invoking 9/11....a step away from a promise made?

DKSuddeth

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2003
5,175
61
48
North Texas
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4420934/

WASHINGTON - President George W. Bush’s re-election team unveiled his first campaign advertisements on Wednesday and they in part use the events of Sept. 11, 2001, to focus on his “steady leadership” during turbulent times.

The Bush-Cheney ’04 campaign waited to launch the ad campaign until after the Democrats chose their presumptive nominee, John Kerry, who locked it up with impressive victories across the country on Tuesday.

Campaign officials said they saw Kerry, a Massachusetts senator, as a formidable opponent and predicted Bush will be at most tied or behind in the polls until the Republican nominating convention in New York in September. Recent polls have put Bush behind his Democratic opponent.

“We’re obviously starting this race in a place where we thought we would, which is even or slightly behind, and I think that’s going to stay that way for the next five or six months,” said Bush’s campaign pollster, Matthew Dowd.

The four Bush ads, one of them in Spanish, will begin running on Thursday in at least 16 important battleground states and on more than five national cable television channels.

Two ads refer to the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, as the Bush campaign seeks to present Bush as a tried and tested leader who has risen to the challenge. One ad, entitled “Tested,” shows, among other images, a damaged building from the World Trade Center ruins behind an American flag.

“The last few years have tested America in many ways,” the voice-over says. “Some challenges we’ve seen before. And some were like no others. But America rose to the challenge.”

'Steady leadership'
It concludes: “President Bush. Steady leadership in times of change.”

An ad called “Safer, Stronger,” points to the problems the United States has faced since Bush took office in January 2001, a recession, a declining stock market, a dot.com boom gone bust and “a day of tragedy.”

“Today, America is turning the corner. Rising to the challenge,” the ad says. This one is also done in Spanish.

A 60-second ad entitled “Lead” focuses on what may well be Bush’s greatest weakness, the inability of the U.S. economy to generate a lot of jobs despite strong growth.

“And as the economy grows, the job base grows and somebody who’s looking for work will be more likely to find a job,” Bush says in the ad.

Seated next to him is his wife Laura, who the Bush campaign sees as an enormous asset. She lauds her husband for “the strength, the focus, the characteristics that these times demand.”

Multimillion-dollar purchase
The ads constitute a multimillion-dollar purchase as the Bush campaign begins to dip into the more than $100 million in cash on hand. The ads are positive looks at the president’s record with no attacks on Kerry.

Dowd said a large section of the electorate will see the ads but would not say which states they will be in to avoid tipping off the Bush strategy to the Democrats.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe was quick to respond.

“These ads are expected to reference Bush’s ’steady leadership’ as president, but they would be remiss to leave out some ’steady’ facts when it comes to his leadership: a steady loss of jobs, a steady increase in uninsured Americans, a steady decline in education funding, a steady erosion of veterans’ benefits, a steady attack against the Social Security Fund, and a steady rise of the deficit,” he said.
 
I saw most of the ads and they are excellent! This is just the very beginning of the end for Kerry.
 
I think the best part of them is that they are positive, showing a vision for America and running on the Presidents record.
 
As the Bush campaign focuses on national security and steering away from the job market they will lose touch with the working class. As I said in earlier threads, its going to be the economy that decides this election.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
As the Bush campaign focuses on national security and steering away from the job market they will lose touch with the working class. As I said in earlier threads, its going to be the economy that decides this election.

Even the working class are interested in national security. Also, Kerry hasn't given one good reason or plan to make anything different. (other than vowing to be friendlier with the terrorists)
 
It won't matter what kerry says or doesn't say, If the job market does not improve quite a bit it won't matter.

Yes, I'm sure people do care about national security but these people that aren't working will damn sure vote for anyone but bush. It may not be wise, but it will happen.
 
Bush has to run on his response to 9/11. His presidency is defined by the national security agenda. Kerry took the gloves off with his focus on Vietnam and his claims that he would repudiate the War on Terror and go crawling to the U.N. to beg forgiveness for the U.S. not kowtowing to global government.

