Perhaps he should have said, “I’m George W. Bush, and I understand this message.” I certainly don’t. Which kid to pick up first? Huh? Is he trying to relate to soccer moms picking up one kid from football and one from orchestra? Kids small enough to physically pick up and hug really didn’t understand what was going on September 11. This gets a whoosh from me. What also got me about this one was Laura’s look on her face- like there was a stagehand squeezing her toe with pliers to ensure that she had that little grimace to her.
Well, I asked my wife and my father (who are both big Bush supporters…go figure) and they both said it was pretty clear to them. According to both (and I asked them separately…hows that for using the scientific method?? 
) what GW is trying to say is in essence which child to console first because of the terrible events of 9/11. Appearently a parent can’t multi-task and console two kids at once. FWIW, I know my oldest child was pretty shaken on Sept 11th and DID actually need some serious consoling, so I suppose this is plausable. I was pretty shaken too and could have used a hug myself.
Personally I think this ad was a flub that no one caught (i.e. the language is strange, and it might have been part of a longer conversation that was edited badly), but maybe its simply keyed to people who support and understand Bush. Who knows? Maybe it was the drugs…
-XT
Perhaps the ad is intentionally ambiguous. Bush comes across as saying whatever you want him to say (unless you are already a firm Bush hater, in which case the ad isn’t targeted at you anyway.) It’s a way of saying key phrases and emotional words (9/11, children, etc) without actually lying.
Eventually, the cuteness wears off and you begin leaving Marine Corps recruitment brochures around the house.
Not really an answer, was it? No, but I didn’t feel any direct personal threat to me and mine. One sincerely doubts that ObL even knows Minneapolis exists, no one else seems to, which is pretty much OK with residents of the Third Coast. Of course, he might have been motivated by a compelling desire to commit some dastardly act on Mary Tyler Moore, but, well, after all…who hasn’t?
No. While I’m offended and disappointed by it, it’s still of pissant proportions relative to the more important issues that’ll affect my decision, like how I perceive his reasons for going into Iraq, the decay of our international relationships, how effectively terrorism is being addressed, Kerry’s character and history, Edward’s competency, etc.
After belly crawling under barbed wire through a mine laden battlefield, Mare whipped a live pineapple at Donald Rumsfeld, and I think she’s gonna make it after all.
PFC Morganstern wasn’t as lucky, but was decorated posthumously for accessorizing her uniform in a fashion that was attractive and inspirational.
Okay, so it is the spot I’m thinking of. Don’t know what to make of her sidelong glances:
“You’re such a stud.”
“What the *%&# are you trying to say?”
“Get on with it! I need to change my tampon.”
“Wow. I could have had a V-8. Or at least a slant six.”
Something like that.
re: “boobies of Justice”
That, alas, sounds like a fair description of our justice system (or a bitchin’ name for a rock band).
Yeah, so? He’s imagining a hypothetical scenerio where one of the kids is in Elementary school, and the other in High School, and deciding which one of the terrified kids to pick up first. He’s describing the psychological effects of terror on the average person which extends beyonds the victims actually killed and injured.
I’m a staunch Kerry supporter, yet I had no difficulties with this ad. It didn’t perplex me in the least bit. There’s a hell of a lot of real things to criticize Bush about, but this isn’t one of them.
Um, sorry, but BULLSHIT. This is some kind of pseudo Sophie’s Choice sniveling litte piece of crap. Invoking images of 9/11 and threats to children as part of a campaign aid, in the guise of some kind of compassion, is very much descriptive of the character of this man, and entirely appropriate fodder for debate and condemnation.
Apart from that, the wording is undeniably very strange.
Regarding your scenario, I realize as a parent that I will always feel great concern for the well-being of my children, but I hope I would not rush to school to pick up my high school age child, unless there was a direct threat on the school, or my child suffered from some kind of disorder.
Maybe the ad would worked better with a Miss Afghanistan scene instead of the Olympics.
I’m willing to grant this is what he’s imagining, even if it’s not clear the way he phrased it. But I refuse to accept this to be the great agony of 9/11. It was the worry of a small segment of Americans, to be sure, but it was not the “great agony” of most parents or most Americans on that day. That’s why it’s stupid to me.
I don’t really blame Bush. I think it’s quite possible that the line was taken out of the context of fleshier, less confusing dialogue. But the people putting the ad together should have had better judgement.
Um, sorry, but your reply is megalomaniac BULLSHIT of the first order. Its your OPINION that the piece was ‘pseudo Sophie’s Choice sniveling’ blah blah blah. I might agree with you, but unlike you I realize thats my fucking OPINION…not fact. And that others might see things just a bit differently than I (or YOU) do.
Sheesh.
-XT
I’d have to agree, any interpretation of these remarks could not rise above opinion, since the words themselves defy simple interpretation. They read as though originally written in Tagalog, translated into Japanese stereo-instruction idiom, then to English via Babblefish.
What interests me is the process more than the result. The Pubbies have spared no expense in the hiring of verbal gunslingers, thier usual verbiage are pored over with Talmudic intensity, to squeeze the last erg of partisan energy without saying something that can be busted by facts.
So how did anything so entirely obtuse get official okie-dokies from God only knows how many shrewdly professional bullshitters (I mean that as a professional description, not necessarily pejorative unless you have some quaint attachment to “truth”)? How many different practitioners of oral flex read this thing? 10? 20? And nobody, not one of them cleared his throat and said “WTF?”
I have a lurking suspicion, which I will openly state is nothing more than that. As I noted, this is an ad aimed at women. This is “soft” Bush, “caring” Bush, he has a wife there to verify his acceptability. Politics is still “guy stuff” when practiced by guys, they don’t pay much attention to this sort of thing, this sort of “warm and cuddly” crap makes thier eyes glaze over. If it were about bona fide “guy stuff”, like throw weights, deployments, and the subtle aracana of making folks dead, they would have gone over it with exacting care.
As it was just a political “chick flick”, they glanced over it, shrugged and said “Sure, whatever.” Why bother with a rigorous examination of the intellectual significance of the ad, when it’s aimed at women?
(Your correspondent hastens to note that he is merely noting behavior and opinions that he does not, by any stretch of the imagination, share or approve of, so help me Goddess, amen.)
Megalomaniac?
It is indeed my opinion. This is why I stated it. It is also my opinion that it is bullshit to state that this is something Bush cannot be criticized for. Where did I claim that this was any more factual than Blalron’s claim? Other than using the word BULLSHIT, how was my posting of my opinion any more megalomaniacal than anyone elses?
I do grow fatigued, however, over being told what I can and cannot criticize Bush for, however. He’s a dickhead. If you want to talk about the economy, let’s talk about the economy. If you want to talk about bald-faced abuse of 9/11 imagery, let’s do that. If you want to give him a smackdown for the Shifties false claims, bring it on. Hell, if you want to debate what the implications of his lack of response on the day we were attacked, let’s do it.
The only thing I will be wary of is being flanked. Don’t let him entirely rule the message, but don’t let the smear machine get the better of your flanks, either.
And let’s face it: will anyone who is really undecided at this point honestly be swayed by a discussion of the economy, and whether Bush can be blamed for the loss of jobs and lackluster recovery? Are they suddenly going to sit up and take notice if you discuss the appointment of industrial lobbyists to all positions of environmental protection or other watchdog posts? Will they suddenly realize that, unless they are rich, they are being shafted by Bush’s tax plan? Come on, anyone who has not paid attention up until now is going to be swayed by the weakest crap. Don’t let any of it stick.