Putting these ads out was another stroke of brilliance by Karl Rove. As midwinter pointed out, the debate has shifted from the Bush's policies to 9/11 and Bush can't lose running on 9/11. Secondly, something that I haven't seen pointed out is that Bush is getting the controversy out of the way now and not closer to the election or closer to the anniversary.
The issue is now fair game and Kerry is going to do some real damage with it. Time to put that IAFF endorsement to good use. Some ads with the NYFD talking about how Bush cut funds for first responders should do the trick. Or how Bush cut funds that were supposed to be used to upgrade the FDNY's radio system, which could prevent situations like what happened on 9/11. Or how the EPA was directed by the White House to cover up the environmental impacts. Or how the .gov still owes NYC about $15 billion dollars.
this is all bullshit. people say "oh we need freedom of speech" and all that crap, but when somebody airs something "offensive," they sue them and go overboard with it. here's a damn idea: shut up and go make your own ad!
this is all bullshit. people say "oh we need freedom of speech" and all that crap, but when somebody airs something "offensive," they sue them and go overboard with it. here's a damn idea: shut up and go make your own ad!
ps: sorry, its been a long day.
Umm. They did. MoveOn.org sponsored the contest. Last i checked, the Repugs WENT APESHIT OVER THEM!
Bush is going to invoke his performance after 9/11 every chance he gets... no big surprise. Watch for some lame ceremony during the RNC convention.
Funny thing is he's cut funding to first responders and states have had to close firehouses ... Bush invokes the memory of fallen firefighters but that's as far as he goes. Remember the firefighters! Forget what I did with all that homeland security money... and the aide promised to NYC.
The Firefighters are insulted. The widows are insulted. What happened on 9/11... what happened before it? 2 years later... Bush wants to give the 9/11 commission a whole hour. whoopdeedoo.
Meanwhile the press is banned from showing flag draped coffins of dead soldiers from Iraq. you do remember them don't you? 500+... and more dying every week.
Bush is going to invoke his performance after 9/11 every chance he gets... no big surprise. Watch for some lame ceremony during the RNC convention.
Funny thing is he's cut funding to first responders and states have had to close firehouses ... Bush invokes the memory of fallen firefighters but that's as far as he goes. Remember the firefighters! Forget what I did with all that homeland security money... and the aide promised to NYC.
The Firefighters are insulted. The widows are insulted. What happened on 9/11... what happened before it? 2 years later... Bush wants to give the 9/11 commission a whole hour. whoopdeedoo.
Meanwhile the press is banned from showing flag draped coffins of dead soldiers from Iraq. you do remember them don't you? 500+... and more dying every week.
Exactly. Bush refuses to let the press shoot any footage of dead soldier's flag-draped coffins as they come home. But, man, he sure doesn't hesitate to use the flag draped coffins of the WTC victims to promote his re-election bid.
"Bush doesn't have a legal right to use the images"
"Bush doesn't have a moral right to use the images"
"The firefighters are mad. The familes are mad. Bush is so stupid"
First, I do not for a second believe all the "outrage". It's manufactured. Oh, I believe some families and various individuals may not like it....but really. The only people who are outraged are Bush's political opponents. The unmitigated outrage! Sue! Sue! Sue!
Second, let's put this in perspective. We're talking about a few seconds of footage, all presented in the context of "facing challenges". If you don't believe that, then go back and watch the ads again and tell me it's not true. Bush has every right to point to the way he handled what NO other American President has ever handled before...the mass murder of 3,000 civilians on American soil. It would be one thing if the ads were direct references to 9/11....but they're not. They are about facing challenges, and one of those challeneges was undoubtedly 9/11.
Third, the notion of a class action lawsuit is just utterly and wholly absurd.
First of all, I think a lawsuit is ridiculous. But I also think it's just about as ridiculous as the Bush/Cheney campaign using the image of rescue workers/firefighters carrying a flag draped coffin out of ground zero. It's in poor taste, especially when the families of the victims have asked the campaign to drop the images from the commercials.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
First of all, I think a lawsuit is ridiculous. But I also think it's just about as ridiculous as the Bush/Cheney campaign using the image of rescue workers/firefighters carrying a flag draped coffin out of ground zero. It's in poor taste, especially when the families of the victims have asked the campaign to drop the images from the commercials.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
First of all, I think a lawsuit is ridiculous. But I also think it's just about as ridiculous as the Bush/Cheney campaign using the image of rescue workers/firefighters carrying a flag draped coffin out of ground zero. It's in poor taste, especially when the families of the victims have asked the campaign to drop the images from the commercials.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
Now tell me, what's the difference?
I guess I can't disagree there. Though, I'd like to know whose decision it was not to show the coffins. As for "poor taste" I don't agree.
I guess what I don't understand is how can showing one flag draped coffin somehow be in better taste than showing another?
I mean, if the Bush Administration is going to claim that it is in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming back to the United States from Iraq because the families don't want them shown, how is it *not* in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming out of Ground Zero if the families don't want them shown?
