Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
Support the TDP! |
March 04, 2004Firefighters and Families Angry with Bush AdBy Byron LaMastersIt's no surprise, but President Bush is exploiting 9/11 for political gain. The San Jose Mercury News reports:
George W. Bush is exploiting 9/11 for political gain. It's an outrage and we need to speak out. Posted by Byron LaMasters at March 4, 2004 07:21 PM | TrackBack
Comments
Good idea. 9-11 never happened is the new Democratic slogan. That's the reason Bin Laden wants the Democrats to win. This is the reason Bush is going to be reelected. Democrats do not have an answer to the fact that America's enemies want Bush to lose. Bin Laden, Saddam, Taliban, Iran, Arafat, Hamas, Hezbolla, Jihadis and Arab dictators all want Kerry to win. Bush has utterly devastated them. They know they'll get more of the same if he's reelected. That's the simple truth. Look at the oil price. The OPEC and its band of assorted tyrants and enemies of America is keeping it artificially high to make sure the economy and the labor market do not recover. Just to anger the voters not to vote for Georgie the Tyrant Killer. To my surprise some democratic voters are falling in their trap. Who are electing the president of the US, Americans or America's enemies? A vote for Kerry is a vote for the enemy. Someone still has his weekend furlough from the nuthouse . . . . . . Actually, as indicated by the victims mentioned in these articles, they do not want Bush elected either. Nor do a majority of our friends & allies. Nor, presumably, do the people who voted for Gore in 2000, who outnumbered the people who voted for Bush. I suppose they are all un-American terrorists too by this nut's logic. Mr. Vandal is an example of the despicable act of trying to link a polical foe with a bunch of murderous terrorists more political gain. It just shows that Republicans have no shame. Posted by: WhoMe? at March 4, 2004 07:40 PMRepublicans have no shame? Only a liberal could be shameless and hypocritical enough to deny the truth of the matter and acknowledge that Bin Laden and 9/11 are the direct result of Democrats and Clinton refusing to take action against Al Qaeda when they had the chance in the 90's. The article quoted here CLEARLY states that the people complaining SUPPORT KERRY and do not support Bush. Its a political decision on their part - big whoop, and it is not newsworthy. Not to mention the hypocrisy of Democrats and the media exploiting the emotions (... brought several victims' relatives to tears) of those who claim their emotions have been exploited by Bush in the ads. Double standards again... Posted by: Chris at March 4, 2004 08:53 PMI'm all for Bush alienating as many people as possible. And as for him exploiting 9-11 in a gross way, he's been doing that all along after oh, December 2001. Posted by: Melissa at March 4, 2004 09:16 PM"Only a liberal could be shameless and hypocritical enough to deny the truth of the matter and acknowledge that Bin Laden and 9/11 are the direct result of Democrats and Clinton refusing to take action against Al Qaeda when they had the chance in the 90's." Clinton warned Bush, Bush had intelligence (i.e. CIA, etc, not his own) and if you bothered to check the timeline of that morning, he sat in a classroom reading about goats as 3,000 innocent people were burned and crushed to death. He knew damn well that it was going to happen. Yet, he chose to IGNORE the problem. It happened on Bush's watch. On Clinton's watch, many terrorist plots were foiled, including a plot to blow up LAX. And Gore attempted to pass legislation to improve airport security, but was stopped by the Republican-controlled legislature. Pass the blame all you want, but here is the fact: 3,000 people are dead, and politicizing their deaths is unconscienable. Should we forget about 9/11? No, absolutely not. But using footage of remains being carried out for political gain is the action of a hard-hearted bastard. The same one who sold photos of him in Air Force One that day for fundraising. The same one that wants to cut funding of the heroes of 9/11--the first-response teams. The same one who cut pay for the military fighting a war which he promoted on a lie. The same one who will stop at nothing to gain the White House. BTW, if Clinton is the guilty party, why is it that he and Al Gore have agreed