[Axo1ot1]

georgewbush.com

for shame.

[paully dub]

I saw it, and I dare him to put it on tv.

Sad...

[olePigeon]

What happened to George Bush changing the face of politics by not making personal attacks against other candidates?

By the way, this shoud go in the political forum.

[york28]

It's funny, all over the site there are accusations of Kerry being pessamistic and negative, and then just as many negative attacks on him from the Bush side. Ugh.

This prolly ought to be in political. If I don't mention that someone else will. (edit: Yup.)

[Logic]

Political lounge perhaps?

[wdlove]

Those that live in glass houses should not throw the first stone.

[boots]

Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
georgewbush.com

for shame.

No, man. That was a clip from MoveOn.org. He was using that as part of the "Angry Liberal" opponents theme. He wasn't using that clip to label those guys. MoveOn had an ad submitted that compared Bush to Hitler.

It's a terribly put together clip...I'll give you that.

[MindFad]

Pretty disgusting.

[theolein]

There seems to be more on Kerry on that site than there is on GW.

Anyway, one more vote for moving this to the pol lounge.

[itai195]

LOL... yeah I don't care what my leaders do just... please, for Christ's sake... don't yell, the kids are asleep.

[Agasthya]

nevermind.

moveon.org explanation explained things.

Still.. A very poor put together piece. It is easy to be extremely confused by it.

[itai195]

I think that scene is part of a MoveOn ad as boots suggested. The quote is taken from the minutes of a meeting between Bush and former Palestinian Prime Minister Abu Mazen, as reported by Ha'aretz (an Israeli paper).

[nredman]

[Joshua]

Classic.

So, knowing that MoveOn was the one making the Bush-Hitler connection, do you feel the same outrage?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
georgewbush.com

for shame.

As boots said, I think you misread that one, although it's a bit ambiguous if you haven't seen the MoveOn vids (which I haven't). Maybe they're hoping it'll play both ways.

The attempts of both candidates to evoke a Reagan/Clintonesque optimism have been pretty awkward. We're in the middle of a very uncertain war, and the rosey-outlook stuff just doesn't seem fitting at the moment. I think a lot of people want someone who has a better handle on things, not a Pollyanna. But that could change by November.

What strikes me as odd is that, right between "Economy" and "Health Care," the Bush site has a tab for "Compassion." Is there a Secretary of Compassion? Do the Dems have a corresponding tab for "Toughness"?

[itai195]

Originally posted by zigzag:
What strikes me as odd is that, right between "Economy" and "Health Care," the Bush site has a tab for "Compassion." Is there a Secretary of Compassion?

In grand Orwellian manner, I think that's John Ashcroft

[boots]

Originally posted by Joshua:
Classic.

So, knowing that MoveOn was the one making the Bush-Hitler connection, do you feel the same outrage?

Yes...though the ad was not produced by MoveOn, it was submitted as part of a contest. They should have had more sense than to even let that one see the light of day. The controversy that one has stirred really overshadows all of the pretty decent ads that were submitted.

[ambush]

it sounded as if they added "boo" voices on Moore's speech.

[Joshua]

Originally posted by ambush:
it sounded as if they added "boo" voices on Moore's speech.

The boos weren't added; that clip was taken from Moore's acceptance speech from the Oscars.

[zachs]

Wow...I thought for a second that the site had been hacked or something and someone had put up and anti-Bush ad. And then the Hitler thing came on, and although they flashed "MoveOn.org," it was just for a second, and that portion looked like a part of the ad.

Anyway, I hope they put it on TV. Free advertising for Kerry.

[Zimphire]

He never compared anyone to Hitler, that I believe was a clip someone made comparing HIM to Hitler.

He took the plight of the left and put it in a small video showing them making asses out of themselves.

[Gee-Man]

This ad is unbelievably awful and shameful. If the intent was to say that the "other side" is making the comparison to Hitler, then the editing on that spot is simply atrocious. I knew the story about moveon.org's anti-Bush ad competition beforehand and I still missed the super-quick "moveon.org" at the bottom of the screen after the 1st viewing - I simply thought they were inserting clips of Hitler in the middle of speeches by Gore, Dean, Kerry et.al. The initial impression left my jaw on the floor in disbelief until I watched it again and realized what it was "trying" to say. Did somebody really think this ad could change an average swing voter's mind if the core message is that hard to catch?

Even if you concede that people will get the lightning-quick reference, this is simply bad, bad politics. The inserted Hitler clips completely change the point of the ad from a simple message about "pessimism" to hysteria. There is no good reason to put this Hitler imagery in any political ad, none whatsoever. Doesn't matter if you think you're "responding" to the other side, it serves no useful purpose.

Here's the fact: a couple of people (literally, two) submitted ads to moveon.org for their open-to-anyone contest and in them made a useless comparison between Bush and Hitler. So what? I've heard certain conservatives make stupid comparisons between Kerry and Stalin - but that doesn't mean that those people represent Bush and all Republicans anymore than a couple of internet guys represent Kerry and all Democrats. None of the politicians featured in that ad have ever made or endorsed any kind of comparison of Bush to Hitler! If Kerry responded with an ad featuring his "opponents" comparing him to Stalin, I would see it as equally retarded.

I'm beginning to wonder whether this is just bad editing or a real attempt to confuse things by letting people come to misleading conclusions. If people protest that Bush is saying that Kerry and Gore are similar to Hitler, they can simply respond by saying, "hey, we never said that - it's the Democrats saying it! You just misunderstood the ad!", knowing full well that the ad is intentionally misleading. On the other hand, if you do "get" the ad, it still is horribly misleading, since none of these mainstream politicians has EVER themselves made such a connection or aligned themselves directly with people who have, as is implied in the ad. Someone may have thought it was a win-win situation.

Bottom line, Mr. President - I don't care about your supposed optimism or pessimism. I don't care whether your opponent threw a medal or a ribbon over a fence 30 years ago, nor do I care about your National Guard service. I especially couldn't give two sh*ts about what a couple of guys on the internet with iMovie and a collection of old nazi speeches on their hard drives think about Bush - this isn't about them, it's about the election of the next President of the United States. I don't vote for a president based on any of this useless crap, it's about what you will do for this country and for the world for the next 4 years. Period. Don't try to distract me and waste our collective time with phony differences about "optimism" or "pessimism".

I'm planning on sending an email to the georgewbush.com web site to let them know how disgusting this ad is to me. No matter how you slice it, this is a new low in the campaign season. Let's hope it doesn't get any worse than this.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Gee-Man:
If the intent was to say that the "other side" is making the comparison to Hitler,

It was.

Did somebody really think this ad could change an average swing voter's mind if the core message is that hard to catch?

I didn't think it was that hard to catch. Some people just knee-jerk and claim the worst.

Even if you concede that people will get the lightning-quick reference, this is simply bad, bad politics. The inserted Hitler clips completely change the point of the ad from a simple message about "pessimism" to hysteria. There is no good reason to put this Hitler imagery in any political ad, none whatsoever. Doesn't matter if you think you're "responding" to the other side, it serves no useful purpose.

I think they were trying to make a point about some people on the left's venomous foaming at the mouth tudes.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
He took the plight of the left and put it in a small video showing them making asses out of themselves.

Why is it condemnable for Michael Moore, but praiseworthy for the President, to do essentially the same thing? Seems to me that either both are condemnable, or neither.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Why is it condemnable for Michael Moore, but praiseworthy for the President, to do essentially the same thing? Seems to me that either both are condemnable, or neither.

The same thing? Not nearly.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Gee-Man:
I'm beginning to wonder whether this is just bad editing or a real attempt to confuse things by letting people come to misleading conclusions.

The latter seems to be the Bush administration's modus operandi. I didn't vote for the man, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt, and yet this administration constantly shows its constituents nothing but contempt.

Either way, this strikes me as a totally ineffective ad. I don't know why they even bothered to put it up on the web site -- perhaps it somehow strikes a chord with some tiny sliver of the 'swing voter' population.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by itai195:
The latter seems to be the Bush administration's modus operandi.

Naw, I think it's the left's modus operandi to make people think that.

Hence the video.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by zigzag:
The attempts of both candidates to evoke a Reagan/Clintonesque optimism have been pretty awkward. We're in the middle of a very uncertain war, and the rosey-outlook stuff just doesn't seem fitting at the moment. I think a lot of people want someone who has a better handle on things, not a Pollyanna. But that could change by November.

Awkward, no doubt. It's so silly, because it's so transparently a campaign strategy. It's a well-established finding that people like, and vote for, optimistic leaders. But it's not something you can just claim about yourself in order to be effective. Sheesh these folks are losers.

Anyway, about the ad - despite the ad being called "the faces of the Democratic party", Hitler isn't a member of the Democratic party; but interspersing Hitler making a speech with Gore, Kerry, and the others making speeches sure drives home the point, doesn't it? And who knows who made that moveon.org ad? Was it even a Democrat? It was just some ad somebody submitted to a contest. Calling it a face of the Democratic party is not much better than taking one of the silly posts on MacNN about nuking the Middle East and making an ad out of it, calling it "faces of the Republican party" and showing pictures of Bush.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Naw, I think it's the left's modus operandi to make people think that.

Hence the video.

Yeah, cause a stupid video made by a couple of losers is WAY more misleading and pertinent than a misleading ad about Kerry's defense voting record made by the Bush campaign.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by itai195:
Yeah, cause a stupid video made by a couple of losers is WAY more misleading and pertinent than a misleading ad about Kerry's defense voting record made by the Bush campaign.

What was exactly misleading about the Kerry ad? I am honestly curious.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
What was exactly misleading about the Kerry ad? I am honestly curious.

Must we rehash every old debate? Search through the forum, it's been quite thoroughly discussed.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by itai195:


Must we rehash every old debate? Search through the forum, it's been quite thoroughly discussed.

I did a search for "Kerry ad misleading" and only got this thread.

I am not saying it WASN'T misleading. I would just honestly like to know.

PVT message me or something as to not derail the thread.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
The same thing? Not nearly.

Sorry - I confused your answer with a

They're only different from your perspective. Other people regard Moore's movies as legitimate commentary (and Bush as a buffoon), and Bush's ad as unfair and dishonest. More even gets standing ovations. Both use actual clips, often out of context, to make a partisan point. Why would one be legitimate and the other not? Do you have an actual explanation?

[Gee-Man]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zimphire:

It was.

I know the supposed "point" of the ad, I already said so in my post. No need to try to educate me.

I didn't think it was that hard to catch. Some people just knee-jerk and claim the worst.

So the Bush campaign features Hitler clips in a political ad juxtaposed against politicians who had absolutely NO connection with those clips or the people who made them - and if someone even hints that this could cause confusion, you think it's other people who are "knee-jerking"? Wow. I'm speechless how you could justify this.

I think they were trying to make a point about some people on the left's venomous foaming at the mouth tudes.

Ok - let's go with this then. So what does this "point" offer us as political discourse? That there are people out there who are mad at Bush? Is Bush trying to say that no one should ever be mad at him? Is he saying that a quote like "This president is a miserable failure" from Gephardt is just as bad as comparing him to Hitler? Perhaps he is saying that all of these quotes are similar since they all came from "liberals", no difference between the Hitler comparison and the campaign rhetoric of Gore, Kerry, and Dean.

Of course, in politics, what's good for the goose is good for the gander - so would it be ok in your mind if Kerry made an counter-attack-ad juxtaposing a Bush speech with clips of Michael Savage telling a caller, "You should only get AIDS and die, you pig!" (real quote). Or maybe Kerry should add in a few clips of Ann Coulter, pick any one of her angry tirades against liberals. My personal favorite - "If you don't hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don't love your country." Or perhaps this one to a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war." (from MSNBC).

I have no problem with Bush telling people that his opponents are angry at him. It's a worthless and irrelevant point, but ok. I DO have a real problem with his campaign even implying that the Hitler comparison is even remotely the same as "Kerry's Democratic Party" by deliberately pushing them together in a montage, that simply takes things WAY too far and pisses me off as a voter.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I did a search for "Kerry ad misleading" and only got this thread.

I am not saying it WASN'T misleading. I would just honestly like to know.

Ok, at risk of falling into a debate I don't want to rehash, I'll just give you this link which does a pretty good job of debunking the ad, and you can also look at factcheck.org which has several articles debunking the Bush campaign's distortions of Kerry's voting record.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zigzag:
They're only different from your perspective. Other people regard Moore's movies as legitimate commentary

Yes, we can't help those I don't think. They are too far gone.

[Zimphire]

Yeah I go here http://factcheck.org/archive.aspx

And I see BOTH sides screwing with reality.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, we can't help those I don't think. They are too far gone.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zigzag:

Yes, I've owned a few.

Could we get back to the topic plz?

THX!

[itai195]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yeah I go here http://factcheck.org/archive.aspx

And I see BOTH sides screwing with reality.

Yes both sides make misleading ads, but my original point was that the present administration seems to have made this standard operating procedure beyond that realm. Either way, I wouldn't characterize some random -- and tasteless -- MoveOn ad as indicative of Democratic thought. Putting imagery of Hitler in an ad just seems stupid to me, there's no telling how people will react to that.

[PacHead]

Is that whole ad basically taken from the other anti-Bush ad up until the last few seconds ?

(I haven't seen the original anti-Bush one)

Does anybody have a link to that original one ?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by itai195:
Yes both sides make misleading ads, but my original point was that the present administration seems to have made this standard operating procedure beyond that realm.

Seems like it's going on on both sides to me.

[zachs]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Is that whole ad basically taken from the other anti-Bush ad up until the last few seconds ?

(I haven't seen the original anti-Bush one)

Does anybody have a link to that original one ?

The first part consisted of clips from various speeches.

If you're looking for the Hitler ads, here they are:

Hitler Ad #1
Hitler Ad #2

[PacHead]

Originally posted by zachs:
The first part consisted of clips from various speeches.

If you're looking for the Hitler ads, here they are:

Hitler Ad #1
Hitler Ad #2

thanks

[saab95]

Originally posted by ambush:
it sounded as if they added "boo" voices on Moore's speech.

They sure did- and with good reason.

[saab95]

For the record:

The Coalition of the Wild-Eyed