Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
03-04) 05:10 PST NEW YORK (AP) --
President Bush's re-election campaign on Thursday defended commercials using images from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, including wreckage of the World Trade Center, as appropriate for an election about public policy and the war on terror. Some families of the victims of the attacks are angry with Bush for airing the spots, which they called in poor taste and for the president's political gain. "With all due respect, I just completely disagree, and I believe the vast majority of the American people will as well," Karen Hughes, a Bush campaign adviser, told "The Early Show" on CBS. "September 11th was not just a distant tragedy. It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Obviously, all of us mourn and grieve for the victims of that terrible day, but September 11 fundamentally changed our public policy in many important ways, and I think it's vital that the next president recognize that." The first three ads, unveiled Wednesday at campaign headquarters in suburban Washington, will run on broadcast channels in about 80 markets in 18 states, most of which are expected to be critical to the election, and nationwide on select cable networks. "It's a slap in the face of the murders of 3,000 people," Monica Gabrielle, whose husband died in the twin towers, told the New York Daily News for its Thursday editions. "It is unconscionable." Two of the spots show the destruction at the World Trade Center and include an American flag flying amid the debris. They also feature images of firefighters working through the wreckage. "It's as sick as people who stole things out of the place," said Firefighter Tommy Fee of Queens Rescue Squad 270. "The image of firefighters at ground zero should not be used for this stuff, for politics." The ads do not mention Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, focusing instead on improving Bush's image after criticism by Democrats in recent months. "I would be less offended if he showed a picture of himself in front of the Statue of Liberty," said Tom Roger, whose daughter perished on American Airlines Flight 11. "But to show the horror of 9/11 in the background, that's just some advertising agency's attempt to grab people by the throat." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"basskisser" wrote in message
om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. All this to chase an enemy we cannot see or define clearly. Quite a bit different than fighting German and Japanese soldiers. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message link.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME? In times of war and national crisis, our nation has a history (and our leaders a responsibility) of reigning in the rights of American citizens for our own safety. However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of rulings by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message link.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME? In times of war and national crisis, our nation has a history (and our leaders a responsibility) of reigning in the rights of American citizens for our own safety. However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of rulings by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench. As opposed to an inactivist judge? I think that's synonymous with a corpse. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
NOYB wrote:
I wonder how the liberals felt about the Sedition Act of 1918, and FDR's Executive Order 9066 signed in 1942...AT THAT TIME? A number of them hated it... along with a number of conservatives. Please also note that those acts were eventually overturned. Please also note that Republicans mostly disliked FDR, and the right-wing branch of the GOP actively hated and undermined him, and spread the most awful rumors they could think of. Some were outright Nazi sympathizers. If you really wanted to drum up ridicule for BushCo and the neocons, you might google up a few exapmles and hold them up as praiseworthy patriots... not that I'm trying to give you advice how best to achieve your goals, Comrade However, the Patriot Act was done to undo the wrongs set by years of rulings by activist judges who tried to make laws from the bench. Wow, now here is a classic. First, you obviously feel the Patriot Act should be a permanent addition to the American legal scene (or should we say, a permanent subtraction from the Constitution). Secondly, you are again displaying that wonderful hypocrisy and the strong double-standard that are the hallmark of the BushCo cheerleaders. Not long ago you were smirking about activist judges making law from the bench, saying how great it. Only it was about abortion then. After giving up on John H, how comforting to see that you're still as amusing as ever, Nobby! DSK |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:05:24 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "NOYB" wrote in message hlink.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. All this to chase an enemy we cannot see or define clearly. Quite a bit different than fighting German and Japanese soldiers. Doug, are not the Democrats themselves continuously complaining about the insufficiency of money for homeland defense? Hasn't Harry himself used our lack of searching every container from every container ship as proof that Bush is falling down on the homeland security issue? Isn't the hardest part of this whole terrorist battle the fact that we *can't* see or define them clearly? John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
John H wrote:
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:05:24 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It's a defining event for the future of our country. ... Bingo. There's the problem - the belief that 9/11 was a defining event. The administration would have us believe that the event defines the future indefinitely, and obliterates all other concerns. How perverse. People compare it to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Personally, I think it's worse, since it was perpetrated on civilians. The attack on Pearl Harbor certainly "defined the future indefinitely, and obliterated all other concerns"...in fact, it did so in a much more profound manner. Our way of life has hardly changed following 9/11. Compare that to the years immediately following Pearl Harbor. I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. All this to chase an enemy we cannot see or define clearly. Quite a bit different than fighting German and Japanese soldiers. Doug, are not the Democrats themselves continuously complaining about the insufficiency of money for homeland defense? Hasn't Harry himself used our lack of searching every container from every container ship as proof that Bush is falling down on the homeland security issue? Isn't the hardest part of this whole terrorist battle the fact that we *can't* see or define them clearly? John H Searching contrainer ships is a lot different from carving away at the Constitutional rights of citizens, but I wouldn't expect a d.f. like you to appreciate the difference. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Bush shows his ignorance yet again
"John H" wrote in message
... I was referring to the atmosphere of fear which Ashcroft and Bush would like us to accept as normal, thereby making it OK to carve away at the Constitution. All this to chase an enemy we cannot see or define clearly. Quite a bit different than fighting German and Japanese soldiers. Doug, are not the Democrats themselves continuously complaining about the insufficiency of money for homeland defense? "Homeland defense" is too broad a term. But, it suits the suits nicely because most citizens are too lazy to tweaze the term apart into its different elements. Just because we need to secure our cargo ports more effectively (since they are barely secured at all) doesn't mean we have to give the police Orwellian powers. They are two different aspects of the same program. Hasn't Harry himself used our lack of searching every container from every container ship as proof that Bush is falling down on the homeland security issue? I have no idea if Harry said that. But the fact is that until voices were raised last summer, virtually NOTHING was being done about securing cargo ports. From what I've read, there's still next to nothing being done, compared with all the big ideas that were floated in the months after 9/11. However, last week's news mentioned that the CG has been authorized to crack down on traffic to & from Cuba. The government spokesperson said it was part of the homeland security effort. Call me crazy, but it sounds more like pandering to Cuban voters in an election year. That should go far in protecting us from them pesky A-Rabs. At least someone woke up recently and has provided a bunch of feds in boats to patrol the harbors here in Rochester. With enough dramamine, you can cruise from Canada to here unseen in almost any weather. Most days, it's a cakewalk. Wait...I remember....it was Louise Slaughter, our Dem congresswoman. She nagged the appropriate parties until they woke up. Isn't the hardest part of this whole terrorist battle the fact that we *can't* see or define them clearly? Warning - cynicism ahead: How can that be? We've been shooting at them for the past year. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A lump of coal for Bush | General | |||
OT--An interesting piece on Bush | General | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General |