to the 9/11 probe interviews, and Bush has been playing hide and seek with the committee? He's in trouble and he knows it. Chris, "Bin Laden and 9/11 are the direct result of Democrats and Clinton refusing to take action against Al Qaeda when they had the chance in the 90's." ABSOLUTELY WRONG!!!! Another attempt to smear Clinton. Here is the TRUTH: Shortly after Clinton took office, the World Trade Centers were bombed. This lit a proverbial fire under Clinton's ass to do something about international terrorism and HE DID. He beefed up the anti-terrorist sections of Federal Law Enforcement. When Clinton asked for more funds for the task, Republican Senator Hatch (Chair of the Commitee that oversees federal law enforcement agencies) fought him. Clinton's FBI, CIA, and National Intelligence apparatus thwarted Al Quaeda again and again. His team fended off attacks to blow up bridges and tunnels in NYC, to blow up multiple simultaneous planes over the Pacific, an assasination attempt on the Pope, a plan to blow up LAX and the Space Needle in Seattle during the 2000 millenia celebration, and the list goes on and on. The two plots that unfortunately succeeded were the USS Cole bombing and the two embassy bombings in East Africa. No one is perfect, but he put together one hell of a record on this and fought it relentlessly and with success. All this was achieved despite every attempt by the Republican Right Wing to weaken our National Security by distracting our Commander in Chief with a voyeuristic sex hunt. . . . . . and then Bush took over. When Bush, Inc. came in, fighting international terrorism was not its national security priority. Bush's National Security team had a single priority to the exlcusion of all others: MISSLE DEFENSE SHIELD. In no time, fighting international terrorism took a back seat to a multi billion dollar boobdoggle, which would not amount to a hill of beans improvement in National Security, but would sure as hell make Bush's supporters stinking rich (as if they were not already stinking rich). Well, the rest is history. FBI field agents reported suspicious behavior of foreign nationals enrolling in flight schools and not wanting to land planes, as well as other pieces of intelligence indicating terrorist activity in the making. They sent this information up the chain of command, and these pleas fell on deaf ears. The upper echelons of our National Security Apparatus, now in the hands of Bush appointees, were to busy pushing Missle Defense to worry about Al Quaeda. Then 9-11 happened - no coincidence at all. Posted by: WhoMe? at March 4, 2004 09:20 PMGlad to see that my comments struck a nerve. We can debate Clinton's apathy / hawkish attitude to Al Qaeda all night long. I won't budge, and neither will you. Everybody will realize that its just politics kids, I lay blame, you shift blame, I shift blame again, you shift again. Learn to live with the fact that people will not always agree with you now, or you'll spend way too much time arguing in life and have high blood pressure. =) By the way, I love the conspiracy theory angle on weakening our national security with a "voyeuristic sex hunt" (I had no idea that the evil Sen. Hatch had planted Ms. Lewinsky in the White House). =P I'll reiterate the main part of my past post, and leave it at this. The point of this Mercury News article is hardly newsworthy - Democrats, admitted Kerry-supporters, and the media... all exploiting people's emotions, in order to blame Bush for exploiting people's emotions in these TV ads. Politics... pure and simple. And hypocritical. =) Posted by: Chris at March 4, 2004 09:32 PMWhat a whitewash. If Clinton had used his balls for something else than looking for a nookie in the White House he could have done what Bush did. Destroy Bin Laden and the Taliban in it's layer in Afghanistan well before 2001. If Clinton wasn't weak on terror 9-11 wouldn't have happened. Kerry is the same. Voting for Kerry wwill strengthen the enemy. Posted by: Ricky Vandal at March 4, 2004 09:36 PMWhat a whitewash. If Clinton had used his balls for something else than looking for a nookie in the White House he could have done what Bush did." Typical Republican. Sooo obsessed with all things sexual and having to do with Clinton that they are able to link a terrorist-caused mass murder with Clinton's sex life. So he excites you and you can't