Bush using 9-11 grief for self promotion

[tim_duncan2000]

Just about every political campaign, book tour, movie, welfare bill, etc. uses historically significant facts/images in their appeals. What about democrats using the Vietnam War?

I know. That's what Kerry is doing, even though he was anything but proud when he came back.

Also, many Democrats and anti-Bush people basically blame Bush for 9/11. Isn't that also using 9/11 for self promotion?

 

[lilcountriegal]

DK... Jim posted a link to the commercials on Page 1 of this thread. I've withheld opinion until after I watched them.

There are such minute references to 9/11 in there that I think its ridiculous for the Democrats to be finding fault with that.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by tim_duncan2000
Also, many Democrats and anti-Bush people basically blame Bush for 9/11. Isn't that also using 9/11 for self promotion?

No kidding. Yesterday on the news shows I hear 4 times "3000 people were mudered on his (Bush) watch", like Bush was responsible for the attacks. What a bunch of crap!

 

[_dmp_]

I find it odd that having a loved one die during the 11Sep attacks qualifies one to know better, or be smarter, or have their opinion carry more weight than it should.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
No, not yet. I havent had alot of time to watch tv, period. I'd like to eventually though, just to see what the hype really is all about. If I remember correctly though, there was a statement by the administration shortly after the attacks in '01 that the events of 9/11 would not be used for political gain. Is that not what he's doing? Maybe I'm wrong, as I said I have not seen the ads.

All in All, I do think its cool that the Bush campaign is staying away from the negative attacks as compared to Kerry, boosts my respect for it just a bit.

You can view them on georgebush.com

 

[spillmind]

I find it odd that having a loved one die during the 11Sep attacks qualifies one to know better, or be smarter, or have their opinion carry more weight than it should.

these people have a better understand for the full weight of emotion about the incident that i do. how about you?

it's respect for the fallen by not putting the gravesite up there as your own personal platform. if they were truly positive ads that ran 'on his record' there wouldn't be much there. the bush camp doesn't need to use past terror attacks to achieve what they are trying to achieve.

while i do think it's good that it focuses on the 'postive', there is just too much negative that has has happened during his tenure.

if kerry runs ads about record job losses, that is TRUE

if the dems run ads about kids paying for our deficit, it's TRUE

if anti-bush ads say that tens of thousands have perished (murdered even) during bush's term its TRUE

go ahead and blame it all on clinton. i'd really like to see him run *that* in his 'positive' ads. get real, people.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by acludem
The problem is Bush is using 9/11 to beat on the Democrats, which he specifically said he wouldn't do. He's using it to attack the democrats on national security, even if the ad doesn't say it, that's the point. Republicans (led by Bush's main henchman Karl Rove) used 9/11 to beat Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, a man who gave three limbs for his country, by accusing him of being less than patriotic. That's exactly what he's doing in a backwards way with these ads.

As for investigations, the reason why we need to look into what happened is so we can learn how to prevent. For starters, the Bush administration lifting a finger for the 9 months it was in place before the attacks would've helped. Bill Clinton left the best terrorism experts in the world working in the Justice Department and the Bush administration simply ignored them. The investigation (called for by both parties) is into what failures occured allowing the attacks to occur, and what can be done to prevent such attacks in the future.

acludem

Although other people have responded to this, I'll add my two cents.

These ads attack no one. They are clearly statements about what Bush has done during his tenure. Your definition of "beat on" and "attack" have no basis in the facts.

Once again, I'll also have to state the obvious. Bush was president during the attacks and afterwards. It is a completely historic fact that he led the country and did the things he says in the commercials. As opposed to, say, the morons who have assailed Bush for being a Nazi just because his lineage descends from people who may or may not have been.

 

[MtnBiker]

Bush did not mention Clinton during the 2000 election. I doubt he will in 2004.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by spillmind
these people have a better understand for the full weight of emotion about the incident that i do. how about you?

it's respect for the fallen by not putting the gravesite up there as your own personal platform. if they were truly positive ads that ran 'on his record' there wouldn't be much there. the bush camp doesn't need to use past terror attacks to achieve what they are trying to achieve.

while i do think it's good that it focuses on the 'postive', there is just too much negative that has has happened during his tenure.

if kerry runs ads about record job losses, that is TRUE

if the dems run ads about kids paying for our deficit, it's TRUE

if anti-bush ads say that tens of thousands have perished (murdered even) during bush's term its TRUE

go ahead and blame it all on clinton. i'd really like to see him run *that* in his 'positive' ads. get real, people.

Oh, please. If Kerry ran ads on record job losses, he'd have to implicate Clinton- for they began on his watch.

If he wants to talk about deficit, he'd have to portray the democrats as complicit for most of Bush's agenda has been to appease the democratic liberal spenders.

If he wants to sling mud about who lost more people during their term, millions of people were murdered during Clinton's term.

These facts don't make such a great advertisement for Kerry, though, do they?

Oh, and just for the record, I support the ads. And I did lose people that were close to me in the attacks. Even more of my family and friends were there but got away unscathed. Just like the press to dig up the few people who are too rawly emotional to objectively look at this. How about they take a poll of every single person in the world to see what they think? I doubt they'd have the balls to pull it off.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by MtnBiker
Bush did not mention Clinton during the 2000 election. I doubt he will in 2004.

Of course not. All those who don't like Bush's policies are too damn stupid and selfish to just admit the man's a gentleman. They dislike his policies so much that they can't even see how decent he is.

I don't claim the man's perfect but at least give him credit where credit is due- he does what he thinks is best for the country. There's a lot of politicians for both sides that I don't agree with- but they are decent people deserving of respect.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by spillmind
these people have a better understand for the full weight of emotion about the incident that i do. how about you?

it's respect for the fallen by not putting the gravesite up there as your own personal platform. if they were truly positive ads that ran 'on his record' there wouldn't be much there. the bush camp doesn't need to use past terror attacks to achieve what they are trying to achieve.

while i do think it's good that it focuses on the 'postive', there is just too much negative that has has happened during his tenure.

if kerry runs ads about record job losses, that is TRUE

if the dems run ads about kids paying for our deficit, it's TRUE

if anti-bush ads say that tens of thousands have perished (murdered even) during bush's term its TRUE

go ahead and blame it all on clinton. i'd really like to see him run *that* in his 'positive' ads. get real, people.

It's less than 3 seconds of time in 2 minutes of ads. It was done in a respectful manner. It showed progress of the nation from that point forth and what started us in that direction. It's completely appropriate and part of his record.

I would tell you to get real but I know I'd be wasting my time. You had your mind made up about any Bush ads before they were even released. The fact that some liberals are complaining comes as no surprise. Some will bash no matter what the subject. I will say a prayer for these poor, misguided, brainwashed souls, but I doubt it'll help.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by spillmind
these people have a better understand for the full weight of emotion about the incident that i do. how about you?

What a crock of shit. Just because you lost somebody doesn't make you smart. I understand the full weight of what happened to the fullest.

Originally posted by spillmind

it's respect for the fallen by not putting the gravesite up there as your own personal platform.

:baby:

 

[Ralph Wiggums]

Here is an article I came across that I thought brought out a differenct angle of one reason some people are upset with these ads that I have not seen mentioned here.



Bush Exploits Photo of Dead Bodies, Despite Ban


As the nation headed for war last year, President Bush "clamped down" on the media, extending and expanding a controversial policy that banned reporters from photographing flag-draped caskets of soldiers killed in combat 1. The White House said the policy was enforced to "spare the feelings of military families." 2 Yet, in the very first television advertisement of his 2004 campaign, the president has blanketed the nation's airwaves with an image of "firefighters carrying a flag-draped body" from the 9/11 wreckage at Ground Zero 3.

