Nitpicking the 9-11 Ads

MRC | March 9, 2004 | L. Brent Bozell III

[LavaDog]

John Kerry’s Super Tuesday wins on March 2 marked the formal start of this year’s presidential campaign. This might explain why the liberal media silliness began with the first Bush-Cheney ad buy on March 4. The Bush ads were positive, promotional, piano-plunking, the type that usually bore reporters to death. But this time, they were quickly slammed by the press.

The Democrats thought they had an angle to trip up the Bush campaign, and they pushed it. Say, didn’t those ads flash about a second of pictures of September 11? Well, yes, and so what? After being attacked unmercifully by the left for his handling of the war on terrorism before and after 9-11, shouldn’t the president be allowed to defend himself?

Apparently not. Bush, we are told, is playing politics. Which is exactly what his hypocritical critics are doing.

Some relatives of the lost, like Debra Burlingame on MSNBC, said the images of 9-11 "belong to all of us. We were all attacked." But most of the relatives quoted were fierce critics of Bush. Many of those featured in early press reports were members of a little radical conclave called "September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows," founded by about 80 relatives of the more than 3,000 victims of that infamous al-Qaeda attack. The Washington Post called them "nonpartisan," which is laughable. They are very active lobbyists of the far left.

See their Web site at peacefultomorrows.org. Last year, they were hosting protest marches to condemn "the illegal, immoral, and unjustified US-led military action in Iraq." They opposed the war uprooting al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and complained that 9-11 was "used to justify the deaths of thousands of Afghan men, women and children." Their members give speeches across the country with titles including "Exploiting 9-11 for Empire Building."

Their fundraisers starred Amy Goodman, the host of Pacifica Radio’s morning show, "Democracy Now," the taxpayer-funded public radio show that replays long speeches by radicals like Michael Moore and Arundhati Roy spewing hate at Team Bush in the ugliest language. "Nonpartisan" is a rotten label for this group, because it assumes they have no agenda, that they’re quietly apolitical or perhaps soggy centrists.

By the way, please note that the "Peaceful Tomorrows" gang has been funded by a liberal philanthropy called the Tides Center, as their first newsletter in 2002 explains. The Capital Research Center notes that the Tides Center received at least $650,000 in 2001 from the Howard Heinz Endowment, led by none other than Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry. Keep waiting for the media to report any of this.

Some anti-Bush critics were so nonpartisan they could not recall whether they voted for Bush or Gore. On MSNBC’s "Hardball," Monica Gabrielle, who gained prominence for slashing the Bush ads as "a slap in the face of the murders of 3,000 people," was asked how she voted in 2000. She said "Politics don’t have anything to do with it." Chris Matthews pressed again. She claimed: "You know what? To be honest with you, I don’t even recall."

Uh-huh. Maybe Mrs. Gabrielle can recall her political position last summer, when she complained to the left-wing Web site Salon.com: "We've been fighting for nearly 21 months -- fighting the administration, the White House." She told Matthews that Bush spent September 11 in a school room and then on his airplane, so he wasn’t a leader. So she is uncommitted on Bush’s re-election? She has no agenda? Her activism can be seen as a laudable response to losing her husband, but she should not be presented as having no axe to grind.

Our sensitivity to every image in a Bush ad is not matched by any sensitivity to the tone of Bush’s critics. One widow, Kristin Breitweiser, even claimed "Three thousand people were murdered on Bush's watch." Can you imagine a widow ever getting national media exposure by throwing hardballs about murders on President Clinton’s "watch" in Oklahoma City, or the Khobar Towers, or our embassies in Kenya or Tanzania? That would be seen as a low blow, not worthy of broadcast. But not in this election year.

The media are at their most hypocritical when they suggest Bush is unfairly benefiting from 9-11 in his ads. But who has piled on the profits with hours and hours of specials, and newspaper and magazine special editions, devoted to 9-11? Because Bush has done a good enough job in preventing attacks on the homeland, the media can go back to profiting from the usual sludge on Martha Stewart and Kobe Bryant and Michael Jackson.

Imagine how the media will react when the Bush people go negative!

[Conspiracy Guy]

My two standard ad flap posts follow.

Rant

Why doesn't the media interview me? I could tell how offended I am by John Kerry's traitorous activities since coming home from Nam. I could discuss the fact that I have no idea where Kerry stands on any given issue at any given time since he appears to have no stand.

