Bush on the Bush ads

Bush on the Bush ads
: Bush will not pull his ads with 9/11 scenes. This is pretty much already in the nonissue column. I linked to a few liberal bloggers who weren’t upset and I’m seeing more who feel the same. Says Bush:

  • http://myblahg.blogspot.com Robert McClelland

    I can’t help but note how some right whingers stooped to a new low by attacking the families who complained. The main attack is that some of them are liberal, therefore they don’t have the right to complain that they feel Bush has unfairly used their tragedy for political purposes. Sickening.

  • http://www.elflife.com/ Carson Fire

    Who said “they don’t have the right to complain”? It only makes sense to point out that the head of the firefighters union is already on the Kerry bandwagon, for instance. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t have the right to complain, but it puts his complaints in perspective.
    Anyway, what Democrat is left in me is glad to hear this is being dropped as an issue, because it only makes the Dems look smaller and pettier by the minute.

  • http://myblahg.blogspot.com Robert McClelland

    See what I mean. Right on cue a sad, pathetic right whinger launches into smear mode against the families of the 9/11 victims who were offended by Bush’s use of 9/11 for political purposes. How sad is it when you make personal attacks against someone who suffered a terrible tragedy merely because they were offended by the use of that tragedy.

  • http://www.elflife.com/ Carson Fire

    Huh?

  • http://myblahg.blogspot.com Robert McClelland

    Just a note: my comment above was not directed at Carson Fire. There was another comment that I was responding to that Jeff must have removed.

  • http://www.needlenose.com Swopa

    “How this administration handled that day as well as the war on terror is worthy of discussion …”
    If only he felt it was worthy of discussion with the commission appointed to investigate September 11th.
    But hey, since George himself says it’s okay, I say, bring it on! How about an ad showing Bush reading to the schoolkids in Florida (after being notified of the first plane striking the WTC), side-by-side with the second plane’s impact?

  • http://www.elflife.com/ Carson Fire

    RM, I was posting and refreshing at the same time, and there were no other comments here but yours, and then mine, and then yours two minutes later. If this fresh right-wing attack on the families was posted and deleted in that same time frame, it would have had to have been dang fast. Are you sure you didn’t just misunderstand my post the first time you read it? Not attacking, just asking.

  • http://worldonfire.typepad.com/world_on_fire/ rickfman

    take a look at my commentary on the Bush ad campaign, and Kerry’s possible responses:
    http://worldonfire.typepad.com/world_on_fire/

  • http://www.rsrobinson.net Randal Robinson

    This “controversy” was an awfully good example of media bias and how journalists can give the story the slant they want by carefully selecting who to interview and the quotes to use. These journalists decided what the story was in advance (Bush exploits 9/11) and then went straight to the sources they knew would give them the quotes they wanted (Pro-Kerry firefighters union and anti-war group Peaceful Tomorrows).
    I don’t have anything against any of the 9/11 families who expressed negative views of the ads but I do have a big problem with the media who manufactured this controversy by implying that these people were representative of all 9/11 families when, in fact, they were deliberately selected because they had an ax to grind against Bush.

  • hen

    what wd you have had bush do when he was told that a plane struck the WTC? oh i know: immediately convene a UN special session to whine.
    in fact, if you were not such a partisan hack you wd know that after the first plane hit, people had NO IDEA if it was an accident or not, and i can speak as a New Yorker who was listening to WABC when Curtis and Kuby announced same.
    after the second plane hit it was apparent what happened and Bush excused himself and left.
    but hey no need to let the facts get in the way of a good idiotic rant.
    hey bobby – let’s see if i have it right: Bush is a homophobe, no Presidential candidate ever used war as an issue in his reelection, the NRA supports terrorism and the only 9/11 “survivors” who should have a voice are the ones that agreed to spew the DNC talking points to Katie Couric — is that about right?

  • http://www.needlenose.com Swopa

    … after the second plane hit it was apparent what happened and Bush excused himself and left…
    Actually, no — he stayed in the classroom for several more minutes, reading a story called The Pet Goat and bantering with the children.
    You didn’t know that?