get enough of him. Hey, I don't blame ya--that's one thing we have in common. Hopefully the only thing. BTW, as I mentioned in another post, it was not just Orrin Hatch involved in a --yes-- voyeuristic sex hunt. Ken Starr was offered a job at Hustler, since Larry Flynt said that the Starr Report "was the best porn [he'd] ever read." You guys are obsessed--go get the help you need. Posted by: Leodem at March 4, 2004 10:34 PMSo if Bush is so good on terror, what do you GOPers make of today's reports about Mr. Zarqawi and how Bush missed several opportunities to get him??? Posted by: Jason Young at March 4, 2004 10:36 PMhahaha... whitewash... lol... coming from the individual who has made two consecutive posts embellishing and elaborating on the sexual exploits of Clinton and who has even thrown in the obligatory Larry Flynt reference... why bother responding? I love it!!!! Posted by: Chris at March 4, 2004 10:39 PMBush destroy Al Qaeda? Last time I looked, we were getting ambushed in Bagdad every day. All Bush did was stir a hornet's nest. The terrorists are re-forming networks in Afgahanastan. By creating massive instability, he left the region more dangerous than he found it. 9/11 didn't happen on Clinton's watch for good reason. By the way, you have to laugh at the whole, "Terrorists support Kerry" thing. As if there is a Capitol Gang roundtable of Ben Laden and his minions debating with Robert Novak and Pat Buchanan about Kerry's prospects over Bush. Here's a newsflash guys - they hate all of us, Bush, Kerry, and all the rest too. They are not taking sides. They want us ALL to go down. Posted by: WhoMe? at March 4, 2004 10:42 PMhahaha... whitewash... lol... coming from the individual who has made two consecutive posts embellishing and elaborating on the sexual exploits of Clinton and who has even thrown in the obligatory Larry Flynt reference... why bother responding? I love it!!!! ? Two consecutive? Learn to count. Elaborating? Do you know what that word means? No,I think not. I'm not the one obsessed with Clinton's sex life. Does the Larry Flynt reference bother you or leave you bothered? And why did you bother responding since I am not worth it? Like I said, of all the posts here, you Republicans respond to the sexual. You're proving my theory--keep it up! I love it, too--there are many intelligent posts here (not from you), yet every time, you ALL come back to the sex references, regardless of the discourse and debate. I'm done with my blog tease--go work off that nervous energy and post something worthwhile, reponding to something worth the bother. Posted by: Leodem at March 4, 2004 10:51 PMNow, is this the example that Clinton set during the "voyeuristic sex hunt"? Insults? Personal attacks? I thought liberals had been taught better from that whole nasty mess - to step back and remain above the pettiness of Republicans... =) Is this what it takes to build a village? =) Seriously, on behalf of Republicans everywhere who only respond to the sexual, thanks for taking a few moments to lower yourself and save once again bringing us back to the "discourse and debate" of the Bush ads with your "blog tease"... hahaha Also, thanks for the tip, I'll be off looking up the meaning of the word 'elaborate' since apparently I've been misinformed since grade school, and it suddenly means "to totally disregard the 'discourse and debate' at hand. =P Posted by: Chris at March 4, 2004 11:45 PMThis is one of BOR's least intellectually stimulating and enlightening threads I have read. To make things interesting, let's get back to the ad in question with a pop quiz. What do the Bush ad and Lloyd Doggett have in common? Posted by: notgonnatell at March 5, 2004 12:11 AMBoth sides of this absolutely sicken me. Bush uses the death of 3,000 people for a political ad (gee, I thought it was a tough day for all of us there but I guess it was only the Republicans that saw 3,000 of their countrymen crushed in rubble). Then the media pounces on the story and Democrats kick and scream about "playing politics" when they are doing the same. Then both sides blame the other for 9/11. Is everyone so wrapped up in their hatred for the other side that they leave nothing sacred? Posted by: Jeff at March 5, 2004 07:57 AMThis was of course planned in advance by Dem operatives. They identified 9/11 victims who voted Dem (easy to do in NY), contacted