Though I feel for the families who lost someone on 9/11, the attacks are not their private property. The attacks were aimed at every American. I am sick of people acting like because they lost someone, this is private. Their loss is private but the attacks were not. I will never forget that it was an attack on me, my family, my friends, my nation. I take it personal as should every American.

If George W. Bush wants to use 9/11 in his campaign, that is his right. He was attacked too. His response to the attacks shows the character and courage his predecessor did not have when we were attacked so many times during those 8 dark years.

God Bless America and George W. Bush.

Conspiracy Guy 3/5/4


Poem

We Remember

We saw the look upon his face,
Through whispers he was told.
We knew he felt just what we felt,
We wouldn’t sit here cold.
We knew this time that we would act,
And not just turn our head.
This time we’d go and we’d go big,
We wouldn’t bomb some shed.
He called them faceless cowards,
He vowed we’ll hunt them down.
We watched as he spoke to us all,
Sincerely, not some clown.
His eyes assured us he’d not rest,
Until they paid the price.
Yes we’d turn over every stone,
Until they were on ice.
He warned the battle would be long,
That many would forget.
That some would say, let’s just move on,
Not him, his mind was set.
We backed him then, we back him now,
The fight must still go on.
We can’t back down, we can’t let up,
Until the threat is gone.
God Bless our troops as on they fight,
Each day for them we pray.
We thank them all, for all they do,
“They are the best”, we say.
We will support our President,
He’s proven he will stand.
We’ll vote for Bush this coming fall,
We will protect this land.

Conspiracy Guy 3/5/4

[Esther Ruth]

Beyond strange and weird, these women saying they don't recall who they voted for in 2000! An admission of guilt it would seem, to the fact that this IS politically motivated, this assault on an innocent commercial.

[Cubs Fan]

Not only did the media not even ponder whether these were left wingers. They never found a single family member who said the ads were fine. Not one

And they never found even one veteran, even though there are thousands, who are irked at John Backstabber Kerry's exploiting Vietnam.

The media has entirely dropped ANY and ALL pretense of objectivity.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

Imagine how the media will react when the Bush people go negative!

If he stays positive, they will still overeact and look like the idiots that they are and Bush will look like the leader that he is.

The polls have JF'nK ahead for now but more of this kind of drivel will only help Bush.

I really think by the time November comes around, Kerry will look like the liberal that he is and Americans will have no choice but to vote Bush.

[jmstein7]

BUMP!

[malia]

Ms. Burlingame, life-long Democrat, sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame, captain of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001. has said----

"George W. Bush says that his presidency is inspired by an enduring obligation to those who lost their lives on that brutal September morning. The images of that day stand as an everlasting example of our country's darkest day and finest hour. They are a vivid reminder of the strength and resilience of our great country. They belong to us all--including this president. Let the candidates make their own choices. I trust the American people."

Ms. Burlingame statement will not be on all the news stations, nor will Hardball have Ms. Burlingame as a guest.

We have the choice to do everything in our power to try to stop terrorism, on our soil or abroad. Or we have the choice to close our eyes, again, ignore all the warnings, again.

Many Americans understand we will never be 'safe'. and must never think we are. Our President understands this and has faced the most difficult decision of sending his fellow citizens into harms way.

Or

America can elect John F. Kerry who wants to apoligize to the world for President George W. Bush, for his actions after September 11, 2001, for going after the terrorists. John F. Kerry want to ask the terrorist to please stop doing what they are doing.

The candidates have made their choice. It will be our turn in November. We have work to do. No thanks to Finance Reform (McCain), groups like "Democracy Now", Public Radio, "ANSWER" "Peaceful Tomorrows" - we have just seen the tip of the iceburg - will be out loud and strong that month before the election.

[CedarDave]

Imagine how the media will react when the Bush people go negative!

The Bush people to go negative? Ha. What a joke. They'll treat the RAT ads with a "tsk, tsk" and trumpet how positive the Bush campaign is compared to Kerry's. In the meantime the lies against Bush go unanswered and the only negative "press" given to Kerry comes from talk radio and internet. What a Bush speech is reported the liberal mainstream uses words like "Bush Bashes Kerry" or "Bush Unleashes Broadside against Kerry" whereas for Kerry they use headlines like "Kerry Criticizes Bush on _______ (insert topic of the day)".

IMO, restrict the uplifting, inspirational stuff and get down to defining your opponent.