I guess what I don't understand is how can showing one flag draped coffin somehow be in better taste than showing another?
I mean, if the Bush Administration is going to claim that it is in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming back to the United States from Iraq because the families don't want them shown, how is it *not* in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming out of Ground Zero if the families don't want them shown?
how could this man possibly be against gay marriage?? talk about queer eye for the straight guy...he could easily be the 6th member
g [/B]
Well, that's Bush reading and listening to school children a full twenty five minutes after he was informed of an attack in NYC. That's not queer...that's just plain stupid and ignorant.
It would be one thing if the ads were direct references to 9/11....but they're not. They are about facing challenges, and one of those challeneges was undoubtedly 9/11.
So you're saying the advertisement in question didn't directly reference 9/11 as "one of those challenges" within the context of "facing challenges?".....and then you say it did. I hope you're not okay with this contradiction?
So you're saying the advertisement in question didn't directly reference 9/11 as "one of those challenges" within the context of "facing challenges?".....and then you say it did. I hope you're not okay with this contradiction?
You're misinterpreting. Or perhaps I'm not being clear. Either way, what I meant is that it's not like he ran a "9/11" ad. It was only part of the ad. It also used only a few seconds of footage from the aftermath of the attack. There is no question that this was a defining time of his Presidency....and the nation. He has every right (both moral and legal) to use it. The criticism about these ads is entirely manufactured. One of the better points I heard on this was made by Rudy Giuliani. He surmised that had Bush not referenced 9/11, the Democrats would be attacking him for ignoring the murders of 3,000 people and saying he was too distracted by Iraq to care.
Bush has real things the Dems could come after him on, particularly in the area of over spending and big government. If they were smart, they'd steal the Republican agenda from the party....just as the Republicans effectively stole the Democratic agenda on issues like Medicare. And, Bush and company will do it again on Social Security. It's going to be a major campaign issue, and if Kerry let's Bush go on the offensive with it like he did with gay marriage, it's going to hurt him.
None of ad critiques is going to matter, because 1) The ads are going to be allowed to run and 2) They'll most likely be effective on the general populus. Stand back for a second without the Bush hatred and partisan glasses and look at the ads. They're very well done and quite effective. (Before you flame me, let me point out that I thought Gore ran some good ads last time around as well. By contrast, I didn't think Bush's ads in 2000 were that well done).
Comments
The issue is now fair game and Kerry is going to do some real damage with it. Time to put that IAFF endorsement to good use. Some ads with the NYFD talking about how Bush cut funds for first responders should do the trick. Or how Bush cut funds that were supposed to be used to upgrade the FDNY's radio system, which could prevent situations like what happened on 9/11. Or how the EPA was directed by the White House to cover up the environmental impacts. Or how the .gov still owes NYC about $15 billion dollars.
ps: sorry, its been a long day.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Wow, way to completely invalidate his feelings about losing his friends *and* come off as a condescending ass, all at one fell swoop. Amazing.
thank you
Originally posted by ipodandimac
this is all bullshit. people say "oh we need freedom of speech" and all that crap, but when somebody airs something "offensive," they sue them and go overboard with it. here's a damn idea: shut up and go make your own ad!
ps: sorry, its been a long day.
Umm. They did. MoveOn.org sponsored the contest. Last i checked, the Repugs WENT APESHIT OVER THEM!
Funny thing is he's cut funding to first responders and states have had to close firehouses ... Bush invokes the memory of fallen firefighters but that's as far as he goes. Remember the firefighters! Forget what I did with all that homeland security money... and the aide promised to NYC.
The Firefighters are insulted. The widows are insulted. What happened on 9/11... what happened before it? 2 years later... Bush wants to give the 9/11 commission a whole hour. whoopdeedoo.
Meanwhile the press is banned from showing flag draped coffins of dead soldiers from Iraq. you do remember them don't you? 500+... and more dying every week.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Bush is going to invoke his performance after 9/11 every chance he gets... no big surprise. Watch for some lame ceremony during the RNC convention.
Funny thing is he's cut funding to first responders and states have had to close firehouses ... Bush invokes the memory of fallen firefighters but that's as far as he goes. Remember the firefighters! Forget what I did with all that homeland security money... and the aide promised to NYC.
The Firefighters are insulted. The widows are insulted. What happened on 9/11... what happened before it? 2 years later... Bush wants to give the 9/11 commission a whole hour. whoopdeedoo.
Meanwhile the press is banned from showing flag draped coffins of dead soldiers from Iraq. you do remember them don't you? 500+... and more dying every week.
Exactly. Bush refuses to let the press shoot any footage of dead soldier's flag-draped coffins as they come home. But, man, he sure doesn't hesitate to use the flag draped coffins of the WTC victims to promote his re-election bid.
The Hypocrisy is Astounding!
"Bush doesn't have a legal right to use the images"
"Bush doesn't have a moral right to use the images"
"The firefighters are mad. The familes are mad. Bush is so stupid"
First, I do not for a second believe all the "outrage". It's manufactured. Oh, I believe some families and various individuals may not like it....but really. The only people who are outraged are Bush's political opponents. The unmitigated outrage! Sue! Sue! Sue!
