Thursday, March 04, 2004
9/11 what's the deal?
I just don't get it. According to this AP story, some of the victims' families are upset about Bush's new campaign ads.
Why risk this? Can the benefit outweigh these voices:
"Until Bush cooperates with the federal commission that is investigating the nation's preparedness before the attacks and its response "by testifying in public under oath ... he should not be using 9/11 as political propaganda," said Kristen Breitweiser, a wife of one of the victims.
"Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, on Thursday called the ads disgraceful...."We're not going to stand for him to put his arm around one of our members on top of a pile of rubble at Ground Zero during a tragedy and then stand by and watch him cut money for first responders."
Yes, I know he going on the Patton war president hero thing, but wouldn't the images actually give fodder to the "other side" while giving the media a "good" controversy for ratings? Won't his pronouncements after the tragedy about not using 911 for political gain come to haunt him?
The bottom line is, why defend it? I can't explain why they would come out say the ads are, "...Appropriate for an election about public policy and the war on terror, saying they were a tasteful reminder of what the country has been through the last three years." Yeah because we all done forgot. What the hell? What planet are they on? I'm not exactly a Bush supporter, but purely from a political move, I would suggest bagging the ads while using the same message with different images -- of course not being a Bush supporter, I hope he runs the ads all over the place and more stories like this pop up in the media and make it mainstream. Let's talk about the reminders, the commission, the promise not to exploit the tragedy. Yeehaw.
|
Why risk this? Can the benefit outweigh these voices:
"Until Bush cooperates with the federal commission that is investigating the nation's preparedness before the attacks and its response "by testifying in public under oath ... he should not be using 9/11 as political propaganda," said Kristen Breitweiser, a wife of one of the victims.
"Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, on Thursday called the ads disgraceful...."We're not going to stand for him to put his arm around one of our members on top of a pile of rubble at Ground Zero during a tragedy and then stand by and watch him cut money for first responders."
Yes, I know he going on the Patton war president hero thing, but wouldn't the images actually give fodder to the "other side" while giving the media a "good" controversy for ratings? Won't his pronouncements after the tragedy about not using 911 for political gain come to haunt him?
The bottom line is, why defend it? I can't explain why they would come out say the ads are, "...Appropriate for an election about public policy and the war on terror, saying they were a tasteful reminder of what the country has been through the last three years." Yeah because we all done forgot. What the hell? What planet are they on? I'm not exactly a Bush supporter, but purely from a political move, I would suggest bagging the ads while using the same message with different images -- of course not being a Bush supporter, I hope he runs the ads all over the place and more stories like this pop up in the media and make it mainstream. Let's talk about the reminders, the commission, the promise not to exploit the tragedy. Yeehaw.
Comments:
Post a Comment