[wewillnotfail]

nice job

[Conspiracy Guy]

Thanks

[EllaMinnow]

Putting my optimistic spin on your theory, maybe the lack of media disapproval of JFinK's tactics will cause him to go nastier and more negative as the weeks go by.
I was pleased to read this column by Byron York, it seems that JFinK's dirty campaigning is not going unnoticed:



http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200403091240.asp

For example, Gallup found that the public seems to believe Kerry and the Democratic party have, at least so far, conducted a dirtier campaign than Bush and the Republican party.

Gallup asked, "Would you say that George W. Bush and the Republican party have — or have not — attacked John Kerry unfairly?" Twenty-one percent said yes, Bush and the GOP have attacked Kerry unfairly, while 67 percent said no, they have not. Twelve percent had no opinion.

Then Gallup asked, "Would you say that John Kerry and the Democratic party have — or have not — attacked George W. Bush unfairly?" Thirty-five percent said yes, Kerry and the Democrats have attacked Bush unfairly, while 57 percent said no, they have not. Eight percent had no opinion.

Breaking down the numbers by party, 33 percent of Democrats said Bush and the Republicans have attacked Kerry unfairly. But 53 percent of Democrats said Bush and the Republican party have not attacked Kerry unfairly.

Twenty-one percent of independents said Bush has been unfair, but 65 percent of independents said Bush and the GOP have not attacked Kerry unfairly.

Nine percent of Republicans believe Bush has been unfair, while 84 percent believe he hasn't.

Looked at from the other party's perspective, 59 percent of Republicans said Kerry and the Democrats have attacked Bush unfairly, while just 35 percent said Kerry and the Democrats have not attacked Bush unfairly.

Thirty-five percent of independents said Kerry has been unfair, while 55 percent said Kerry has not attacked Bush unfairly.

Thirteen percent of Democrats said Kerry has been unfair, while 80 percent said he has not.

In all, it appears that Republicans feel more aggrieved at the moment — not surprising, given the months of Democratic campaigning and the Bush campaign's belated counterattacks. But perhaps more importantly, more independents seem to believe that Kerry and the Democrats have been unfair than believe that Bush has been unfair.

[trebb]

Bush, we are told, is playing politics. Which is exactly what his hypocritical critics are doing.

Exactly - the Dims and media remind me of my brother when he was about 4 years old. He was mad at his friend and wanted to fight him, but didn't want to get hurt. So, he told the kid, "I'm going to fight you, but don't you fight me back."

The Dims would never make it in sports - if they had a baseball team, they would complain that the other team was actually daring to play baseball against them. The nerve...

[alwaysconservative]

Bump for later reading.

[malia]

"I'm going to fight you, but don't you fight me back."

I love that and it is just what Kerry is doing, right. He went after President Bush and his National Guard duty. The next thing I heard from Kerry is President Bush was attacking his patriotism. Then the Adm had to defend themselves that no such comment was made!!!

I like it when the Bush Adm. is playing offense instead of defense.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

IMO, restrict the uplifting, inspirational stuff and get down to defining your opponent.

You can define your opponent without going postal. It's what he is doing with the speeches. However, in the ads he is going positive and getting lambasted for it. In one way, he is defining his opponent and in another his opponent is defining himself as a whiner. A win-win situation if there ever was one in politics. A Cherry on the top is the media's pounding of the ad so Bush won't have to run it but once to get nationwide impact.

If the pattern continues, (it won't) he'll have money left over after the election.

I would like to see Kerry in Kerry's own wards and video flip-flopping and lying on the screen over and over again.

Since 9/11 people have realized how important character is once again. Trouble is, not every voter knows what it looks like because of Clintox. They need Freeper therapy!

[vanmorrison]

...And JEffinKerry is ahead of Bush in the polls!

Brain-dead America speaks!

[auzerais]

I certainly hope that Ms Burlingame publically condemns cartoonist Don Wright by confronting him and the public with the hateful nature of this cartoon that appeared on today's (03/08/2004) Palm Beach Post Opinion Page:

http://www.comicspage.com/wright/

Just who is Mr Wright implying that Pres Bush is waving to?
The terrorists?
If so, then this cartoon is nothing less than libelous and the RNC and/or family members of flight 77 should file suit immediately.

[malia]

disgusting!!! But that speaks more about the artist? than it will ever speak for President George W. Bush.

[sauropod]

ping.

[backhoe]

Cross-link:

-The Prince of Tides- Bush ads, Kerry ads, the Tides Foundation, and so much more--