Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Reminding a nation that Bush has already passed the test of true leadership in a crisis
Published on March 5, 2004 By Draginol In Republican

Some people have complained that Bush doesn't have the right to make use of any 9/11 related images in his campaign commercials.  I disagree. But I also strongly believe that he needs to tread carefully as to not seem to be exploiting a national tragedy. 

The reason I think he can and should bring up 9/11 is because it was the defining moment of is presidency. I remember thinking as the months passed after 9/11 how thankful I was that Bush had won and not Gore. I could imagine the over-engineered response Gore would have put together. Would Gore have taken out the Taliban? Would some other President have managed to topple the Taliban and disrupt Al Qaeda with so few losses? Who can forget Bush standing at ground zero with his arm around the weary fireman? It was a defining moment in our country's history and Bush was the right man at the right place. He not only should remind us of those times, he has an obligation to remind us of what we've been through and how he handled a dire situation.

Those who cry foul are being hypocritical, to say the least. We don't know a lot about Kerry but we damn well know that he served in Vietnam. That he got a silver star, a bronze star, and two purple hearts. I know this off the top of my head. Why? Because he is constantly making a big fuss about the defining moment of his life. I don't have a problem with that though. Those events demonstrated that in a crunch, Carry is a brave and heroic figure.  Would someone argue that Vietnam was a "national" event that should therefore be hands off? Of course not.  9/11 was a national tragedy as well. And it is important for people to realize how effectively Bush handled that crisis.

Obviously Bush critics won't like that. Their strategy has been to try to make it so that Bush can't talk about anything.  If you try to point out Kerry's deplorable voting record on national security issues, his supporters claim that's off limits because he's a war hero.  Now they're trying to create a scenario where Bush can't speak about what he accomplished.  Honestly now, if I told you on 9/12/2001 that as we enter 2004 the United States would not suffer a single follow-up terrorist attack would you have believed it? Be honest now.  Nearly 3 years later and we've not suffered any additional attacks. Before 9/11 we had been routinely attacked by Al Qaeda -- the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, the first WTC attack. And yet after 9/11, nothing. No matter how you slice it, you have to give some credit to Bush for this. Because, make no mistake, if we suffered a terrorist attack he would almost certainly get blamed for that. We can't have it both ways.

His ads needs to remind us what we've been through. Not just for political purposes but because too many people have already forgotten what happened on September 11. Four airliners were hijacked at the same time. Two of them were rammed into the world's largest building, the WTC and destroyed. The WTC, if you hadn't ever been in it, was the size of a small city. The twin towers could comfortably fit over 100,000 people in them (that's how many people could potentially have died incidentally if the planes had struck about an hour later and at the same time and a bit lower on the buildings). A third hijacked airliner rammed into the Pentagon. The fourth was retaken by the passengers and crashed into the ground while it was on its way to Washington DC. Its target believed to have been the White House (think about that for a moment - if the passengers hadn't done what they did, the White House might have been destroyed). Or maybe the capital building!  Think about that. 

We need to be reminded that we are at war. And that like Kerry in Vietnam, when Bush had his crunch time, he showed that he was a man of integrity and effective leadership.


Comments (Page 3)
6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Mar 07, 2004
1st Ammendment
on Mar 07, 2004
Pres Bush has all the rights. It happened on his watch. Guys you should have listened to the lady who lost her husband during 9/11. She said, "I would have been the proudest person in the world if the one covered by the flag was my husband." She was referring to Bush's commercial.

I realized that the libs should complain. They don't have a solution if it happened during their watch. Look what happened when our two embassies were bombed in Africa! Look what happened when Sudan offered Osama! Look what happened when the USS Cole was bombed!

Please read my new article - A Walking Barrel of Promises.

aconservative

on Mar 07, 2004
Funerals of US service men and women killed at WAR are banned on TV in the US_but exploitation of the images from THAT day are?
For the re-election campaign? Seems insulting to me_"Bush's accomplishments?" you mean his compliance in allowing this (9-11) to happen. Check out the site Wahkonta suggests for a minute by minute account of that day in history.

But I also strongly believe that he needs to tread carefully as to not seem to be exploiting a national tragedy.

(TOO LATE, BRADWardell.....)
on Mar 07, 2004
Pres Bush has all the rights. It happened on his watch. Guys you should have listened to the lady who lost her husband during 9/11. She said, "I would have been the proudest person in the world if the one covered by the flag was my husband." She was referring to Bush's commercial.


