Crank it up GWB!Blast that pussy Kerry and the Billary,too.

am i first??? heheee

maybe he should use footage of people jumping out the windows, that would really get the lefties foaming.

I'm certain that these same people were complaining about the staged picture of Clinton stacking pebbles on the beaches at Normandy. Not.

You're damned right, Charles. I suspect it's more about who the ads are for, though. Democrats who invoke national tragedies seem to get free passes.

?Would you ever go to someone?s grave site and use that as an instrument of politics?"

Well. . . .

"We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it as a final resting place for those who died here that that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do."

Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg, Nov. 19, 1863

I thought the Ad was very tastefully done. It serves to remind us we are in a war with fanatical terrorists and we better not forget it!

I wholeheartedly agree. Are we to believe that there weren't ANY that approved of the 100% relevant 9/11 subject matter?

Also, can anyone tell me who are the owners of haaretz daily? I'm convinced they are controlled by al jazeera or al arabiya, going by the content.

ps: First post by me, long time reader.

#5

Touche!!!

And what about the next time Kerry refers to his service in Viet Nam?

I think it's tasteless. Why not show pictures of troops in Iraq? That's part of his record--he had nothing to do with the heroism of NYC's firefighters...

Several relatives of victims also praised the ads.

You'd have to read almost all the way through the article to catch that, much further than the biased headline, of course.

Anyone know if Mr. John Flipflop Kerry has ever even been to Ground Zero?

Like the British electorate that defeated Churchill after WW2, the citizens of the U.S. want to move on. Unfortunately, the enemy this time has not been defeated, comforting though it may be to consign 9/11 to the dustbin of history. Wasn't life easier under the Democrats, when our biggest concern was the mystery of JonBenet Ramsay and the sperm stains on Monica's dress? Before that warmonger (Bush Lied!) set us on this path of peril (NO WMDs!) and destruction. Back when the world still loved us. The Democrats are like that poppy field in The Wizard of Oz, lulling us all into a deep and tranquil sleep before we get to the Emerald City. I hope the American people have the wherewithall to resist the temptation to fall back asleep.

They have to do this. If Bush can run ads like this, Kerry doesn't have a chance. Just watch, the left is going to do everything they can to keep the attacks on 9/11 out of this election.

Blue Falcon:

Doesn't look like it

[Link: www.google.com...]

The article also quotes the head of a firefighter’s group that has endorsed John Kerry. No bias here.

It's worse than that. As this article states, Schaitberger himself stumps for Kerry.

The administration is its own worst enemy: Cheney has a 35% approval rating, it censors pictures of coffins coming home from Iraq but thinks it OK to use the image for campaign ads.

We allow our country to be run like dogpatch.

Charles,

Although some of the victims' relatives clearly have an agenda behind their anger, I would not rule out a possibility that some people genuinely do not want the President or any other candidates to use 9/11 pictures in their election campaign. I read someone say that they would have reacted the same way if it was a democrat in office. Listen, what happened in 9/11 is still fresh, especially for those who lost his/her loved ones. I would not pass such a harsh judgement on these people, or conclude that they are just whole bunch of leftists.

The images of the firefighters and the ruins of the WTC last no more than two seconds. I think GWB needs to make a commercial where the whole thirty seconds are images from that horrific and heroic day. Could you imagine telling FDR he can't mention anything about Pearl Harbor while campaigning because it's "insensitive" to the families of the victims?

My first reaction when I heard this new story: These people are desperate.

Makes me wonder why Kerry has to raise any money at all, when every newscast on ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN is an advertisement for him.

Then the media wonders why its ratings are going into the gutter.

#7 Sheiky Claims, welcome!

The larger issue here is that Mr. Kerry has expressed that he would end the war on terror if elected. He would go back to the Clintonian policy of trying to arrest terrorists after they attack us. And that worked real well...
recall that the planning for 9-11 was begun in 1996, while Bill and Hillary wer hosting Ramadan celebrations at the White House.

One candidate is for taking the fight to the terrorists before they kill us, and the other is for . . .
The images from 9-11 are therefore very relevant.

Did FDR mention Pearl Harbour while campaigning?

The Weekly Standard has Scrappleface's new Kerry parody: "Kerry to face Kerry: Far-left liberal to square off against sensible pragmatist in 2004 election."
by Scott Ott, scrappleface.com

[Link: www.weeklystandard.com...]

Maybe we should seek permission of the delicate elite uber-liberal before any images are put forth.
Bush on the white house lawn?
Not acceptable nor sportsman’s like.
Bush pictured next to an American flag?
(That’s Ghastly, vile, outrageous and partisan.)
Bush on an Air-craft Carrier?
(Bush is an opportunist and a fraud.)
Kerry on an Aircraft Carrier -
(Fine. He spent 4 months in Vietnam, so you know.)
Bush presenting the fine and brave troops in Iraq a turkey?
(The turkey must be fake. Bush is an opportunist - how dare he!)

See- these are the rules – learn how to play ball with the precious uber-libs, and no one gets hurt.

Just because the complainants are partisan players, just because the media is biased, just because the media wants to go David Irving on September 11, does it neccessarily mean that the ads are in good taste?