No thanks.
 
I think those ads will remind people once again of what sort of world we live in.
I think they will tell JK supporters that voting for JK will not ensure anything but voting for Bush will ensure continued fight against terrorist.
When 9/11 happened the most important to the citizens of this country were not jobs but security and seeing part of their country, no matter how small nationwide, destroyed. Voting for a man like JK will do what?
That is the intention.
Without national security, everything else means nothing. Your job means nothing...

Many years ago I worked in Walt Disney World and they were under constant threat of attack from terrorists and I am sure they still are.
I have also spend some years working in airports around the country and international and most important - to some anyway - was security.

However there are those that do not think that way. They are most interested in themselves and jobs and nothing else. Failing to realize that terrorist acts involve all and in the end your job will mean nothing.

I shutter to think of JK in the oval office. I cannot fathom the logic of voting for a man with no consistancy in anything. If voted, how does one know where he will stand on any issue if he changes his mind every few years? What he says now to entice your vote, will it change once in office? He is for the war in Iraq, he is against the war in Iraq. What does he do once in office? Confuse?
How do you know what you are getting from this man if he changes his mind? One year he is for NAFTA under Clinton, now under Bush he is not. Perhaps once elected he will be for Nafta again.
If you are voting for him because of his promise of thousands of jobs within his first two years, how do you know he will not change his mind?
When judging a man, does one not on his charector?

I have a post asking for reasons why anyone is voting for JK. I am not looking for Bush bashing, any idiot with a minute brain can do that - I am looking for a positive reason why they are voting for him.
That post remains empty.
 
But if you havent noticed Bush is running on the recovery of the economy. just look at the ads.
 
I noticed none of you seem to have a problem with Bush politicizing the unmitigated slaughter of all of those who died in the World Trade Center and related plane crashes. That speaks volumes about the sort of people who support this president.

acludem
 
Originally posted by acludem
I noticed none of you seem to have a problem with Bush politicizing the unmitigated slaughter of all of those who died in the World Trade Center and related plane crashes. That speaks volumes about the sort of people who support this president.

acludem

He led the country after the worst terror attack ever. Should this just be ignored as if it never happened?

If Guiliani should ever run for office again he would likely do the same, and rightfully so!!
 
GW is using those ads to remind people what he stands for -

remind people what we are up against in this world.

JK doesnt seem to remember that. He seems to believe that if he were president no attacks from terrorits would occur.

Who do you want in the oval office?
 
Definitely not Kerry. I would take Bush over him any day of the week- before or after 9/11. The ads were tastefully done and, like someone else pointed out, entirely without rancor towards other politicians. Can't say that about many ads today.

The fact that some people thing that it's crass or self serving to show 9/11 just makes me laugh. Every newspaper and news show in the world had photos of that on their front pages or cover story...certainly they are in business to sell papers/ad time. That doesn't make it less acceptable to use the images. They tell a story.

Personally, they
 
So should John Kerry not mention Vietnam? He as much said so some 20 years ago but invokes that war every chance he gets. Face it people its the same ball game the Demos have been playing for the last 45 years, do as I say not as I do. The party of the underachievers I say.
 
Originally posted by acludem
I noticed none of you seem to have a problem with Bush politicizing the unmitigated slaughter of all of those who died in the World Trade Center and related plane crashes.

I can only imagine what sort of response this type of attitude would have incited in Americans back in 1944 if applied to Pearl Harbor.

Different times I suppose.
 
As ive said elsewhere it seems its alright for Democrats to politicize 911 to attack Bush and accuse him of knowing about it and not stopping it, yet for Bush to run on his record of amazing leadership during a time of crisis is "Offensive".

I think the reaction from the Democrats today now that Bush is finally campaigning tells alot more than they are saying. it shows how in trouble they are.
 
I completely agree Avatar. Very well said on your part.

The democrats were the first to take their gloves off in this campaign... they're just upset that we showed up to fight.
 

Forum List

Back
Top