Apparently, the new Bush ads — which use images of Ground Zero — have upset some of the relatives of the victims of 9/11 tragedy, or, as Karen Hughes calls them, “Democrats.”
My ex, who I’ve been empowered to speak for on this matter whenever appropriate, had her brother killed in the WTC on 9/11. She freakin’ hates Bush; and, although I haven’t spoken to her about it, I’m sure she’s offended by these ads.
I’m deeply offended. But I was offended at the way the American population in general appropriated the 9/11 families’ grief, whatever their political affiliation.
Of course, if Kerry juxtaposes images of FlightSuitBoy and that Mission Accomplished banner with the aftermath of attacks on Americans and Iraqis, it’ll be ‘cheap negative exploitation’. Natch.
jh bogart, I’ve always been partial to demonRATs myself. Gets a lot done in just a few letters. The best we can do seems to be Rethuglicans, which isn’t nearly as clever if you ask me.
If the victims (meaning the survivors and those that lost loved ones, Charles) weren’t Democrats yet, this ad may make them so.
Bush truly has been a CEO president. Unfortunately for us, he’s a Ken Lay-style leader in a time when we need a leader who can do with the USA what Steve Jobs did with Apple.
When I heard the ads contained 9-11 pictures I feared something awful. But having seen them, I don’t think they’re too inappropriate. The 2 adds strike me as terrible politically – they seem just apologetic, like “hey things aren’t great but its been a tough couple of years”. In that context its surely fair enought to point in an add out the “test” presented economically and otherwise by 9-11. Its being used as an excuse, not a weapon to bludgeon opponents.
{ 9 comments }
Doug 03.04.04 at 6:20 pm
Heh.
Rich Puchalsky 03.04.04 at 6:44 pm
Don’t forget — FDNY are now Democrats too.
Keith M Ellis 03.04.04 at 6:56 pm
My ex, who I’ve been empowered to speak for on this matter whenever appropriate, had her brother killed in the WTC on 9/11. She freakin’ hates Bush; and, although I haven’t spoken to her about it, I’m sure she’s offended by these ads.
I’m deeply offended. But I was offended at the way the American population in general appropriated the 9/11 families’ grief, whatever their political affiliation.
nick 03.04.04 at 7:45 pm
Of course, if Kerry juxtaposes images of FlightSuitBoy and that Mission Accomplished banner with the aftermath of attacks on Americans and Iraqis, it’ll be ‘cheap negative exploitation’. Natch.
JH Bogart 03.04.04 at 9:11 pm
I believe the proper term is not “Democrats,” but is instead “Demoncrats.”
Issa 03.04.04 at 10:15 pm
jh bogart, I’ve always been partial to demonRATs myself. Gets a lot done in just a few letters. The best we can do seems to be Rethuglicans, which isn’t nearly as clever if you ask me.
charles 03.04.04 at 10:49 pm
Wishful thinking on Karen Hughes’ part? 3,000 dead “Democrats” not enough? Another Bush surrogate, spouting off in time-tested fashion.
Charles
Saint Fnordius 03.05.04 at 12:10 pm
If the victims (meaning the survivors and those that lost loved ones, Charles) weren’t Democrats yet, this ad may make them so.
Bush truly has been a CEO president. Unfortunately for us, he’s a Ken Lay-style leader in a time when we need a leader who can do with the USA what Steve Jobs did with Apple.
james 03.05.04 at 1:15 pm
When I heard the ads contained 9-11 pictures I feared something awful. But having seen them, I don’t think they’re too inappropriate. The 2 adds strike me as terrible politically – they seem just apologetic, like “hey things aren’t great but its been a tough couple of years”. In that context its surely fair enought to point in an add out the “test” presented economically and otherwise by 9-11. Its being used as an excuse, not a weapon to bludgeon opponents.
No?
Comments on this entry are closed.