them, and coached them on what to say and when to say it. Planned for months. Posted by: TM at March 5, 2004 08:15 AMInteresting. If firefighters support Kerry and don't like the ad, it must obviously be purely political. Ask a pertinent question, Chris: Why are the fire fighters supporting Kerry anyway? Would it be that Kerry has supported them? Would it be that they think Bush has reneged on promises to help them? Please note, too, that there quotes from individuals who lost friends and family on 9/11. Calling their motivations "political" is at least as dishonest as you accuse Democrats of being. As for Clinton's supposedly not taking action, remember that even when he struck at Iraq, Republicans mouthpieces criticized and cried "Wag the dog!" because they needed to know the details of where his penis had been. If Clinton failed to act (which is a tenuous argument to begin with), conservatives share no small part of that blame. Even talking about Bush, you conservatives can't resist carrying on about Clinton, your raison d'etre. Posted by: Tx Bubba at March 5, 2004 11:28 AM"Also, thanks for the tip, I'll be off looking up the meaning of the word 'elaborate' since apparently I've been misinformed since grade school, and it suddenly means "to totally disregard the 'discourse and debate' at hand. =P" Tip? Hmm.... "and it suddenly means "to totally disregard the 'discourse and debate' at hand. =P" Um, you are the one who keeps getting on me about Clinton......I initially merely mentioned him...
All of your "facts" on your little posts on this thread have been debunked by other members. Instead of responding to them, you attack me on a trivial, frivolous, lowbrow topic. I pointed out the obvious--it was a sex war with Clinton from day one. I would really rather discuss other things, such as this farce of a war, the sorry state of our economy, and the fact that we have horrible relations with many countries now. I would rather rather discuss the blatant opportunism displayed by the Bush administration regarding Sept. 11th, as they and their friends have profitted from this tragedy and the war. Even the duct tape suggestion was a form of war profiteering--go look it up, while you are looking for a dictionary. Most posters at BOR like for threads to remain at least partly constant, so regardless of any further little comments in my direction, I am going to cease discussion of your obsession with Clinton's nether regions, and stay on the topic. WhoMe?, Jason Young, and TX Bubba have made some excellent, thought-provoking posts on this thread, (they deserve for us to stay on topic) and I would in fact like to quote TX Bubba as my final say: "Even talking about Bush, you conservatives can't resist carrying on about Clinton, your raison d'etre," the gist of what I would like to say to one and all. (That means roughly 'reason for being' in case you were looking for a Freedom Dictionary and passed up the French one.) "What do the Bush ad and Lloyd Doggett have in common?" I don't know, notgonnatell. But I have a feeling you do. The ad was produced by Mark McKinnon (former Daily Texan editor) who served as Doggett's press secretary during Doggett's 1984 campaign for the U.S. Senate. Kind of like that "12 degrees of Kevin Bacon" game, huh? Posted by: notgonnatell at March 5, 2004 02:55 PMOne more thing for defenders of Bush to consider: As reported by the Associated Press on 1/23/03, President Bush said "I have no ambition whatsoever to use this [9/11] as a political issue." What does "I" mean? Posted by: Tx Bubba at March 5, 2004 03:05 PM"The ad was produced by Mark McKinnon (former Daily Texan editor) who served as Doggett's press secretary during Doggett's 1984 campaign for the U.S. Senate. Kind of like that "12 degrees of Kevin Bacon" game, huh?" Not really. McKinnon, if I am not mistaken, was once a Democrat, and left politics only to come back and work for Bush. Actually, due to Bush's rather bi-partisan nature in TX (sorta...) many Dems worked for Bush, including the woman who allegedly mailed the infamous debate tape th the Gore campaign--she was a former University Democrat. But I believe that McKinnon is a Republican now. Doggett and Bush using the same guy for media (16 years apart!) HARDLY puts Doggett in the Bush camp. If you wish to impugn Doggett, well--this is hardly damning evidence. Sorry to disappoint. Just give 'em enough rope... I posted here on the same topic. HAHA! It's so funny coming to these liberal cook websites. Now that the x-files aren't on I need some sort of conspiracy entertainment. Oh, I bet you heard the news by now. And this is funny because it fits in. NBC aired the CIA tapes clearly showing Bin Ladin in the training camps. Real time too. Bill Clinton had his chance right then and there to kill Bin Ladin. I know that makes you dems sad. But it would have been a good thin. Dems. Nice Presidential candidate by the way. You got yourself a true spokeman for your silly pro bin ladin cause. Posted by: slickwilly@clinton.com at March 18, 2004 08:15 PM
Post a comment
|
About Us
About BOR
Advertising Policies Byron L. - Founder Karl-Thomas M. - Owner Andrea M. - Contact Andrew D. - Contact Damon M. - Contact Drew C. - Contact Jim D. - Contact John P. - Contact Katie N. - Contact Kirk M. - Contact Marcus C. - Contact Matt H. - Contact Phillip M. - Contact Vince L. - Contact Zach N. - Conact
Donate
Archives
November 2005
October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003
Recent Entries
Home Again
Greg Abbott gets a gold star Bush's Exit Strategy Courts Rule on School Finance Bill and Bell: More Than Just an "I" In Other Gubernatorial News... Where To See Your 2006 Democratic Hopefuls Just plain wrong. Person of the Year Sen. Eltife Speaks Out on School Reform Voting Rights Act Kabuki Dallas Democrats Preparing for 2006 Some Additions Phoney Baloney BORed: The Google Never Lies The Key Parrothead Demographic Rep. Coleman Issues Letter to John Sharp New Name in the Mix for TDP Chairman RPT Gets Deferred Prosecution Conversations with Bob Gammage
Categories
2004: Dem Convention (79)
2004: Elections (571) 2005: Elections (13) 2006: Texas Elections (154) 2006: US Elections (21) 2008: Presidential Election (9) About Burnt Orange (147) Around Campus (175) Austin City Limits (228) Axis of Idiots (34) Ballot Propositions (56) Blogs and Blogging (153) BOR Humor (69) BOR Sports (78) BORed (24) Budget (17) Burnt Orange Endorsements (15) Congress (47) Dallas City Limits (94) Elsewhere in Texas (40) Get into the Action! (11) GLBT (164) Houston City Limits (43) International (107) Intraparty (50) National Politics (585) On the Issues (13) Other Stuff (48) Politics for Dummies (11) Pop Culture (68) Redistricting (257) San Antonio City Limits (6) Social Security (31) Texas Lege (181) Texas Politics (770) The Economy, Stupid (18) The Media (8)
BOR Edu.
University of Texas
University Democrats
BOR News
The Daily Texan
The Statesman The Chronicle
BOR Politics
DNC
DNC Blog: Kicking Ass DSCC DSCC Blog: From the Roots DCCC DCCC Blog: The Stakeholder Texas Dems Travis County Dems Dallas Young Democrats U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett State Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos State Rep. Dawnna Dukes State Rep. Elliott Naishtat State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez State Rep. Mark Strama
Traffic Ratings
Alexa Rating
Marketleap Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem Technoranti Link Cosmos Blogstreet Blogback
Polling
American Research Group
Annenberg Election Survey Gallup Polling Report Rasmussen Reports Survey USA Zogby
Texas Stuff
A Little Pollyana
Austin Bloggers D Magazine DFW Bogs DMN Blog In the Pink Texas Inside the Texas Capitol The Lasso Pol State TX Archives Quorum Report Daily Buzz George Strong Political Analysis Texas Law Blog Texas Monthly Texas Observer
TX Dem Blogs
100 Monkeys Typing
Alandwilliams.com Alt 7 Annatopia Appalachia Alumni Association Barefoot and Naked BAN News Betamax Guillotine Blue Texas Border Ass News The Daily DeLay The Daily Texican DemLog Dos Centavos Drive Democracy Easter Lemming Esoterically Get Donkey Greg's Opinion Half the Sins of Mankind Jim Hightower Houtopia Hugo Zoom Latinos for Texas Off the Kuff Ones and Zeros Panhandle Truth Squad Aaron Peña's Blog People's Republic of Seabrook Pink Dome The Red State Rhetoric & Rhythm Rio Grande Valley Politics Save Texas Reps Skeptical Notion Something's Got to Break Southpaw Stout Dem Blog The Scarlet Left Tex Prodigy ToT View From the Left Yellow Doggeral Democrat
TX GOP Blogs
Beldar Blog
Blogs of War Boots and Sabers Dallas Arena Jessica's Well Lone Star Times Publius TX Safety for Dummies The Sake of Arguement Slightly Rough
Daily Reads
&c.