I wholeheartedly approve of President Bush using images of September 11 in his campaign ads. It is completely legitimate. The man was President when we were attacked. It’s part of his record.

I don't quite follow. Don't you usually talk about good things happening in your record, not bad things?

I think that this so-called outrage by the families of the victims, is itself outrageous. Give me a break. September 11th revolutionized American foreign policy, and the President responded with the "Bush Doctrine."

Bush should show the biased media a big "fuck you" by running a 2 minute long commercial just on September 11th alone.

This has NOTHING to do with showing images of the attacks, and EVERYTHING to do with politics. If the commercial had showed an exerpt of Bush speaking to the joint session of Congress on September 20th, the media would've still exploded and would've raised hell about politicizing the attacks.

In a larger context, I fucking resent these families becoming the greatest bunch of untouchables of this century. All of us here on LGF sympathize with these people. But does that mean I can't have an opinion on the rebuilding of the Towers, or the memorial? Or the size of the office buildings to go there instead? Can't I campaign for the President on his response to the attacks?

I hope that the majority of the victim's families aren't this wacked out, and that this is an example of the bias of the media at work. And I hope that the President campaigns on the issue of September 11th to the fullest extent. I actually posted on another blog that I thought these commercials were TAME, and that Bush should've come out stronger.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised on this. The media wants to take away Bush's greatest strength. He'd be an idiot to give it up. I only hope that his advisors aren't the sort of morons who believe that they can play nice with the media and would bury this issue.

Bush has got to fight this campaign just like he fought his wars. With relentless focus, letting the bastards hang themselves, and charging to victory.

#10
Tasteless?
Bush is Commander in Chief, you idiot.

These particular objectors may be far left idiotarians. That doesn't mean they're wrong about this. I think it's tasteless to use images of people dead or dying as part of the campaign. Talking about 9/11 is fair game, of course, that's legitimately part of Bush's record. But showing the pictures? It's in very poor taste.

In a larger context, I fucking resent these families becoming the greatest bunch of untouchables of this century.

The politics of guilt?

#13
Brilliant.

OT: The random Zappa quote:

Thanks to our schools and political leadership, the U.S. has acquired an international reputation as the home of 250 million people dumb enough to buy 'The Wacky Wall-Walker.'

Hey, the original octupus-shaped "Wacky Wall Walker" kicked ass! And anyway, it was the perfidious Japs who invented it, if you want to point fingers.

I lost a relative in WTC Tower 2.
I see nothing wrong with Bush using his historical record.
I'd like to see the pic of him on the bullhorn w/the fireman.

Mr. John (I received 4 purple hearts in 24 hours) Kerry doesn't like it. Get over it, pal.

Here's the priorities for me:
National security, Israel/Jews.
It's no contest.

I agree with most of everything said, but it would be nice to see some mention of Bush's proposed cuts to first responder funding. I don't have a problem with the images of ground zero, like it or not it's a reality that we all have to live with, but I could have lived without the images of firefighters.

A reduction of 243 million dollars in grants to mostly rural volunteer departments is unconscionable and has a much greater chance of negatively impacting our citizenry than many of the programs that benefitted from the overall increase in related portions of the 2005 budget. The SAFER act, promising billions for recruitment, training and the maintenence of staffing levels over seven years is on the verge of outright abandonment.

I'm all in favor of Homeland Security but it would be nice to assure the security of the family next door. How about a little support for first responders when it's not an election year?

We look real good on TV -- as Mr. Bush has obviously noticed.

re #29,

I don't understand what you mean. "The politics of guilt?" Please elaborate.

It isn't like Bush blamed 9/11 on Clinton, as it was planned on his watch due to his weak resolve and pathetic response to al-Qa'eda attacks.

That might be questioning their patriotism...

I think it's tasteless to use images of people dead or dying as part of the campaign.

Maybe it's tasteless, but murder is more tasteless.

I'd put pictures of gut laden, bombed out busses, in 30 second TV spots juxtaposed with a picture of arafat and saudi clerics in rotation.

And I'd do it world wide every thirty minutes.

Can Bush do any wrong in your universe, Charles?

i do not think that its illegit to use 9/11, but Kerry can use it too. Its something that happened and we all have to face up to that.

#13
Your comment implies that Bush is the only one who isn't asleep- i beg to differ.

I think this site is turning into a hail Bush club rather than the powerful commentary it use to be on the hipocrisy of the Left and political intrigues...

I'd stump for Kerry too if I had a name like Shit Burger.

I don't understand what you mean. "The politics of guilt?" Please elaborate.

That much of America, the liberal part, feels so much guilt and self-loathing.

I don't know if I can put it any better than that.

Hail Rumsfeld, definitely!

37

I'm not sure about that.

I have no idea who I would have voted for if the dhimmi's were nominating a serious candidate like Liebermann or better yet, Miller, but they're not. So I'm going with the mediocre over the plain awful/

#37 Jack Frost

Interesting. Tell me - how's Kerry going to use 9/11 in his campaign?

#42 Me

I know - he's gonna twist it and pull it like taffy.

Andrew

Well, he could like Mr. Bush, throw images of the 9/11 tragedy into his ads and promise whatever he likes. I know it may seem absurd to Republican zealots, but Bush isn't solely responsible for bringing this country back on its feet- Kerry is part of our government.