The lady? There was just the one?

A number of the September 11 widows took umbrage at the ad. Who are you to tell them that their reaction is inappropriate? You found one of them who was a Republican and you ran with it. Wake up.
on Mar 07, 2004
If you happened to miss it the first time, go to : http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline It has the minute by minute of Bush outright refusal to act despite being informed of the events going on BEFORE the planes hit the second tower. We had pilots requesting permission to go supersonic and stop the jet, but Bush couldn't be bothered as he was having a photo op with school kids. The evidence shows he was inept and is not capable of acting under pressure in defence of his Country. 9/11 was a terrible day and him on his seat reading while it happened is the image we should keep in mind when considering his actions on that day.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline
on Mar 07, 2004
Not being a US citizen, (Australian) I tend to see the issue somewhat differently, Whilst I feel for your losses and the despair it must have caused,I do tend to be a little non-commital
when it comes to Your President. I now admit I see the issue in a different light your article has given me a new perspective. I too served in VietNam and have a fond feeling for the many American troops I was privlidged to work with
on Mar 07, 2004
Bulb,
Please refer to the earlier response I entered in refererence to the 9/11 widows interviewed earlier this week.
on Mar 07, 2004
Please refer to the earlier response I entered in refererence to the 9/11 widows interviewed earlier this week.


That was a small handful. I don't doubt that there were hundreds watching the ad at home and suffering in silence.
on Mar 07, 2004
"I don't doubt that there were hundreds watching the ad at home and suffering in silence."


This is true because you imagine it to be?

I wonder if all those "suffering in silence" feel much better about Kerry using that suffering to further his own career. "Waving the Bloody Shirt" works both ways. Kerry, standing on their suffering like it was some moral stepladder, is worse than Bush using the images to begin with, to me. If it is exploitation, at least Bush exploits the event itself, not the victims' families after-the-fact, wielding them like some political parrying dagger.

on Mar 07, 2004
This is true because you imagine it to be?


I didn't say it's true because I imagine it to be; I just said that I imagine it to be. Agree or disagree as you please.


I wonder if all those "suffering in silence" feel much better about Kerry using that suffering to further his own career. "Waving the Bloody Shirt" works both ways. Kerry, standing on their suffering like it was some moral stepladder, is worse than Bush using the images to begin with, to me. If it is exploitation, at least Bush exploits the event itself, not the victims' families after-the-fact, wielding them like some political parrying dagger.


Mincing words in a desperate attempt to make Kerry the bad guy after Bush's faux pas.
on Mar 07, 2004
"Mincing words in a desperate attempt to make Kerry the bad guy after Bush's faux pas."


Hey, you guys invoked the dreaded 'exploitation' argument. Kinda naive to think that Kerry isn't exploiting the "suffering" of the families to attack Bush. If the families were really that outraged I doubt Kerry would have had to mention it.
on Mar 07, 2004
Before 9/11 we had been routinely attacked by Al Qaeda -- the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, the first WTC attack.


The perpetrators of the first WTC are all still rotting in the prison cells that Clinton's people put them in. And after the bombing of the Cole, Clinton had his people put together a comprehensive plan for erasing Al Quaeda off the face of the planet. But because the plan wasn't finalised until nearly the end of Clinton's term in office (what with the attack that caused it to be created happening less than a month before the 2000 general election, and all,) Clinton chose not to start a war that Bush would have to finish.

Instead, he had the people that put the plan together deliver it to Bush's people. Unfortunately, Bush's people proceeded to do nothing with it, and cost us an opportunity to destroy bin Laden before he could orchestrate the 9/11 attacks.

In light of not only that, but Bush's promise not to exploit 9/11 for political gain, these ads are particularly offensive.
on Mar 07, 2004
Because we did nothing about this: (image of the first World Trade Center bombing, followed by images of the USS Cole and the African Embassy bombings)
We were forced to do something about this: (Image of 9/11)

Tasteless? Maybe, but true.


No, it's not.

Unless you are referring to the Bush administration's doing nothing for the first months of the current Presidency?

Link

on Mar 08, 2004
The perpetrators of the first WTC are all still rotting in the prison cells that Clinton's people put them in


Wait, so we put criminals into prison? Shocking! They should be summarily shot, without trial!

Cheers
6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last