Bush Ads Exploit 9/11 Victims

On the original topic, I happened to find a link while browsing on a different topic.

I had known that the family members quoted as critical of the ad were members of "Peaceful Tomorrows," a (generally speaking) left-of-center group that formed after 9/11. One of the people continually quoted by the press was a spokesperson for the group, and I recall her saying in the past that the group was adamantly opposed to the Afghanistan invasion, for example.

However, I did not know that Peaceful Tomorrows was funded to the tune of millions by the Tide Foundation, an organization with what looks like not insigificant connections to Ms. Teresa Heinz Kerry.


source (internal links there to other information):

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9850

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=10054_Anti-War_9-11_Victims-_Project_of_Tides_Center


Some/Many of the families may actually be appalled by these commericals -- but given that the above has never been mentioned, and given that the firefighters who were appalled also have ties to the Kerry campaign, I think I'll need a bit more than what appears to be a manufactured firestorm to buy that.

N/A
 
"Barbara Minervino, a Republican from Middletown, N.J., who lost her husband, Louis, in the attacks, questioned whether Bush was "capitalizing on the event.""
(AP)
 
subgenius said:
"Barbara Minervino, a Republican from Middletown, N.J., who lost her husband, Louis, in the attacks, questioned whether Bush was "capitalizing on the event.""
(AP)
Click to expand...
I think that is fair. I think it is also fair for Democrats who lost families, I also think it is fair for any American to question the appropriateness of such actions.

I think I have a right, not as much as family members of those who died but I do have a right to question the appropriateness of using the death of American citizens for political purposes. We all do. Anything that demeans or cheapens the lives of 9/11 victims demeans and cheapens us.

I don't think the ads, as they are now, are inappropriate but respect those who do.
 
All that I have seen from the coverage on these adds is that NBC and a few Democratic family members were exploiting the tragedy of 9-11 to make partisan attacks against the President.
This is about the president's record of service during the time of 9/11.
 
RandFan said:
I think that is fair. I think it is also fair for Democrats who lost families, I also think it is fair for any American to question the appropriateness of such actions.

I think I have a right, not as much as family members of those who died but I do have a right to question the appropriateness of using the death of American citizens for political purposes. We all do. Anything that demeans or cheapens the lives of 9/11 victims demeans and cheapens us.

I don't think the ads, as they are now, are inappropriate but respect those who do.
Click to expand...
It takes no thinking to automatically disagree. When we call names and dismiss out of hand a position, especially just an opinion, thinking has stopped. My adversary is my benefactor.
If anyone noticed, my original post included a quote from a victim's loved one who thought the ad was OK.
 
subgenius said:

It takes no thinking to automatically disagree. When we call names and dismiss out of hand a position, especially just an opinion, thinking has stopped. My adversary is my benefactor.
If anyone noticed, my original post included a quote from a victim's loved one who thought the ad was OK.
Click to expand...

Yes but the title of the thread is "Bush Ads Exploit 9/11 Victims" and not "Did Bush Ads Exploit 9/11 Victims?"
 
Brown said:
In a sense, Lyndon Johnson's presidency was the greatest disappointment of the 20th Century.
Click to expand...
His initiatives sure split the country into warring factions.


He had one of the most stellar opportunities for greatness.... but the VietNam War got in his way.
Click to expand...
That was the most public part of his problems.


Unfortunately, Johnson used his consensus-building techniques to mire the USA further into that conflict. In retrospect, that was his big mistake.
Click to expand...
Which consensus building techniques impressed you most favorably, the extortion or the blackmail?


So many of Johnson's domestic initiatives pertaining to poverty, education, civil rights.... all overshadowed by Southeast Asia.
Click to expand...
Yet Vietnam has fully recovered while the US continues to split into smaller and more vociferous special interest groups.

Each to his own, huh?


Actually on topic, all I see is politics as usual. Pols who don't politic are called "losers" in the next election.
 
subgenius said:

One man's opinion.
Click to expand...

Well, one man's opinion "shared by many including those who lost loved ones in the tragedy," except that we know what about 7-8 relatives think - out of the families of over 3,000.

I am not saying that the people quoted are not sincere; this is a matter about which many people may reasonably disagree.

I am saying, however, that the press firestorm over this appears to be entirely manufactured. That's politics, but I cannot hold the opinions of a half-dozen or dozen people out of tens of thousands as a representative sample -- especially where the ones quoted appear to have their own, pre-existing agenda.

N/A
 
Straw man. No one is claiming that 9/11 is a shining moment.

Claims:
1)Al Qaeda is motivated to inflict harm on the United States
2)After our invasion of Afghanstan they are even more motivated
3)In spite of all of the threats by Al Qaeda there has been no more attacks
Click to expand...
Some people are claiming something equivalent to this. 1) and 2) are easy claims to make. 3) is absolutely false.
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — The terror attack that killed at least 20 people in Riyadh Monday night "had the earmarks of Al Qaeda," Secretary of State Colin Powell (search) said Tuesday.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86741,00.html
Click to expand...
This is just one. Note that you are not claiming there have been no more 9/11 scale attacks, but that there have been NO MORE ATTACKS. Untrue.

Your move, chia pets or chalupas have nothing whatsoever to do with our protection. You argument is vapid it's embarrasing.
Click to expand...
What's embarassing, aside from your spelling, is that Bush took office in Jan 2001. He had the same exact authority, yet failed to 'protect us'.

Bush MUST take responsibility for the event. But there must be some context. It was in planning before he took office. Individuals who should have had red flags go off in their heads were asleep at the wheel.
Click to expand...
Whatever happened to "The Buck Stops Here"?

