Doubtless someone will try to discourage you from this course of action**.** Frankly, although I’m sorely tempted, I won’t try that. However, I would urge you to think very carefully about the consequences of such an action. Great decisions should not be rushed**!**
No, I saw it on TV first too. Still couldn’t figure out what kind of “pick up” he meant and where the agony comes in. I still think it’s poorly-worded.
Even if he meant “pick up from school”, I still don’t think it belongs in the ad. How many parents were rushing to pick up their kids from school? I know in the NYC area there were lots, but the vast majority of Americans were not doing this, right? And the number of people picking kids up from multiple schools is even smaller.
Most importantly, picking up the kids is kinda trivial to the greater agony of searching for lost loved ones and watching people leap from buildings. No one died because a parent picked up the wrong kid first. If he’s going to capitalize on 9/11, at least point out the real pain.
Unfortunately, saying “ignore the smirking monkey in the White House” is probably a fair bit off message.
Assuming arguendo that 9/11 isn’t off-limits automatically, if a candidate promises that he won’t use it in political advertising then it becomes off-limits. Bush promised that he wouldn’t be using 9/11 in his campaign ads. He already broke that promise months ago so this is just par for his particular course.
It doesn’t get any clearer. The video is Bush yammering in the foreground with Laura sitting at his side, silent. The ad makes no fucking sense.
Let’s not forget that this isn’t the first time the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign exploited 9/11 for their ads. Or have we already forgotten the commercial from last March, featuring firefighters removing a flag-draped body from the rubble of the WTC?
Maybe the ad made a lot more sense, but was totally unfair and ludicrous and they would have been sued and lost the election, so they cut out a bunch of stuff, and ran it anyway. So now they won’t get sued (but it makes no sense).
If this is about picking up your kids from school, wouldn’t it make sense to pick up the closest one first? 
And on that note, I’m moving this to Great Debates.
And, why agonize about this? In the case of terrorist actions, if there is a danger to your kids, how could the parent know which, or if any, were in danger? Plus it might make sense not to pick them up at all, as where they currently are may be safer then where you will take them.
I saw it last night myself. Seemed to me like a blatant attempt to work 9/11 in some context or other into the ad. When I think of the tragedy of September 11th, worried parents picking up children from school is hardly the image I get. I found it ridiculous and offensive–are we so stupid that in order to win our votes, he just has to keep saying “Terror-freedom-turn the corner-September 11”? What are we, sheep?
I’d say the translation is simple:
“THEY’RE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN!!! WET YOUR PANTS IN FEAR!!! NOBODY CAN SAVE YOU EXCEPT ME!!!”
It’s been a pretty consistent message from the White House. The only thing that can save us from terror has to date been the Patriot Act, TIPS, tax cuts, deficit spending, nuclear proliferation, Patriot Act II, invading Iraq, and sending the Statue of Liberty back to France.
I’d think you’d pick up the youngest first. But agreed, it makes no sense. But what really got me was this
Except to go after the person who masterminded it rather than someone who had nothing to do with it, huh? Is this still trying to draw the Iraq - 9/11 connection?
I could understand if the ad were being shown only in NYC. But I’ve seen it here in Tennessee. To the best of my knowledge, schools here did not close early that day.
I arranged that day to be with my grandchildren when they came home from school at their regular time. My purpose was to reassure them as best I could and then distract them. It never occured to me or their mother that they would be dismissed early.
Often public school systems are too poor to afford separate school buses for high school, middle school and elementary school. It would be impossible to just dismiss the schools immediately.
I cannot imagine the chaos if all parents had tried to pick up their children in all schools at the same time. Is that what Bush is suggesting is normal when part of the country is under a terrorist attack?
I think that he has made an assumption about what actually went on that day.
I saw the ad here in So Cal, and I know there wasn’t agony over picking up children from school down here on 9/11.
Regardless of what it says, the meaning to me is clear: “Vote for me, or terrorists will kill your children.”
I took the disputed phrase to mean that you’d have to go pick up your kids and get them to a safe place, presumably your house, and you’d have to pick one up first, leaving the other to die in a hellish inferno, etc.
The Sept. 11 shit doesn’t bother me nearly so much as the “children” thing. He hasn’t reached the valley that the governor of my old Kentucky home, Ernie Fletcher, dug in the last election by putting pictures of random children on his campaign bumper stickers, but Fletcher also never suggested that voting for him would protect your children from physical harm. It’s not a long way from this to “Vote for Me or I Shoot This Dog”.
The words
make sort of a poetic justification for the president sitting on his butt in that Florida schoolroom for many minutes after hearing about the second plane. He did it so as not to cause the children undue pain, because he cares so much for America’s future. Of course it doesn’t make sense if you look at it rationally, it’s an emotional appeal.
Actually, I recall some news stories after 9/11 that talked about this very situation - someone from the WTC (or near it) survived the disaster, but lived in an evacuation area. She had to get both kids from different schools, and at the time she had no idea if there were going to be attacks. It’s probably a story like that he’s referencing.
The other possibility is that he was talking about getting kids from the day care centers that were in and around the World Trade Center.
But whoever scripted and/or edited that ad should be smacked. The way it’s worded is confusing.
I saw this ad just last night and remember scratching my head and turning to my wife and saying essentially WTF??? The first thing that popped into my mind was “I wonder if he is referencing some obscure actual event and is assuming we know what the hell he’s talking about…or if he’s on some serious drugs and if he will share”.
Very poorly written ad IMHO. Even my wife who is a Bush supporter was basically looking puzzled.
-XT
See, when I heard it I heard “I can’t imagine the great agony of a mom or dad…” and my first thought was…“seeing their kids go off to risk their life in a war.” And I thought, wow, why would Bush be mentioning that (the guy who doesn’t even want pictures of the coffins coming home).
And of course I was right. He wasn’t going to mention that in a million years. He’s just going to indulge in the creepiest sort of fear mongering…
Yup.
Never mind that none of those kids were in danger then. The point is we were afraid they were then so let’s remember that and base are decisions of that…and ignore the part (as it was the first thing I thought about) where the real children at risk (well, to a parent, a 19 year old is still their child :)) are the ones being sent in to battle.
The phrase “a new low” seems to be getting worn out.