  • Jeff B.

    Actually, no — he stayed in the classroom for several more minutes, reading a story called The Pet Goat and bantering with the children.
    You didn’t know that?

    Cripes, I DIDN’T know that. That’s awful. Well, that completely invalidates his leadership in the War since then. Wipes the slate clean.
    Guess I’m voting for Kerry now.

  • O’Majestic

    About that update: “…the Bush administration to forbid taking pictures of flag-draped coffins of soldiers killed in Iraq…”
    It has been US law for quite a while (pre both Bush’s)to not allow public photographers during the ‘returning home ceremony’ of our fallen brothers and sisters. It is not just a Bush thing as your comment suggests.

  • http://www.rsrobinson.net Randal Robinson

    Actually, no — he stayed in the classroom for several more minutes, reading a story called The Pet Goat and bantering with the children.
    I’ve noticed at CalPundit that commenters keep bringing up Bush’s immediate reaction as if it is something that might somehow turn voters against him. It won’t, of course, unless you think that voters believe Bush should have sprinted to the nearest fighter jet available (he is an ex-fighter pilot after all) to take to the skies to combat the enemy ala Bill Pullman’s President in Independence Day.
    If Bush’s reaction in the minutes and hours after the WTC and Pentagon attacks was the sum total of his response – or even typical of it – then I would be the first to pull the lever against him. Of course that’s not the case at all which makes these hyper-partisan condemnations of his immediate reaction absurd.

  • http://www.buzzmachine.com Jeff Jarvis

    O’M: Good point. This USA Today story — http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-12-31-casket-usat_x.htm — says the policy has been in effect at Dover since 91 but was extended to and enforced at other bases during the Iraq war.

  • http://politicaljunkie.blogspot.com krove

    But hey, since George himself says it’s okay, I say, bring it on! How about an ad showing Bush reading to the schoolkids in Florida (after being notified of the first plane striking the WTC), side-by-side with the second plane’s impact?
    Go Ahead and suggest it to the DNC.

  • HA

    Let’s call this false-outrage over the 9/11 images what it really is – an attempt to impose a speech code on this election campaign. The Kerry campaign is desperate to take national security off the table as an issue because of his own abysmal record.
    The left has crushed free speech on college campuses by using speech codes. Now it wants to crush free speech in politics using the same technique. This is un-democratic and un-American and pathetic.
    Last time I checked, the First Amendment is still in effect. It wouldn’t be if the left had its way.

  • susan

    HA has pointed out a very valid argument regarding the First Amendment and our rights to free speech.
    Unfortunately, people are so involved with the Stern issue to even take notice.
    Oh I forgot, Stern’s rights were suppressed because CC was apparently pressured by the government which was addressing the issue that a most Americans have simply had it with our public airwaves constantly bombarded with oppressive, offensive, down-dumbing diatribe.
    Pressure from radical organizations funded by abusive, corrupt and bogus ‘human rights’ institutions who actively prevent everyone from their right to free speech by enforcing speech codes, however, is perfectly acceptable.
    I guess this means I will be forced to hop on Collectivist Bandwagon in order for me to enjoy my right to free speech.
    I agree with HA, this is pathetic.

  • Trump

    can’t help but note how some right whingers stooped to a new low by attacking the families who complained. The main attack is that some of them are liberal, therefore they don’t have the right to complain that they feel Bush has unfairly used their tragedy for political purposes. Sickening.

    They can complain, but “right wingers” also have the right to point out that they have ties to groups funded by Kerrys wife, etc….which is an important point to bring up, don’t you think?

  • Trump

    But hey, since George himself says it’s okay, I say, bring it on! How about an ad showing Bush reading to the schoolkids in Florida (after being notified of the first plane striking the WTC), side-by-side with the second plane’s impact?
    Howabout an ad contrasting Bush’s visit to ground zero with Kerry’s? (hint: Kerry’s visit will be a blank screen since he never bothered to show up….)

  • Mork