All this whining, seething and hand wringing.
Awww!!!

Let's elect Kerry the pivot. Let's bring all of our troops home, disarm them and discharge them sending them back to their little safe homes. Let's honour the survivors by forbidding the showing of any 9.11 pictures ever again. Then we can all make a human chain across the country holding hands, singing kumbyyah, group hugging. That way we'll all already be in the fourth position of walking around with our heads up our asses when the next attack occurs.
Then when the next attack has happened and President Kerry has ordered murder warrents served for the perps we can all feel so much relief and surety of being protected.
This will make all the L3's sooo happy, and superior in their 'I told you so' attitudes. The only thing that will be muscling the terrorists are the jaw muscles of the left.
All I can say is #1. ensure self perservation, #2. hide your weapons and #3. keep your ammo dry.

Personally all this screaming about anyone using still pictures or video of 9.11 is no more evil than watching the deaths of our service men on Pearl Harbour Day.

Oh yes, watch the hate and negative ads that about to hit being paid for by MoveOn.org, which is using the millions of Soros. That nice little loop hole that was created by the left for sucking in millions of dollars is also outside the jurisdiction of using any kind of attack ads during the blacked out period just before the elections. It is going to be worse than nasty folks.

44

Pray tell, how did Kerry help the 9-11 recovery as compared, with say, the midnight clerk at the corner Diamond Shamrock?

I see this attack on a Pro-American president as a continuation of the left's desire to keep 9/11 swept under a sand dune rug.

#37 Jack Frost

Sure there have been numerous shots at Bush here, primarily over his domestic policies - but generally not over his foreign policy or understanding that since 9/11 we are at war.

Kerry probably would use 9/11 in his campaign effort - regardless of what Bush or the families say. They would blame Bush for the attack - just as they did in the months after to deflect the expected (but never delivered blame on Clinton), and use it as an example towards all of the goodwill (ie France and Germany) that was lost based on his counterattacks to Afghanistan and Iraq.

If Bush loses in November - there will be no WoT, no Bush Doctrine to stop terror, the nations that promote and assist it, and no efforts to protect the Homeland. We will return to the Clinton / Carter programs of appeasement, criminal investigations and pursuit, and defense cutbacks. There will also be a near total abandonment of Israel.

There is too much at stake to take a major part of the Bush record out of play or let the other side get the advantage to dictate the pace and topic.

#44 Jack Frost:

True, when he bothers to show up:

Not Voting=Not Present

Talk about AWOL!

#46 Ed Moran

That's not fair. The midnight clerk at the corner Diamond Shamrock has a job he shows up for on a regular basis.

#44 Jack Frost

Kerry is part of the government. But does his participation and record with votes and comments since 9/11 really count as positive participation?

Imagine the opposite -

Bush begins an ad blitz and fails to mention 09/11 or the war on terror

Eliciting this response -

“It makes me sick,” said Colleen Kelly, who lost her brother Bill Kelly Jr., in the attacks and leads a victims families group called Peaceful Tomorrows. “Bush is too ashamed of his administrations response to terrorism to showcase his failure.”

#52 TAS:

You nailed it. When you let your opponents frame the debate, you lose before you can even open your mouth.

46

I dont think that he did. I'm simply saying that Kerry is part of the US government too, thus he too can make promises since he is a candidate for Pres.

i 'm simply saying that Bush cannot exclusively use 9/11 to his advantage due to the fact that he is not the beginning and the end of our government. If anybody in govt is most responsible for raising the morale of our nation its Guiliani and the success of the troops- Bush , like Kerry does not represent all of America

Charles,

Since you are recieving the freely given services of critics, maybe you should devise a graph showing percentages of how well you perform on your own website.

I had two aunts, who were very close in age. Neither of them ever married, which isn't the problem that occured when they were doing something together. If they were making decisions on their own they were quite profficient.
I remember the first time I went on a short trip with them when I was 16, and watched them in the train station walking around with their fingers in their mouths trying to make the decision on what to do next. To me that is the impression I have of Kerry in a situation of grave danger.
It was funny at the time, now it's damned scary.

The only thing Boy George has going for him is Sept. 11th. And even that is going sour with the Iraqi situation of no WMDs found. Given that Propganda Minister Rove has only two tricks. One smear Kerry with everything in the book, even calling him a war criminal based on something said (supposedly) by now conviently deceased Adm. Zumwalt and Two have His Fraudency wrap himself in Sept. 11th. (You say this is normal politics, nonsense! I do not recall FDR in 1944 giving campaign speeches at Pearl Harbor or Lincoln in 1864 giving campaign speeches at Gettysburg or other battlefields! I was in the Pentagon on Sept 11th. I knew some of the people who were killed and yes Wealthy Draft Dodging Georgie Juinor using the Sept 11th for partisan purposes (which include having the Republican Convention in New York City as close to the 3rd aniversary of Sept 11th as possible, why not just have him deliever his acceptance speech as ground zero?!)
MAKES ME MAD AS HELL!

Footnote: Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in Nov. 1863 was intended as a minor part of the proceedings. His speech would come after the main event, a long oratory speech by Former Sec. of State Edward Evertt. The organizers of the event, dedication of the Gettysburg National Cemetary, debated whether the President should be invited at all since they did not want to give the appearance of Partisanship! In the end, less then a month before the dedication, the organizers did invite Lincoln, but only to give a short speech as sort of closing remarks on the day's ceremony.

Apropos of bias: Ted Rall is blaming the blogosphere for the fact that the NY Times has dropped his 'toons:

Money quote: "They've sent the message that political pressure works."

Rall rant
The New York Times has dropped political cartoonist Ted Rall, who traces the trouble back to his March 2002 cartoon of "terror widows," which depicted September 11 family survivors capitalizing on the attacks.
The image "became the target of a coordinated e-mail attack by right-wing 'warbloggers.' These pro-Bush bloggers, coasting on a wave of post-September 11 patriotism, sent out e-mails to their followers ... asking each other to deluge the Times and other papers with complaints that purported to come from their readers," Mr. Rall wrote on his Web site (www.rall.com) yesterday.
"It seems that the warbloggers' consistent campaign of e-mail harassment has finally taken its toll over at Times Digital," Mr. Rall continued. "Because they're annoyed by receiving so many e-mail complaints about my work — all of them motivated by partisan politics — the Times has decided to drop my cartoons entirely."
Mr. Rall called the move "a dangerous precedent. ... They've sent the message that political pressure works."

World's smallest violin, anybody?

I think there's a couple of things going on here:
1)our therapeutic "victim" culture--the widow who thinks her grief should direct how the media treats the cataclysmic events of 9/11, and,
2)the dems and their media friends know that they have nothing constructive to offer in response to 9/11 and are terrified the voters will think that's important.

I, for one, think 9/11 is absolutely critical to the government of this country. It turned me from an Al Gore-voting, lifelong democrat into an unabashed hawk. As for the footage of the attacks, "Bring it on!"

Jack Frost -

Guess what - Guiliani and the troops also don't represent all of America. Frankly, it is one of the favorite Democratic sayings - The Buck Stops Here - that lays the leadership and responsibility on the President.

He siezed the initiative, he defined his doctrine and foreign policy / military approach as the head of the Executive Branch and the Commander in Chief.

Kerry was 1 of 100 in the Senate - who did little to nothing to defend the nation and to help present a unified team to our enemies. Yes, Kerry did vote to support the military action in Afghanistan, and Iraq, but he has also back tracked on both votes, culminating in voting against the $87B to support the troops in Iraq and rebuild it post liberation.

As TAS said, if Bush failed to act - guess who would be leading the charge against his inaction and therefore being unfit for another term?

Bush was the leader. Bush needed to lead. Bush made the hard choices to lead. He made the strategic choices.

48

f Bush loses in November - there will be no WoT, no Bush Doctrine to stop terror, the nations that promote and assist it, and no efforts to protect the Homeland. We will return to the Clinton / Carter programs of appeasement, criminal investigations and p

Maybe defense cut backs.. but i dont believe so we will abandon Israel- most americans support Israel. WoT will not end- are you kidding? no way- Kerry understands that. look this is how our system works- we lose a couple of things but we will gain some others - such as civil rights for one. I personally support the ideals of republicanism actually ( bet you wouldn't guess it from my posts) but I am disillusioned with Bush greatly. i dont like his interference into personal life and find his moralizing nature offensive.
This war on terror is not just a republican war its an american war. We're at war- i think even ted kennedy would shoot osama if he were in front of him

They just don't get it do the?y. It's all about politics, and nothing but politics, specifically jihad politics. How can people be so naive about their deadly enemies?

Responding to message 7

Sheiky,

...can anyone tell me who are the owners of haaretz daily? I'm convinced they are controlled by al jazeera or al arabiya, going by the content. This site may have the answer you seek.

Robert Dubh Nianque

#60 Jack Frost

Ted Kennedy wouldn't shoot osama - that's not his M.O.

#60 Jack Frost:

Ted Kennedy shoot Osama?? Where's Ted going to get a gun? And if Osama ducks down, Ted won't even be able to see him until he steps back out of range.

#64 andthenblammo!

He could drown him?

Please keep in mind how the LLL media in California actively conspired with the Democrats to try and smear Schwarzenegger, this in one of America's most liberal states.

Their bias was so blatantly, that Mickey Kaus (himself a Democrat) predicted exactly, three weeks in advance, the exact day that the LA Times would print a front page story about Arnold's alleged sexual harrassment.

End result? In liberal California, Ahnold, who had been polling about 40%, finished at 49%. Combined with McClintock, the GOP got 63% of the vote.

And the LA Times lost about 2% of its circulation, and by some accounts, received more than 10,000 pieces of irate e-mail.

The LLL media, like most leftists, seem to think that if they can't initially get people to believe 2 + 2 =5, if they yell it louder and louder, more people will believe it.

That may have worked at one time. Problem is, with Internet, talk radio, and Fox News, there are now people out there who can tell us that 2 + 2 =4.

Dubya also should bring back the bumper sticker from the '92 campaign:

"Annoy the media. Vote for Bush."

Jakc Frost-

Kerry is part of our government.