If you wish to give context to our protection then fine. But you can't give blame for the event and refuse to give credit for the protection afterward. Otherwise you would by default and defintion be logically inconsistent. So which is it going to be?
Click to expand...
Sure I can. Bush has 'locked the barn door after the horse has run off', as I am sure they say in Texas.

Read this for info on the intelligence community.
http://cfr.org/publication.php?id=6834
Sample:
The evidence so far leads to only one conclusion. What happened was not merely a failure of intelligence, but the result of manipulation and distortion of the intelligence and selective use of unreliable intelligence to justify a decision to go to war. The administration had made up its mind, and would not let stubborn facts stand in the way.

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, a recently retired Air Force intelligence officer who served in the Pentagon during the buildup to the war, said, "It wasn't intelligence--it was propaganda ... they'd take a little bit of intelligence, cherry pick it, make it sound much more exciting, usually by taking it out of context, usually by juxtaposition of two pieces of information that don't belong together."

As it now appears, the Iraqi expatriates who had close ties to the Pentagon and were so eager for the war may well have been the source of the hyped intelligence. They have even begun to brag about it.

The Pentagon's favorite Iraqi dissident, Ahmad Chalabi, is actually proud of what happened. "We are heroes in error," Chalabi recently said. "As far as we're concerned, we've been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush administration is looking for a scapegoat. We're ready to fall on our swords, if he wants."

Our men and women in uniform are still paying with their lives for this misguided war in Iraq. CIA Director Tenet could perform no greater service to the armed forces, to the American people, and to our country, than to set the record straight, and state unequivocally what is so clearly the truth: the Bush Administration misrepresented the facts to justify the war.
Click to expand...
We'll see what Tenet says later today.

In the meantime:
"Anytime anybody attacks our homeland, or our fellow citizens, we will be on the hunt," Bush said. "We will bring them to justice. Just ask the Taliban."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86741,00.html
Click to expand...
Just ask Osama bin Laden. Oh, wait....
 
Dorian Gray said:
Some people are claiming something equivalent to this. 1) and 2) are easy claims to make. 3) is absolutely false.
Click to expand...
In the continental United States.

What's embarassing, aside from your spelling, is that Bush took office in Jan 2001. He had the same exact authority, yet failed to 'protect us'.
Click to expand...
No moron, what is E-M-B-A-R-R-A-S-S-I-N-G is misspelling the word "embarrassing" while you chastise me for the very same thing. You're such a loser.

The planning was in effect before he took office. It really caught us by surprise. It would have happened no matter who was in office. Or do you lack the intellectual honesty to admit that fact?

Whatever happened to "The Buck Stops Here"?
Click to expand...
Whatever happened to reading? Christ you even quoted my words. I used capital letters. Are you to stupid missed the capital letters? And you chastise me for spelling? What a moron. You quote a sentence where I state in capital letters that Bush must take the responsibility and then you ask something as asinine as that? Wow!

RandFan
Bush MUST take responsibility for the event.
Click to expand...
My god, it can't get any clearer than that.

Sure I can.
Click to expand...
So you opted to be logically inconsistent.

Let me ask you a question, could you give me a list of pundits or politicians that claims that the bombing would not have happened if someone else were in office? Hmmm.....
 
Most annoying things about Dorian Gray

1.) He is an ideologue. Incapable of independent thought he spews his party line.

2.) He attacks people but cries when others respond in kind.

3.) He argues in a preemptive non-argument style. You can't attack him because he really hasn't made an argument. "Annoy is subjective." If you then make an argument that he has deemed "annoying" he laughs at you even though he refuses to answer questions and respond to points.

Please see my post 03-05-2004 10:00 AM. That was on Friday and he has never responded.

4.) He is intellectually lazy. In his thread Most Annoying Bush Apologist Sayings he ignored allot of questions and points. He only picks and chooses the arguments he wants to debate. Which is fine except, IT'S HIS THREAD! Come on, how do you make such attacks and then refuse to respond to questions that seek to clarify your attack?

5.) He is just a muckraker. His style is to attack and then wait for others to argue over what he starts.

6.) He is a small minded person who sees the world in black and white, where Democrats are good and Republicans are bad. This is just my opinion but I think it comes across pretty well.

7.) He chastises others for failings that he himself makes.

Dorian Gray
What's embarassing, aside from your spelling...
Click to expand...
Earth calling Dorian, it spelled e-m-b-a-r-r-a-s-s-i-n-g.

Can you spell, "loser"?
 
Dorian,

One small little bit of advice. The next time you want to criticize someone for their spelling. CHECK YOUR OWN FIRST...... moron!
 
Gentlefolk,
I think we can insult each other, if insult we must, in a kinder, gentler, more humorous, erudite way than simple name calling.
Let's, shall we?
Points given for understatement.
 
You couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if you smeared your body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance.
- Edward Flaherty

You wouldn't be intelligent enough to understand anything that I would be stupid enough to tell you anyways.
- Bill Merrill
 
Random Insult Generators

Too lazy to browse for a great insult? Well, we cater for all the mucus-eating, lobotomized psychiatric out-patients and rump-wrecked, Internet riff-raff who ramble into our Hall of Vitriol.

Using JavaScript coding, these fun insult generators custom-make an unique insult every time you click. The Art of Insult reduced to an algorithm. Millions of insults mathematically possible!

If your browser doesn't allow JavaScript pop-ups, you're out of luck.
http://www.insultmonger.com/generators/index.htm
 
I guess this is the place I should have mentioned I saw a Kerry ad yesterday bragging that Kerry warned about terrorists "years before 9/11."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom