Politics from North of the 49th Parallel
Two New Bush Ads
Published on March 11, 2004 By IanGillespie In Politics

The gang that couldn't shoot straight has come forward with two new ads -- that could rival the failure of the three they launched last week.

Sure to attract fire will be the racially charged imagery of the first ad, entitled "100 Days". The picture of a swarthy, bushy eyebrowed foreigner -- above the words "Weaken Fight Against Terrorists" -- has immediately provoked comparisons to Bush senior's infamous Willie Horton ad. James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, has already called for the spot to be pulled. And this is just day one.

The swarthy Arab terrorist ad, "100 Days", ostensibly attacks John Kerry's platform -- framing the debate around the importance of a president's earliest days in office. The first line: "A president sets his agenda for America" in those first hundred days.

Sure, I mean, if you say so, but what's that got to do with John Kerry? That's just four seconds of my life that I'll never get back. They've had months to come up with these ads; is this the best they can do?

The ad doesn't even stick to it's own message. The last of it's three attacks is that Kerry wanted to "delay defending America until the United Nations approved". What's that got to do with Kerry's first hundred days? Nothing. It's nothing. It's muddled. And it's confusing.

Then Bush accuses Kerry of wanting to raise taxes by "at least nine hundred billion dollars". But doesn't that mean Bush must be giving at least $900 billion in tax cuts to these same people? People making over $200,000? People who Bush himself has referred as "the wealthiest" Americans?

Best of all, by exalting a president's first hundred days, the Bush campaign completely belies the entire theme of Bush's first set of ads -- that the president had no control over the first nine months of his administration. After all, a president "sets his agenda for America in the first one hundred days".

So, the overall message of this first ad: George Bush approves of racism, gives fat cats $900 billion and bears responsibility for everything that's gone wrong in the last three years. Karl Rove's a genius!

Tomorrow, more on the second ad which includes gems such as this:

"We can go forward with confidence, resolve and hope; or, we can turn back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists and outlaw regimes are no threat."


Comments
on Mar 12, 2004
It's a question of saying things that people want/don't want to hear. Bush is playing politics, anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

Cheers
on Mar 12, 2004
If the ads are wrong or if you disagree of what they said, then the alternative would be to say why the ads are wrong and come back with a reply of what Kerry would do. The total absence of reply amd resulting to "crying foul" is not the solution. There are 20% of Americans out there that are waiting to make a decision who would make a better President - Bush or Kerry.

Kerry stated that Republicans are "crooked" and "liars", but he has not stated an incident what he said so.

If he can't - perhaps his supporters would enumerate the situations and facts that Republicans are "crooked" and "liars". Debate both sides and then let the people decide.

Isn't that the democratic way?

aconservative
on Mar 12, 2004
If he can't - perhaps his supporters would enumerate the situations and facts that Republicans are "crooked" and "liars".


The campaign is young. Many months remain for Kerry to attack the GOP. Patience, grasshopper.
on Mar 12, 2004
It's beyond me how people can bash Kerry for saying the word "liar" about some Republicans while defending Bush for saying that "Kerry says one thing and does another" and other words to that effect, which, of course, means "Kerry is a liar." It's no wonder we can't get an unscripted answer out of candidates these days when we insist everything be in Washingtonese.

he has not stated an incident


Wasn't a large portion of the Democratic primary about this very subject?