If after reviewing the ad for compliance with the rules and with the codicile that it still had the “Sponsored by moveon.org” statement afterwards, and moveon posted it…
Then of course they would have sponsored it. Rather stupidly, I think, but that’s hardly a surprise.
No need. You do my work for me. Having backed off of “abandoned” and having backed off your previous arguments, and shored them up with the usual bluster, I feel no need to pursue your retreat.
Given Scylla’s last post, i will relent and modify my position somewhat. I will accept that the RNC may not have been as disingenuous as i first thought. The problem, it seems, is that i gave their intelligence too much credit.
You see, i assumed that when a smart person visits a website (like MoveOn’s) and is told that there are a whole heap of video clips there, each one having been submitted by a member of the general public, and is further told that these ads have not been prepared by the website, but are being hosted there for the specific purpose of allowing the public to vote for their favorites, and is also informed that the votes of the public and not the opinions of the website’s owners will determine the fate of these ads, that the person in question would realize that none of the ads was actually produced by the website’s organizers. Further, i would also expect someone with no ulterior motive to accept that the sponsor of a contest is not responsible for sponsoring the content of the entries into that contest.
Sure, they are responsible the appearance of the ads on their site, but they have admitted as much, and apologized for their oversight. I would have more reason to believe that the RNC acted in good faith if they had come out and said “Hey, these appeared to have slipped through your screening process” instead of levelling accusations that implied that the ads were actually produced by MoveOn itself.
I’ve already stated that i believe that MoveOn contributed to their own problems here. As i suggested before, they should have screened only for legality, and let their members vote on the ads.
Oh, and what elucidator said, too.
Actually, they’d be stupid to do anything other than what they did.
Why on earth should the RNC cut Moveon any slack on this?
The purpose of the contest is basically “beat up on the RNC’s guy.”
Why the hell should the RNC be nice about it when Moveon screws the pooch?
It’s also a sound political move. There’s been a lot of noises from the Dems coming pretty close to the line, comparing the current administration to Hitler’s Germany.
It’s a good idea for the RNC to take the opportunity to show that this shit just isn’t acceptable.
Now that this is an issue, the Dems have to be careful about this, or the Pubbies can say “See? They are comparing us to Hitler?”
Actually, that just primes the pump, “disingenuos”-wise. They further would have us believe that the Democratic contenders owe them some sort of apology/disclaimer as well. Which is, of course, utter rot of the “Have you stopped beating your wife?” variety.
Now, if those two ads had somehow made the cut, that is to say, if MoveOn’s participants had agreed with and approved of the sentiments therein flung, you would have a case, you could say that enough of MoveOn’s collective opinion was such that these ads were worthy of futher consideration.
But they didn’t, did they, buckaroo? Those ads didn’t make the cut. Not like that really clever one with the Windows motif, you know, that one? Its over at http://moveon.org/...oh, I did mention that…never mind. Its not as cool as the one with the kids, anyway. Or that one with J Lo all nekkid, and stuff.
And, as has already been pointed out by me and by others in this thread, the RNC has nothing to say when conservatives compare liberals and Democrats to Nazis, as happened only days ago in the New York Post, to name one of numerous examples.
Interesting that this doesn’t seem to exercise your sense of moral outrage.
At least i and most other leftists in this thread have had the decency to say that, no matter their relationship to MoveOn, the ads themselves are stupid and unacceptable.
There’s also the diversion of analysts and filed officers from Afghanistan to Iraq. There was a flurry of articles on this back in August. Here’s one of the more polite ones: Bin Laden hunt suffers as Iraq draws agents
Most of the finalists are fairly lame and predictable. But the “Child’s Play” one is great, and “Desktop,” “Leave No Billionaire Behind,” and “Bush’s Repair Shop” are all pretty good.
The New York Post is not the RNC’s website, nor is it an arm of the RNC. That being said, and since this seems to be important to you, I think comparisons of Democrats to Nazis is pretty crappy.
Listen, Mhendo. I mean this sincerely. You don’t have to look for something to feel superior about. Moveon.org did something stupid.
The ad clearly chafes at you because I guess you feel that it legitimately sucks and distracts from what you feel are the the legitimate good qualities in the Democrats’ stance.
Probably you feel that it demeans Democrats in general by the association with such a recognized website.
The fact that this bothers you speaks well of you. It says you’re not a nut.
What doesn’t speak well is trying to spin a way to make the Republicans look bad for taking umbrage with this characterization.
You don’t have to try to find a silver lining or a justification for a feeling of moral superiority.
If you feel your stance as a Democrat is superior, than it’s above this kind of bullshit, and you don’t have to apologize for it.
Grant that it is bad and wholly bad and move on. Don’t look or try to create a mitigating offense.
Remember this is politics. All you have to do is wait fifteen minutes and some prominent Republican will do some horribly atrocious thing all on his own and without your help.
In the meantime though, your making a pretty classic mistake. You’re trying to attack Republicans for their response while still agreeing that the ads were a shitty attack in general.
It’s a pretty schizophrenic stance. It’s tough to say “I’m sorry.” and “Screw You!” in the same sentence. It seems a little peevish. This is moveon’s mistake in my opinion. They just should have accepted the mistake and apologized instead of attacking back at the same time.
You see how it makes them look. You’ve identified it as a mistake as well, IIRC. Don’t make it yourself.
Don’t look to qualify the error with an offsetting attack against the offended party.
Well, then, lots of noises must mean lots of cites, mustn’t it? In your haste, you neglected to include them. Here is your first opportunity.
Minty, you ignorant peckerwood, that’s “Child’s PAY” not “Play”! See there, that’s one of them witticisms. Though I agree it is one of the better, that “Desktop” as well. But you rather rudely didn’t include the URL link. Allow me to gracefully cover your lapse in protocol: thats http://www.bushin30seconds.org/
No need to thank me, always glad to help.
I figured everyone had it bookmarked by now.
What a moron you are. By that same token, MoveON.org is not the DNC’s website nor is it an arm of the DNC. So perhaps you and the RNC should shut the hell up about the video.
I get the sense sometimes that you just do this to be a pain in the ass.
“Hey I know, I’ll go ask Scylla to chase cites. I know he hates being asked to do that over obvious general statements. Watch me ask. It will piss him off and it will be fun!”
But if it will make you happy, I will go to google and type “Bush Nazi comparisons”
http://www.hollandsentinel.com/stories/090603/opi_090603017.shtml
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0310/S00193.htm
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg090403.asp
http://www.slantpoint.com/mt-arx/000415.html
http://www.elevendayempire.com/movabletype/archives/005776.html
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/03/39286.php
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forum_archive_html/DCForumID12/141.html
http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/uci-peace-justice/2003-October/001180.html
http://www.osusentinel.com/hatemail.php
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/09/DTel200902.html
http://www.madkane.com/wwwboard/messages/2771.html
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1019407/posts
http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Holocaust/holocaust_bush.htm
http://www.cursor.org/stories/fascismxv.php
http://www.nogw.com/nazibush.html
http://www.uksociety.org/us_germany_parallels_1.htm
http://www.bigcountryfordean.com/_reqdis/00000003.htm
http://dean-justinspoliticaljournal.cafeprogressive.com/bush_and_hitler.htm
Will that do ok for you?
How silly of me. Moveon has no political affiliation. So sorry I forgot.
Are the elderly better off now than they were under the prior Administration?
Talk about going out on a limb! Vocal support for increasing educational funds! How do you think it would have played had he opposed the bill?
And if I am not mistaken, he already has, by FAR, the largest campaign budget – mostly corporate funding. So how does this affect him?
Shamelessly courting the Hispanic vote. It’s NO ammnesty. Better read up on the details. Plain politics.
*Great! I’ll feel sooo much more secure next time I am mugged at gunpoint – and I was while living in your country. Now I’ll only need to duck the first ten rounds aimed at my head. Provided one can keep track of such things of course.
Pheew! Feel safer already.*
While actively pushing for policies that disallow gay marriage/equal rights. Such courage!
Not much of a choice. Scientists in the field would have simply packed and moved elsewhere. Intolerance and ignorance might delay science, but now a days, thankfully, it won’t stop it.
Tell me more about this, please.
Says who? No one understood a word he tried saying when he visited Spain and to this day he calls his Spanish poodle Ansar. Of course, nothing odd about the aforementioned as we are all aware he has the same problem in his native tongue.
*Alas, were Dubya a real footy fan I’d finally have to give him credit for something.
Anyhoo, thanks for trying, but I find elucidator’s list much more convincing.*
Scylla, you make the mistake, rather typical of many on both sides of the two-party system in the United States, of assuming that my criticism of Republicans, and my support for certain goals of groups such as MoveOn, must make me a Democrat. Not the case.
The ad does not “chafe at” me at all, at least not in the sense that you seem to assume. You throw in a rather backhanded compliment, saying that the reason i dislike the ad is that i “feel that it legitimately sucks and distracts from…the legitimate good qualities in the Democrats’ stance.” This implies that, if the ad didn’t hurt the Democrats, i wouldn’t be opposed to it at all. This is offensive on two levels: first, it assumes that i have only a pragmatic and not a principled opposition to comparing Bush with Hitler; and second, it assumes that my primary political goal is anything that makes life easier for Democrats which, as i’ve just stated, is not the case.
I know it might not be within your ability to grasp, but not everyone feels the need to espouse unwavering, uncritical loyalty to one of the two major parties that Americans are saddled with.
And Republicans as an “offended party”? With their record of attack-dog ads juxtaposing pictures of Democrats with pictures of bin Laden and Hussein, as in the campaign against Max Cleland? Give me a break!
As for the whole Hitler/Bush comparison, what I personally find interesting is that I’ve gotten a very good glimpse of how easy it is to manipulate the masses in order to to the bidding of their Masters. Which is precisely what was done – and continues to be done – with a majority of Americans in this whole murderous Iraq sham .
As was already quoted upthread and so well put by Herr Goering:
**
After watching this whole thing play out, I must concur.
Well! Scylla has cites for
OK. I’ll bite.
First cite is from that widely recognized Democratic spokesperson Jonah Goldberg. You remember Jonah? From the National Revue?
You’re kidding me, right? Did you honest-to-Native American really believe I’m that stupid? In support of your statement that all kinds of Democrats are saying this stuff, you offer Mr. Goldbergs opinion that all kinds of Democrats are Holocaust deniers!! Oh, and make slanderous comparison between Bush and Hitler.
“My favorite example of this moral myopia comes from a few years ago…” Jesus fuck a shit souffle, Scylla! Did you even glance at this turd truffle before you tried to pass it off as a “cite”!!
OK, we’re warned now. Either friend Scylla isn’t playing with full deck, or he’s dealing off the bottom. First cite offered is Jonah Goldbergs opinion as to what he says Democrats are saying.
Come now. Get real. Or at the very least, don’t insult my intelligence until you can at least outsmart me.
Let’s just glance down the list, shits and giggles, maybe we can pretend the first cite actually qualifies as anything other than a decoy. Oh, looky, there’s Jonah Goldberg again, writing for that much respected Democratic organ, the National Revue. Talk about getting your facts about the Democrats straight from the horse’s…ah…mouth.
What else we got…a cite from a British paper, dated September 20, 2002. Yes. Of course. Just the thing.
Oh, heres a good one! A New Zealand paper quoting the Jonah Goldberg article! Bit of a stretch, calling that a cite, don’t you think? Or don’t you?
And some wierd as shit blogger from Godonlyknows offering his opinion as to the perfidy and hypocrisy of the Democratic party. Is there the slightest reason I should consider the ravings of this “Mad Kane” person as a cite?
You’re gonna bluff, you gotta bluff better than that, Scylla
0 points content, 0 points style, 9.7 chutzpah
But you gotta admire the laziness. Google three words, then post the results without even bothering to read them. Why, I bet cutting and pasting the url’s must have taken, like, a minute and a half.
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I’m second to no man in my deep admiration for laziness, which so vastly expands the opportunity for contemplation. Necessity may be the mother of invention, but laziness is her husband.