Second, let's put this in perspective. We're talking about a few seconds of footage, all presented in the context of "facing challenges". If you don't believe that, then go back and watch the ads again and tell me it's not true. Bush has every right to point to the way he handled what NO other American President has ever handled before...the mass murder of 3,000 civilians on American soil. It would be one thing if the ads were direct references to 9/11....but they're not. They are about facing challenges, and one of those challeneges was undoubtedly 9/11.
Third, the notion of a class action lawsuit is just utterly and wholly absurd.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
Now tell me, what's the difference?
Originally posted by Fran441
First of all, I think a lawsuit is ridiculous. But I also think it's just about as ridiculous as the Bush/Cheney campaign using the image of rescue workers/firefighters carrying a flag draped coffin out of ground zero. It's in poor taste, especially when the families of the victims have asked the campaign to drop the images from the commercials.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
Now tell me, what's the difference?
Go on SDW. Explain the difference.
Originally posted by Fran441
First of all, I think a lawsuit is ridiculous. But I also think it's just about as ridiculous as the Bush/Cheney campaign using the image of rescue workers/firefighters carrying a flag draped coffin out of ground zero. It's in poor taste, especially when the families of the victims have asked the campaign to drop the images from the commercials.
I can think of some other flag draped coffins that the President doesn't want on TV. In fact, the media has been banned from showing them. There are over 500 of them that have come home from Iraq, and none have been allowed to be shown on TV out of respect for the victims and their families.
Now tell me, what's the difference?
I guess I can't disagree there. Though, I'd like to know whose decision it was not to show the coffins. As for "poor taste" I don't agree.
I mean, if the Bush Administration is going to claim that it is in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming back to the United States from Iraq because the families don't want them shown, how is it *not* in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming out of Ground Zero if the families don't want them shown?
Originally posted by Fran441
I guess what I don't understand is how can showing one flag draped coffin somehow be in better taste than showing another?
I mean, if the Bush Administration is going to claim that it is in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming back to the United States from Iraq because the families don't want them shown, how is it *not* in poor taste to show the flag draped coffins coming out of Ground Zero if the families don't want them shown?
Is that what they argued? I'm not sure they did.
Originally posted by THT
I believe the Sept 11 bombings are public enough that anyone can use stuff from those events in anyway they want.
All I got.
Oh and they weren't bombings...they were attacks.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
All I got.
Oh and they weren't bombings...they were attacks.
Is it just me or did Bush just poop a little bicycle?
how could this man possibly be against gay marriage?? talk about queer eye for the straight guy...he could easily be the 6th member
g
Originally posted by thegelding
how could this man possibly be against gay marriage?? talk about queer eye for the straight guy...he could easily be the 6th member
g [/B]
Well, that's Bush reading and listening to school children a full twenty five minutes after he was informed of an attack in NYC. That's not queer...that's just plain stupid and ignorant.
Out of respect for the families!
bwahahahaha.
So when firefighters and their families ask him not to use a flag draped body and he says no...
Originally posted by SDW2001
It would be one thing if the ads were direct references to 9/11....but they're not. They are about facing challenges, and one of those challeneges was undoubtedly 9/11.
So you're saying the advertisement in question didn't directly reference 9/11 as "one of those challenges" within the context of "facing challenges?".....and then you say it did. I hope you're not okay with this contradiction?
Originally posted by ShawnJ
So you're saying the advertisement in question didn't directly reference 9/11 as "one of those challenges" within the context of "facing challenges?".....and then you say it did. I hope you're not okay with this contradiction?
You're misinterpreting. Or perhaps I'm not being clear. Either way, what I meant is that it's not like he ran a "9/11" ad. It was only part of the ad. It also used only a few seconds of footage from the aftermath of the attack. There is no question that this was a defining time of his Presidency....and the nation. He has every right (both moral and legal) to use it. The criticism about these ads is entirely manufactured. One of the better points I heard on this was made by Rudy Giuliani. He surmised that had Bush not referenced 9/11, the Democrats would be attacking him for ignoring the murders of 3,000 people and saying he was too distracted by Iraq to care.
Bush has real things the Dems could come after him on, particularly in the area of over spending and big government. If they were smart, they'd steal the Republican agenda from the party....just as the Republicans effectively stole the Democratic agenda on issues like Medicare. And, Bush and company will do it again on Social Security. It's going to be a major campaign issue, and if Kerry let's Bush go on the offensive with it like he did with gay marriage, it's going to hurt him.
None of ad critiques is going to matter, because 1) The ads are going to be allowed to run and 2) They'll most likely be effective on the general populus. Stand back for a second without the Bush hatred and partisan glasses and look at the ads. They're very well done and quite effective. (Before you flame me, let me point out that I thought Gore ran some good ads last time around as well. By contrast, I didn't think Bush's ads in 2000 were that well done).