Many of the Bush-Cheney re-election ads are, to me, quite amusing at times but the last two have really been stellar efforts.
There's the one where they start off talking 'bout how everything's going so fine and dandy. And that the economy is improving and all that good stuff. THEN it gets even funnier. The announcer guy then says that John Kerry's referring to the Great Depression and the last line of the ad is: "Pessimism never created a job."
WHAT?
Oh, but it gets better. The ad that really gets me rolling on the floor is the one I saw this morning. They show a clip of John Kerry in 1971 saying that we can't go all around the world fighting communism. Then there's a clip of Reagan saying, "Mr. Gorbachev tear down that wall!" Then there's footage of Bush declaring the end of primary combat from last year and they show the Kerry in '71 clip again. And the closing line is something like "John Kerry he was wrong then and he's wrong now."
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
That ad is wrong on so many levels. I don't even know what the biggest sin is. Is it invoking the image of Reagan just two weeks after his death? Or is it that they would dare insinuate that terrorism and communism are comparable? Not only is it stupid to compare terrorism to communism but it's rather insulting to think that the general public would fall for it.
(Also aren't both China and Cuba current communist governments?)
If I were running Kerry's campaign this is how I would respond:
According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary:
Communism is defined as a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production.
Terrorism is defined as the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.
As you can see Communism and terrorism are two completely different things.
[Then I'd show footage of Bush stating how Iraq has weapons of mass destruction that could be used against America. I'd then point out how no actual WMDs were found.]
"The Bush Administration used misinformation to convince Congress to vote in favor of the war. They fooled us once already, now it's your turn to show them who's the fool."
Of course there's a more extreme way to go:
"The Bush Administration used fear as a means of coercing Congress to approve the war in Iraq. Maybe President Bush should look in the mirror if he wants to find the real terrorist."
Personally, while I would find the latter much more amusing, I think the former would be much more effective.
Lisa T. said at 5:20 PM 06-25-2004: all work and no play since the cancellation of Angel. :(
but my spirits are higher now that they have begun filming "Serenity." the world is a dull and boring place without my joss whedon fix. my buffy dvds are holding me right now, but i fear soon even they won't be enough to keep the withdrawal symptoms away.....
amy [email] said at 5:49 PM 06-25-2004: no spike, no angel, at least they are now on tnt. for some reason i hate watching it on dvd, too chronological. the one i most worry about is james marsters-he will be so typecast forever.
myriam [email] said at 12:43 PM 06-25-2004: I'm amazed they're using that clip of Bush declaring the "end" since now even they regret that foolish photo op.
milky [email] said at 6:16 PM 06-25-2004: what if Dubya gave you a great tax rebate? you'd be trampling old ladies and children to get to the hospital.
Aaron said at 5:55 PM 06-25-2004: So when is John Kerry going to actually say "This isn't right, I have a better idea, and this is what it is..."? All we ever hear from him is bad news. Lets hear some actual policy, see some actual plans. I can tell you all day long that I can do better, but it would certainly help if I could actually back that up.
milky [email] said at 6:18 PM 06-25-2004: He doesn't have to say anything.
Common logic in this situation is this: Continue to let those in power fuck up as they've been doing. I won an election in HS like this. I didn't even have to campaign.
milky [email] said at 7:12 PM 06-25-2004: I didn't say that. Right now it's about getting elected or re-elected. It's based on someone's salient fuck-ups. Bush's are recent and Kerry has been careful lately. That's how Kerry runs his campaigns. And the way it looks, I'd pounce with my guns at the last second so there's no time for a retort. I saw Slick Willie pull as fast one on Bush I during the final debates, and that old bastard crumpled in the spotlight. Bush II has no trump card. He's holding on to a Bicycle card and a Joker card. And Cheney and Rumsfeld gave him an UNO deck to fool him into thinking he's actually playing.
The flavor may be nearly the same, but you know, people get tired of eating the same exact shit.
kiche [email] said at 7:17 PM 06-25-2004: that would be pretty hard aaron.
he'd have to top presiding over the biggest terrorist attack on american soil in history, starting a war based on intelligence which was WRONG and which many creditable people said was faulty publicly, AND allowing a man hell bent on destroying america slip through our finger tips.
Aaron said at 7:40 PM 06-25-2004: 5 years ago you would have been describing Bill Clinton, who presided over the Oklahoma City bombing, and the first WTC bombing, launched missiles at Sudan based on faulty intelligence, and allowed Bin Laden to slip through his fingers.
kiche [email] said at 7:56 PM 06-25-2004: 168 people died in the oklahoma city bombing, 6 people died in the first wtc bombing, more than 3,000 people died on 9/11. if you take the two terror attacks you just mentioned added their fatalities to gether and then multiplied them by 10 you still aren't anywhere near september 11th. more people died on september 11th than died in pearl harbor. a good argument can be made that it wasn't a terrorist attack but an act of war.
and by the way we didn't just launch a few missiles at iraq like we did at the sudan (who were much more dangerous and gave bin laden a hide out) we invaded. we are now bogged down in iraq trying to rebuild their country while al quaeda recruits new terrorists for attacks like the one in madrid.
all clinton did bad was get a blow job, bush on the other hand neglected his duty as commander in chief.
kiche [email] said at 8:06 PM 06-25-2004: dude, he lied about getting a blow job, and this had nothing to do with the whitewater land transaction which was what kenneth star was supposed to be investigating him about.
is that the best you've got?
and weren't you going on about how jack ryan's right to privacy was being trampled upon the other day?
craig [email] said at 8:10 PM 06-25-2004: Clinton lied about whether or not he had sex with Monica Lewinsky.
Ask George "Saddam has weapons of Mass Destruction therefore we must premptively invade Iraq to disarm them" Bush, or Dick "Haliburton "Go Fuck Yourself" Cheney if he ever lied about anything.
Aaron said at 8:15 PM 06-25-2004: Gore and Clinton both claimed that Iraq had WMD, and their administration also linked Al Q with Iraq. Speaking of proud Clinton Presidency moments, how about Ruby Ridge and Waco? It doesn't get any better than that.
Aaron said at 2:31 PM 06-26-2004: Why shouldn't it be Clinton's fault? We're blaming Bush for stuff that happened before he was in office. I'm not a Republican.
neilbert said at 12:00 PM 06-26-2004: Communism is a much greater killer and greater threat than terrorism, maybe not anymore, but I never have counted the "Rooskies" out yet. Just in Russia alone it killed 22 million of it's own people; God only knows how many in China.
Derek said at 6:24 PM 06-26-2004: well, actually it didn't get much play but there was a story about how some Iraquis tried to hit our guys with a SARIN gas artillery shell. Now, that is a WMD IMHO. And if there was one you know sure as shit there were more. Plus I've seen some pics of them digging Russian MIGs outta sand dunes. Not old MIG's..they new ones with tech we didn't even know the Ruski's had their paws on.
For what its worth...
reggie [email] said at 7:00 PM 06-27-2004: Neilbert, it's not about whether or not Communism is a greater killer than terrorism. The point is that by definition the two are in no way comparable because terrorism is a method while communism is a socio-political institution. In other words a terrorist can be a communist but a communist isn't necessarily a terrorist. My point is that Bush is banking on the fact that most people, at least those that would be inclined to vote for him, won't be smart enough to tell the difference.