Yeah. so? Based on his voting record, he's almost entirely insignificant.
The fact that Kerry is the best you uber-libs can do, is quite appalling really.
You should be ashamed.

Robert,

Appreciated. Very enlightening.

My wife and I did our part to help our nation recover.

Just a month after the attacks, we flew to Las Vegas for a three day vacation, to help support the American travel industry.

(of course, our baby boy was just old enough for the grandparents to watch him, and airfare and hotel rooms were cheap. Good thing we took a vacation when we did, as our girl followed our boy by only eleven months. We stayed at New York, New York, which had a big Manhattan skyline mural. The WTC were part of the mural. I wonder if it is still there.)

#57 Connecticut Yankee:

Jim Treached gets off the best one:

Rall gets pinko slip

#56 David All

You are sorely mistaken...both Lincoln and FDR used imagery of their day to campaign with.

To start with, here's a nice little collection at the Syracuse library on Lincoln...

1864 Campaign

I wil be finding more if you care to stick around...

#45 quark2

Have you read David Tell's article on campaign funding over at the Weekly Standard? ("Who's Afraid of George Soros?") See particularly point 8, "What's the bottom line on the Soros people and the $300 million they want to spend against President Bush?" You might feel a little better-- hope so, anyway.

Link: [Link: www.weeklystandard.com...]

#60 Jack Frost

Sorry, but Kerry's own words demonstrate he will abandon the WoT and Israel.

Kerry has announced that among the steps he will take in the first 100 days is to appoint a special negotiator / advisor to work towards peace. His top 3 choices - Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and James Baker. All 3 are proven pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel officials.

Kerry has also said that he does not believe that we are at War. There was no declaration according to him, and the force that Bush is using is excessive. His answer is to handle this with more intelligence officers, and criminal prosecutions / law enforcement personnel.

Sorry, if the other side declares war, undertakes multiple attacks that are acts of war, and your answer is to increase the number of cops and prosecutors - then you don't acknolwedge that we are at war.

No, Kerry and Teddy don't think that we are at war. Teddy wouldn't even have the balls to shoot UBL if he was in front of him. He would prefer to try to negotiate and try to understand the motiviations.

#85 Andrew:

I remember a bumper sticker: "Kennedy-Eagleton: I'll drink, you drive."

67

Bush is just as apalling to the other side. I think what voters may need in the future are moderates...

Folks, this is the start of the election campaign--expect another 9 months of it, every day of the week.

The Demos will challenge everything all the time from here on out and rely on the Red Orchestra (aka the mass media) to trumpet their propaganda.

Avoid manic-depression later by taking your meds now.

@56 David All

It's always deadly to assume any given situation. You should know that after terrorists hitting the Pentagon.
You should also be as careful about what issues from your mouth that can come back to haunt you later.

You need to go and read the following.

[Link: belmontclub.blogspot.com...]

Weapons Of Mass Destruction

Considering that nearly 90% of the suspected places of hidden weapons in Iraq that have NOT been inspected I think you are firing off your gun prematurely.

Your hostility towards Bush is very clear, so it really does not matter how effective or ineffective the man is...you are going to hate him and be damned!
What we really need is someone like Gore, Clinton or Carter to mislead this country again.

OT...When legal absurdity is watched world-wide

Perhaps the most telling moment to date came just last Friday when Pastor Scot was asked by the Islamic Council's barrister Debbie Mortimer to stop reading passages from the Koran and just give verses because the readings vilified Muslims. He replied: "If it is not for reading, it shouldn't be in the book."

bwaaahahahahahah

Moderate - the opiate for the masses.
Moderate = someone who is unable to take a stand on an issue.
No thanks. I'll take a decisive leader. Bush is far from perfect, but guess what? perfection isn't on the menu.

But hey jack, you have the politics of whining and name calling on your side. ie: Kerry. Live it up.

With Kerry at the helm you can once again be friends with the corrupt leaders of Germany, France and Russia. Oh boy. And tax hikes. mmm tax hikes.
Punish the productive. Yeah- that's the ticket. Any hope for the Iranian people will be lost. Totally.
Better cry and whine over 9/11 pictures.
Uber-libs own 9/11 - no one else.

#78 ploome

Where'd you find that? Could you post a link?

David All,

And when has President Bush Campaigned at Ground Zero or The Pentagon?

Perhaps you can find that out while I'm still finding more facts to put in your face...

oh yeah - and Kerry will be glad-handing Arafish in no time.

@72 Connecticut Yankee

Thanx for the link. I'll read it after I've brewed some hot tea.

Yes, Ed the fat weather wizard, even today I am enjoying my tea. :)

#27
Butthole, what does the fact that he's commander in chief have to do with whether the ads are tasteless? Would you feel it equally appropriate if John Kerry ran ads showing bloodied American soldiers after a roadside bomb? Rows of dead Iraqis? Can a politician use any image he wants just to stir up voters' emotions?

So bend over and take the Wadd.

ooops link

David All was at the pentagon on 9/11.
What are the odds?

Sure.

Clinton is an admitted draft dodger. So - what are your FEELINGS on that one? idiot.

#84 Johnny Wadd

Have you seen the new Bush ads?

Athos

I partially agree with you. BUT i don't think that means anything. Once kerry is put into that office and presented with the matrix report (or whatever its called) he will do things quite similarly to Bush. Kerry is attempting to rally the anti-war vote. Kerry just said on Super Tues that we were in a WoT..
i think a lot of your complaints are dangerously close to one sided information . Bill Clinton isn't such a bad choice-and i wouldn't call him pro-palestinian. carter on the other hand...yes, bad.

Johnny Waddle

Kerry can do whatever the hell he wants to.
Why don't you precious delicate whiny pathetic uber-libs get over yourselves.

“It makes me sick,” said Colleen Kelly, who lost her brother Bill Kelly Jr., in the attacks and leads a victims families group called Peaceful Tomorrows. “Would you ever go to someone’s grave site and use that as an instrument of politics? That truly is what Ground Zero represents to me.”

So the next time a group that considers itself anti-war (they're not anti-war, they're just on the other side) uses an image of a military cemetary, with Where Have All The Flowers Gone playing on the soundtrack, I'm sure Ms. Kelly will be the first to complain. Right?

Slightly off topic but this reminds me of the families of the sailors that went down on the Edmund Fitzgerald who have lobbied to prevent any further exploration of the wreck. Now the only explorations have been by the official inquiry into the wreck and scientific expeditions because at 500+ feet, it's not like there are going to be any recreational divers. My father, alav hashalom, - wait, his name was Leonard Schreiber, not Oliver Shalom, is buried in a cemetary right on Woodward Ave. just north of the Detroit city limits. I suppose I should object when people drive by during the Woodward Dream Cruise.

Regarding exploiting the dead, Ms. Kelly's lament somehow make me think of a pot, a kettle and the color black.

#58 thinkingmom . . .

What you said . . .

First, I've been annoyed for some time about some of the "professional mourners" of the Twin Towers murders trying to dictate how the World Trade Center and the memorial spaces should be built. The World Trade Center area is an important part of Manhattan--not just a memorial site. I've also wondered about many of the monetary claims. What if there are more attacks and mass murders? Do we all get pensions for life, rights to dictate how the rebuilt spaces should look, etc.?

Second, 9/11 was a major major event that will have ramifactions for the rest of our lives--kind of like the outbreak of World War I, which is still ringing in our ears like a gong that never shuts up. The War on Terror the CENTRAL issue of this election. After being a lifelong Democrat, I have come to despise the Democratic party for its pandering to the clueless antiwar morons. Kerry is a joke as a candidate--a James Buchanan in the pre-Civil War era.

I think the Bush administration made the decision to keep the WOT low-key so that Americans wouldn't get bored too soon. But I do think that there should be more publicity about terror gangs caught, plots uncovered, just so that voters don't think we're out of danger.

Free speech is only...

With Kerry at the helm you can once again be friends with the corrupt leaders of Germany, France and Russia. Oh boy. And tax hikes. mmm tax hikes.
Punish the productive.

and Bush is so wonderful and a hero even? maybe its that he's a plain-talker a euphemism for an underdeveloped vocab. look. i'd vote for Bush if he weren't such an idiot. all politicians are corrupt to some degree. If it were a perfect world- my choice would be a Rumsfeld-Rice ticket. or a giuliani ticket. but Bush is not trustworthy to me and to a lot of 'Uber Libs'.

People need to be reminded of what happened, not just on 9/11, but before and after. If security/intel concerns aren't an issue, we should hear more about what's been done since 9/11 in stopping attacks against Americans. This info is constantly buried when it does surface.

Problem is-- as many have pointed out on LGF often-- we're at war. Too bad so many people in the US don't seem to get that fact. Too many 3 minute MTV videos with no narrative structure-- we have no attention span in this country.

As for FDR-- he didn't need to use images of war in his campaign-- everyone realized we were at war-- they saw it every week on the newsreels at the movies, they were expected to sacrifice for the war effort- unlike today. We can't even get the people my husband works with to contribute for packages to the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the wounded down at Walter Reed-- they're not interested. The war isn't a priority for them-- they believe it's unjust anyway, and the sooner the troops come home, the better, no matter how they come home.

Well Jack Frost.
You have two choices - Bush or Kerry.
(of course you can stay home or vote for Nader or some other unelectable third party candidate)

Rumsfeld, Rice and Giuliani aren't on the menu.

#22 Andjam:

Did FDR mention Pearl Harbour while campaigning?

Not only did FDR mention Pearl Harbor repeatedly during the 1944 campaign but in July and August 1944 he traveled extensively in the Pacific including highly photographed and publicised meetings at Pearl Harbor with Nimitz and McAurther.

Lincoln did not use Gettysberg as a partisan occasion.

Jack Frost cont..

At least with Bush you get Rumsfeld, Rice and Giuliani as side dishes.

You foreign types can watch the Bush ads online.

#56 David All: I call RWC

Doesn't one usually refer to one's accomplishments on their resume? Seems pretty similar to me.

Bush stomped on two huge nests of roaches and the L3 is arguing semantics. We found the WMD's. Kadaffi had 'em, and the Paki's & Norks were supplyin 'em. I don't think any of this would have come to light without so-damn-insane being dragged outta the septic tank.

I'm gonna start saying 'nukular' in honor of GW just to irritate the 'tards that can't come to grips with the fact mooslim's hate us because we're not mooslims and no other reason. The L3's that support them don't seem to realize that they embody all the decadence that pisslam despises. Ya don't see the Saudi's promoting SSM's, or Affirmitive Action, or womyns rights.

I wonder how much the 9/11 'relatives' were paid to whine, and how many actually were related to anyone in there. If any of my family were in there, nothing would piss me off more than having them forgotten.

They are going to blast Bush on ANYTHING he says. If he every said "A..B..C" (as in reciting the alphabet) in any context they will blast him on education. This is going to be so muddy and spun out it will be like being at a monster truck rally...

Oh... Kerry the Minivan... meet Monster Truck Bush

#97 evariste.
Thank you for posting those ads.

The fact that whining left-wingers find those ads offensive, is, in fact, offensive.

@92 Jack Frost

Ya' know, there's a damned lot of us down here in Texas that talk just like him. And even worse, we're moralistic just like him...I think that means we're religious. The funny thing is, lots of us have high IQ's too. His way of talking has nothing to do with his intelligence. Of course he could be a brilliant discourser of lies like Clinton, or a soft sleasespeaker like Carter.

People who lost friends and family on 9/11 have reason to grieve, but that doesn't give them a copyright on the event. When did Pearl Harbor victims and their families assert moral ownership of those images? 9/11 damaged everyone, it was an attack on our country. We are still at risk. The war is ongoing. The Dems are afraid to fight it and want to tuck it away, pretend there is no threat.

If there is a problem here, the problem is that those scenes aren't shown enough. The problem is that the leftist media has done is best to sanitize, hide and marginalize the attacks. They have been successful to the point that one presidential candidate has declared them an "exaggeration".

At the end of the day, Islam's war against this Country and Western Civilization is one of the fundamental issues of this campaign -- it should be.

It's like saying it would have been inappropriate for FDR to have mentioned Pearl Harbor or WWII when he ran for reelection.

At least Bush won't give away our sovereignty to the frogs & terrorists. Kerry has plainly stated that the UN will have veto over our foreign policy.

UN=France, Russia, Arabs & Germans and every other tin-pot dictatorship in the world. Seems the only country excluded is the only democracy in the ME.

Each are vying to take over the world, as usual, and guess who is standing in their way? Uncle kicked-your-aggressor-ass Sam.

@99 Nick

"womyns" You're wrong, that's wormyns lil' feller. :)

I stands corrected ;)

The evil that 9/11 exposed shakes the L3s worldview. My theory is that they can't handle the truth, and so need desperately to keep the rest of us from seeing it.
I don't like thinking of the evil that manifested itself so brazenly through radical Islam on 9/11, but I sure as h*ll want to defeat it. And, whatever GWBs flaws, and he has them, he wants to give my children a free country, and will fight to do it.

@107 Nick

*LOL

This story really turned my stomach too.
- - - -

...what's shocking to me is the fact that the AP, with their vast network of "reporters", couldn't find a single family member with a positive thing to say about the ads. Unfortunately for them one person alone can, in this day and age, use 10 minutes of their lunch hour to track down just such a supportive quote.

...Jennie Farrell, who lost her brother, electrician James Cartier, called the ad "tastefully done," adding: "It speaks to the truth of the times. Sept. 11 ... was something beyond the realm of imagination, and George Bush ... led us through one of the darkest moments in history."

...Funny thing is, I don't seem to recall the Associated Press flooding the wires with stories of angst and protest over Spike Lee's gratuitous use of Ground Zero in his film 25th Hour. Nor did they have any trouble tracking down supporters of "Mickey's Taliban Adventures", a soft sculpture of Mickey Mouse flying an airplane toward flaming, crying World Trade Center towers. But I guess that was ok because it "was about making you think."

The claim here is that Bush is just politicking, whatever that means. But nothing political about Kristen Breitweiser demanding the president "testify in public under oath" before he can "use 9/11 as political propaganda." What she's effectively asking is: "What did he know and when did he know it?" Just as Democratic leaders Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman did shortly after September 11th in an a vain attempt to conjure images of Nixon's impeachment. If that's not using 9/11 as political propaganda, I don't what is.

The Democrats have grown to despise reality and truth. They prefer instead to live in the AP's imaginary world where it is quite ok for anti-America junk "artists" to sculpt our most tragic moments out of pillow cushions and Disney figurines, yet a president respectfully and gracefully highlighting his leadership through troubled times is downright grotesque.

original post

Apparently accusing Republicans of being terrorist supporters after terrorist attacks is OK:

But left-wing vitriol rarely seems to have that effect. Nobody hissed with disapproval when Jesse Jackson, miffed at a Supreme Court decision, declared that the justices were ``paving the way back toward slavery.'' There was no storm of outrage when the president of the American Bar Association, George Bushnell, described Congressional Republicans as ``reptilian bastards.'' Few editorial pages erupted over the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's mailing _ sent after the bombing in Oklahoma City _ that said House Speaker Newt Gingrich ``promotes the policies of a terrorist.''

