's next round of commercials show him on the carrier. LOL.

[Wyatt's Torch]

And the liberal icon used it for his reelection.

Courtesy of Recovering Democrat

[omniscient]

The megaphone at Ground Zero, the flight-suit stylin' and profilin', the Baghdad turkey drop -- all of these in one ad would be wonderful, and hopefully would result in a massive nation-wide scene of raving-mad, gesticulating, frothing-at-the-mouth liberals, wandering around in a daze, too incapacitated to even vote.

[.cnI redruM]

There you go. Get all the images that p*** liberals off and put them in one minute-long ad.

[talleyman]

Little Tommy Dashole is deeply shocked and saddam'ed...
DemoRat = Hypocrite. You can look it up.

[talleyman]

BowelMoveOn.org

LOL! "Getamucil" bump!

[HiramAbiff]

What more do these people want? How much money have these whiners pocketed? I cannot believe how ungrateful these people are for GWB's incredible post 9/11 leadership.

[AgThorn]

Thanks for the link ... did so:

I just want to voice my own "OUTRAGE" over the media's one sided coverage of hunted 'victims' that may have an objection on a passing slide of 9/11 in a BUSH commercial while this same media totally ignores John Kerry's Iowa and elsewhere soundbites about being tougher on 911 if he was in office and his own exploiting of VietNam.

I watched a so called victims 'widow' being 'used' on NBC this morning and listened as she spouted democrat party lines about this happening on 'his watch' and while he was is some schoolroom, and while he was in office, and that he will only give the 9/11 commission an hour, etc.

How STUPID does the media and the Democratic party think the US population is? Do we not see who is REALLY using the 9/11 tragedy for political gain?

Shame on the media, shame on the Democratic party.

God bless our President for being in office during this awful tragedy, for having class to congratulate Mr Kerry for his party win, for being right on on so many issues during this time that we really need leadership.

Kind Regards,
William

[FrankR]

This whole story reminds me of when clinton was on that beach...Omaha Beach, was it? Anyway, he just happened to "find" enough stones (on an otherwise, stone-less beach), to form a cross in "tribute" the soldiers who died at Normandy.

Set-up, contrived, hockey-puck, bull-blather.

The seminar RATS have run out and gathered some victims' families from 9/11 to get the "Tear-Factor" going amongst the voting population. What happened at 9/11 was horrible, but there is not way any of it was GW's fault.

They say they are upset with the scenes from 9/11 in his ads...but if I remember, those same scenes TOTALLY MONOPOLIZED the television and newspapers for months, and months, and months, after the incident. So where were all these broken families then...when the loss was fresh, and we were all still re-coiling from the tragedy?

Why wasn't the media broght to task for the continual, day and night, night and day, showing of these images. There was no griping when the telephoto lenses combed the wreckage on a daily basis, looking for gore (no, not al).

And what about these "firemen", who are joining the "Indignant Seven"? They didn't mind all that coverage by the media, all the images of them as "Heroes", with a background of the carnage that used to be the twin towers?

There's some major B.S. going on here folks...and the libs' media machine is behind it all. But, if the article had been about, say...employment...the dems would have paraded a couple hundred unemployed people to fill the crocodile tear parade; if it had been about the economy, then some people who lost their businesses (probably from their own mis-management) would have been their throphies.

If the ads mentioned the wonderful tax cuts we all enjoyed, then the lefty-loons would have shown us graphs depicting the National debt.

In other words, anyone can counter any argument...but we all have to decide if it's just caterwauling, or a legitimate argument. We have all known someone who was a habitual liar...who used lies to aggrandize him/herself...well, did you ever wonder where these people go when they get ignored by the rest of us...well,they become democRATS and the best ones join the media.

Don't you wish you could just be a giant for a day, and round up all of these jerks, point your gigantic finger in their faces, and say, "SHUT THE H*LL UP!!!!!!!"

[tcuoohjohn]

You were actually offended by a nanosecond-long flash of a flag-draped coffin because it was part of a political ad?

Yes..length of the ad irrelevant. Context is important. As part a memorial to 9/11 victims it would be appropriate. IN the context of a political ad is is unseemly.

Would you rather sanitize 9/11 into complete meaningless symbolism so that it can be swept under the rug and forgotten by Americans.

I doubt that few will ever forget 9/11. You missed my point entirely. There are images that are sacrosanct. Bodies of the victims draped or not are one of those images. Using that image is a fundamental mistake. it does not honor the dead but uses the dead for political purposes. This would be tasteless if done by a liberal. It is equally tasteless when done by a conservative. In fact I have much higher expectations of conservative taste and restraint than I do of liberals who have traditionally reached into the dregs of cultural images. I don't excuse it in Liberals and I certainly won't excuse in in Conservatives.

please focus on the issue at hand a don't muddy up the issue by bringing in irrelevant side issues.

[tcuoohjohn]

You missed the point entirely. As a news image or memorial the image is perfectly appropriate. In the context of a political campaign is unseemly. It would be unseemly for a casket company to use the image to sell it's caskets. It is equally unseemly for a candidate, conservative or liberal to use the image of a body to sell their candidacies.

I don't see where this is such a difficult concept to grasp. Perhaps my sense of honor or squeamishness is more finely tuned than yours.

[omniscient]

Where do you draw the line of appropriateness? Can the ad acknowledge that the deaths occurred to individuals, or is that too specific? Can the coffin even be mentioned as such? Or is that too vulgar? Is a generic artist's conception of a flag-draped casket acceptable? Somehow you are going to have to face the fact that when you talk about 9/11 you are talking about DEAD BODIES.

You are a product of today's PC mentality which has so over-sensitized people that death itself has become an unmentionable. In taking this attitude, you trivilize the very victims you think you are protecting.

[.cnI redruM]

Please tune our senses of honor for us, tcuoohjohn.