The hypocrisy of preventing Americans from receiving a "reminder of the toll of war" at the very same time the president exploits an image of a dead body for his own political gain has caused an outrage among victims' families 4. Chris Burke, whose brother Tom died in the attacks, said, "Using my dead friends and my dead brother for political expediency is dead wrong. It's wrong, it's bad taste and an insult to the 3,000 people who died on Sept. 11." 5

The president's actions have also raised new credibility questions because he previously promised not to exploit the 9/11 attacks. Speaking of 9/11 in January 2003, President Bush told the Associated Press that he had "no ambition whatsoever to use this as a political issue."

Source
http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df03052004.html

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

The images in the ads are there for about a second. It's not like it shows the plane flying into the second tower or people running from the debris when the towers fell.
This was a huge, history changin event that happened when Bush was only 9 months into his term. How can he not refer to it? What I find funny is I know good and well the the conspiracy theory nuts would be out in force if he DIDN'T use this in his ad, saying he "must have something to hide".

 

[Palestinian Jew]

I think its bs how bush will use the image proudly, but then when it comes to the 9/11 commision he doesn't give a shit. Families have a right to be angry.

 

[spillmind]

It's less than 3 seconds of time in 2 minutes of ads. It was done in a respectful manner. It showed progress of the nation from that point forth and what started us in that direction. It's completely appropriate and part of his record.

it's kind of like leaving someone to watch over your house, pets, and plants. you return home to find it burned down. BUT THIS GUYS STAYS TO HELP YOU REBUILD.

sorry, that's BS, and he FAILED. we need new leadership. period. trying to blame former presidents while things happen on your watch is not the type of courageous leadership i look for.

What a crock of shit. Just because you lost somebody doesn't make you smart. I understand the full weight of what happened to the fullest.

i'd rather you tell people who lost loved ones that you know the extent of their suffering to a T, now *that* is a crock. you're only fooling yourself. i'll simply respect their experiences myself, rather than try to trivialize it and claim to fully understand. your beef is not with me.

I would tell you to get real but I know I'd be wasting my time. You had your mind made up about any Bush ads before they were even released. The fact that some liberals are complaining comes as no surprise. Some will bash no matter what the subject. I will say a prayer for these poor, misguided, brainwashed souls, but I doubt it'll help.

i'll bash what i think is wrong, and i won't take to party affiliation, either.

 

[_dmp_]

[qutoe]i'd rather you tell people who lost loved ones that you know the extent of their suffering to a T, now *that* is a crock. you're only fooling yourself. i'll simply respect their experiences myself, rather than try to trivialize it and claim to fully understand. your beef is not with me.[/quote]


What?

What about those 'survivors' who don't have a problem w/ the ads? Do you respect their experiences? How do you know I didn't lose somebody close to me? You assumed I'm not connected, don't you?

(shrug).

 

[tim_duncan2000]

What about those 'survivors' who don't have a problem w/ the ads?

Well, obviously, they don't count.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by spillmind
it's kind of like leaving someone to watch over your house, pets, and plants. you return home to find it burned down. BUT THIS GUYS STAYS TO HELP YOU REBUILD.

sorry, that's BS, and he FAILED. we need new leadership. period. trying to blame former presidents while things happen on your watch is not the type of courageous leadership i look for.

THANK YOU for proving my point.

It's clueless people like you that make this ad more appropriate. The more he is attacked about 9/11 the more he has the right to defend himself.

He is our current president. He will, contrary to your objections, be president until '08. Looks like YOU failed and the majority of the nation will be laughing for another 4 years!

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by spillmind
trying to blame former presidents while things happen on your watch is not the type of courageous leadership i look for.

I don't believe I've heard the President or anyone in high office in his administration blame Clinton for anything, and I doubt they ever will. This is out of respect for the office.

The blame comes from conservative pundits and political chat boards.