1995: A YEAR OF LIBERAL LIBELS
By Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe

December 21, 1995

They join such victim-moonbats as Sarah Brady, and Rep. McCarthy from Long Island, made a widow by Colin Ferguson's racist rampage.

Anyone who thinks the next commander-in-chief should not discuss one of the most significant events in our nation's history, is completely oblivious.

Liberals not only don't think we're fighting a war, they also get offended at the mention of one of its initial battle fields -- the skies of the Eastern seaboard, and the streets of Manhattan and Washington DC.

If you want to see people "exploiting Sept 11" have a look at this:

The Miami Herald
February 20, 2004

Edwards Draws Flak from New York Mayor for Saying GOP 'Exploits' 9/11 Attacks

By Maggie Haberman

John Edwards came to New York looking for votes yesterday, but his famous Southern charm was lost on Mayor Bloomberg.

The North Carolina senator quickly drew Hizzoner's ire when he accused Republicans of planning to exploit the 9/11 attacks at their convention this summer.

...

Talking about the Republicans' choice of New York for their convention, Edwards said: "They come back when it's convenient." He accused Washington of short-shrifting rebuilding efforts here, adding: "We're with you every day, fighting with you every day."

Bloomberg sharply countered Edwards' convention slam.

"He should talk to Terry McAuliffe," Bloomberg said.

McAuliffe, the Democratic National Committee chairman, wanted New York for his party's convention on an "exclusive" basis, Bloomberg said. But when the mayor refused to lock out the Republicans, the Democrats chose Boston, Kerry's hometown.

Bloomberg also dismissed the suggestion that Republicans want to exploit the terrorist murders.

"I don't think that either party . . . if they have their convention here, is trying to exploit 9/11," Bloomberg said. "We paid a terrible price for democracy, and that will always be part of our history and our culture."

[Link: www.miami.com...]

#72 CT Yankee
Thanks for the link .
I was going to give myself $5.00 for lunch tomorrow but fear that may be in violation of Federal law, as I advocate the election of GWB.
Do I have to register with the FEC now?

I still, after all this time, don't understand why so many people in the media, like AP and the NYT, refuse to see what's in front of their noses.

It didn't take me long to change from Bush-hater to Bush-supporter after September 11. The awful facts about Islam were staring me in the face. The potential threats from terrorists were too laughably obvious.

Most of my friends and family STILL think it's September 10. What's the matter with them? They aren't stupid. But they are truly blind to the dangers that we in the civilized world face. Ditto the crazy support for Islamists who oppress women. Why is the LLL so blind to this?

Help---explanation needed.

It didn't take me long to change from Bush-hater to Bush-supporter after September 11. The awful facts about Islam were staring me in the face. The potential threats from terrorists were too laughably obvious.

Most of my friends and family STILL think it's September 10. What's the matter with them? They aren't stupid. But they are truly blind to the dangers that we in the civilized world face. Ditto the crazy support for Islamists who oppress women. Why is the LLL so blind to this?

Help---explanation needed.

One explanation is denial.

I think, post Sept 11th, liberals hate that Sept 10th is forever gone, and they channel this anger onto GWB et al.

Also, the media paint this election as a 'close race' but Bush will win in a landslide -- most Americans are not in denial.
 

Thank you, Charles! Seeing your post and the responses has cheered me up. I just wish I'd gotten back here earlier in the day to see it.

Johnny Wadd

"#27
Butthole, what does the fact that he's commander in chief have to do with whether the ads are tasteless? Would you feel it equally appropriate if John Kerry ran ads showing bloodied American soldiers after a roadside bomb? Rows of dead Iraqis? Can a politician use any image he wants just to stir up voters' emotions?

So bend over and take the Wadd. "

Fair enough wadi, hey isn't that arab for a fucking dry lake bed? But I digress.

kerry can show pictues of the results of his free fire zone incidents, or how his brothers in arms, cut off arms, ears, heads of the Vietnamese, OR the BIGGIE RAPING those Vietnamese women, that might be bigger than Paris Hilton fucking her brains out, how's that.

Ahhh, yes I can just see those political 'tasteful' ads now.

#100

more like

Kerry Le Car meet...Monster Truck Bush

I think this is backlashed produced by media's self-imposed ban on WTC images; these people have been able to con themselves into believing that these painful images are taboo; well guess what, they aren't, and sweeping them under the carpet doesn't solve a damn thing, even if it might make you 'feel' better.

The DNC-Big Media complex has had these people in the bullpen in anticipation of the first Bush campaign reference to 9/11. The DNC-Big-Media complex got their people out there so fast that I heard about the partisan bitching about the commercials before I heard about the Bush commercials. There is no way those commercials were absorbed by the public and fostered any "outrage" within the time frame that these people appeared on TV.

So I guess that FDR could not run an ad of the sinking USS Arizona.

Lest we forget, the firefighter's union, IAFF, is an afilliate of the AFL-CIO.

That makes the IAFF official little more than a lackey of Sweeney.

Azul93gt:

Quite correct. However, they shot their mouths off too fast. Bush will keep running the commercials, and the Rats won't be able to intimidate him.

This was a coordinated attack. Period. It's why I call the media the "Pimp Media". Pimping for Kerry, so to speak.