ABC's The Note Atrios BOP News Daily Kos Media Matters MyDD NBC's First Read Political State Report Political Animal Political Wire Talking Points Memo Wonkette Matthew Yglesias
College Blogs
CDA Blog
Get More Ass (Brown) Dem Apples (Harvard) KU Dems U-Delaware Dems UNO Dems Stanford Dems
GLBT Blogs
American Blog
BlogActive Boi From Troy Margaret Cho Downtown Lad Gay Patriot Raw Story Stonewall Dems Andrew Sullivan
More Reads
Living Indefinitely
Blogroll Burnt Orange!
BOR Webrings
< ? Texas Blogs # >
<< ? austinbloggers # >> « ? MT blog # » « ? MT # » « ? Verbosity # »
Election Returns
CNN 1998 Returns
CNN 2000 Returns CNN 2002 Returns CNN 2004 Returns state elections 1992-2005 bexar county elections collin county elections dallas county elections denton county elections el paso county elections fort bend county elections galveston county elections harris county elections jefferson county elections tarrant county elections travis county elections
Texas Media
abilene
abilene reporter news alpine alpine avalanche amarillo amarillo globe news austin austin american statesman austin chronicle daily texan online keye news (cbs) kut (npr) kvue news (abc) kxan news (nbc) news 8 austin beaumont beaumont enterprise brownsville brownsville herald college station the battalion (texas a&m) corpus christi corpus christi caller times kris news (fox) kztv news (cbs) crawford crawford lone star iconoclast dallas-fort worth dallas morning news dallas observer dallas voice fort worth star-telegram kdfw news (fox) kera (npr) ktvt news (cbs) nbc5 news wfaa news (abc) del rio del rio news herald el paso el paso times kdbc news (cbs) kfox news (fox) ktsm (nbc) kvia news (abc) fredericksburg standard-radio post galveston galveston county daily news harlingen valley morning star houston houston chronicle houston press khou news (cbs) kprc news (nbc) ktrk news (abc) kerrville kerrville daily times laredo laredo morning times lockhart lockhart post-register lubbock lubbock avalanche journal lufkin lufkin daily news marshall marshall news messenger mcallen the monitor midland - odessa midland reporter telegram odessa american san antonio san antonio express-news seguin seguin gazette-enterprise texarkana texarkana gazette tyler tyler morning telegraph victoria victoria advocate waco kxxv news (abc) kwtx news (cbs) waco tribune-herald weslaco krgv news (nbc) statewide texas cable news texas triangle
World News
ABC News All Africa News Arab News Atlanta Constitution-Journal News.com Australia BBC News Bloomberg Boston Globe CBS News Chicago Tribune Christian Science Monitor CNN Denver Post FOX News Google News The Guardian Inside China Today International Herald Tribune Japan Times LA Times Mexico Daily Miami Herald MSNBC New Orleans Times-Picayune New York Times El Pais (Spanish) Salon San Francisco Chronicle Seattle Post-Intelligencer Slate Times of India Toronto Star Wall Street Journal Washington Post
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2b1 |