This is a brilliant, dare I say “Rovian” strategy. The ad will get more “airplay” through You Tube than it would have on TV, the GOP can take the high road by saying “we’re not responsible for that,” and the point of the ad will be made – all for free!
It kind of ignores Bush 41′s NK policy, which was ineffectiveness at all costs. Also it contains plenty of the shrill, policy free politics that I don’t like.
Considering we’re acquiring two nuclear powers out of three in the Axis of Evil during this Administration, I’d say Zucker’s missed out on fact. You can attack Clinton’s failed diplomacy all you want but W’s has yielded nothing but critical mass…no pun intended.
Blaming Democrats for North Korea…stupid. Accusing Democrats of turning a blind eye to terrorism…stupider. Implying that Bush and the GOP has done a good job…stupidest. Watching Kim Jong Il dunk a basketball…priceless.
That is a ridiculous video that will do nothing for the Republicans. It’s so over-the-top that it has no credibility. For once they’re using good judgement and not airing it. And putting it on You-Tube won’t do much either. Regular voters will never see it — only political junkies, half of which will roll their eyes and move on to something else.
Diplomacy 101 for lightweights:
Threats, insults, intimidation, and saber-wrattling to anyone in China’s backyard constitute a threat to China–which of course results in China supplying more weapons to these people. I don’t find it funny. And we can thank Clinton’s technology transfer to China for Korean missiles in the first place.
Wow, there sure are a lot of foreign policy experts on this thread.
TBone, no one is expecting this video to do anything for the GOP. It is just a video. It’s funny. Unfortunately it has some accurate facts displayed in the satirical, sarcastic format.
And, for all of you people who think you somehow have the solution on what we should do to further our diplomatic efforts, while protecting the citizens from global terrorism, I encourage you to submit your proposals to the White House, the State Department, or another applicable government agency. Otherwise, quit criticizing GWB like you could do any better.
And Hinton, I’m going to say what everyone on here is thinking: YOUR ANALYSIS SUCKS!!!!
So don’t go international if you don’t want bloggers to go there. Perhaps we should apply the same logic to state issues. Where’s those damn blue pages?
OK how about this: As a frustrated conservative voter the ad just reminds me of both Bush’s reliance on the “Boogeyman factor” as a political shot in the arm. Instead of voting it just makes me want to stay home again. And again, and again, and again.
Yea W has been pretty poor at foreign policy but Clinton was only marginally better. He had good policies but not the courage to act properly when situations arose. A damning quote from Clinton is that he said early in his tenure (I can’t remember when) “Foreign policy is not what I came here to do”. Enough said.
I think a big problem with Clinton was the American public’s ambivalence to doing anything serious about foreign policy threats. He wanted to do so much but he knew the public would rise against him if he tried, and the GOP would have fanned the flames. Just look at what happened over Bosnia. The public’s determination to do anything substantial about foreign policy threats did not change until 9/11 and W was able to use that and totally f— everything up.
Bill, you apparently missed my sarcasm just as you and others missed the humor in the video. The point is that if everyone here thinks they are so da&% smart on foreign policy, why don’t you go forward and do something?!? Everyone’s an expert and it’s just so simple isn’t it?
Listen, local politics is one thing. Opposing Mark Taylor and Ralph Reed is really pretty simple and basic. However, the same sentiments cannot be translated into foreign policy. It’s an entirely different ballgame, and while I respect that we have some smart and experienced people here, not one single person could do better than Bush, Clinton, or even Carter (well, perhaps Carter is the exception, but you get the idea …).
It’s so easy for people to say “Bush hasn’t done anything with foreign policy, etc, etc, etc …” and “he should of done this” or “why didn’t he do that” but that gets on my nerves more than anything.
Finally, I haven’t been comparing Bush vs Clinton foreign policy, but if you do want to compare, Clinton supporters beware. I would much rather have a leader that does SOMETHING on foreign policy rather than someone like Clinton that d0es NOTHING!
Mojo, your comment is funny to me. What would you do? I’m sure the Mojo Plan is on the docket next for the UN to discuss, but perhaps it was bumped for Hugo Chavez’ “Bush is the devil” speech.
Everybody’s an expert, huh?
Hinton, what problem do you have with displaying the truth even if it is in a satirical or sarcastic format? There is no way one can legitimately say the Clinton Administration had more effective foreign policy initiatives than Bush. You might not like it, but again, some foreign policy action is better than none. Besides, it’s just funny. I bet you’re one of those guys who watches SNL for the issues discussed, totally missing the humor.
Finally, Bill, it has nothing to do with the GOP mantra. However, I would much rather live with my head up the a** of the Republican mantra than with my head up the a** of a donkey!
“Mojo, your comment is funny to me. What would you do? I’m sure the Mojo Plan is on the docket next for the UN to discuss, but perhaps it was bumped for Hugo Chavez’ “Bush is the devil
Oh I am the elitist? You’re the one criticizing foreign policy when you couldn’t even come close to doing a better job. I’m saying none of us could do a better job, including me. That’s why elect candidates I have confidence in.
You can comment all you want. I just think people criticizing foreign policy initiatives when they couldn’t do anything better is absurd.
You can criticize all day long, but when it comes right down to it, you don’t have a solution and certainly couldn’t do any better. Further, you might be a citizen but that doesn’t make you qualified to adequately analyze foreign policy.
Sure, you CAN comment, but that doesn’t mean you should.
BTW, Mojo, name calling really helps your argument, even if it does lack creativity (FYI, that’s sarcasm – I know you have a hard time following such). Good one
{ 39 comments }
This is a brilliant, dare I say “Rovian” strategy. The ad will get more “airplay” through You Tube than it would have on TV, the GOP can take the high road by saying “we’re not responsible for that,” and the point of the ad will be made – all for free!
Also, the spot is hilarious.
Buzz, exactly. And it’s funny.
Sad thing is though the ring of truth to it…
It is hilarious. But there’s a six year vacuum here that leaves alot to be desired.
The fundamental premise of the ad is flawed, but funny nonetheless.
I thought that was pretty lame, but maybe it’s my liberal bias.
I believe the missile tests have been on George Bush’s watch. Does anyone know for sure?
Um…I’m rather conservative but I found that ad vile. And disingenuous. And fear-mongering.
While Democrats don’t have a steller foreign policy record over the past 30 years, it’s not like Republicans have done any better.
It kind of ignores Bush 41′s NK policy, which was ineffectiveness at all costs. Also it contains plenty of the shrill, policy free politics that I don’t like.
Considering we’re acquiring two nuclear powers out of three in the Axis of Evil during this Administration, I’d say Zucker’s missed out on fact. You can attack Clinton’s failed diplomacy all you want but W’s has yielded nothing but critical mass…no pun intended.
I love it! A humorous example of traditional Democratic appeasement and weakness on national security.
CHelf, that’s probably why the Republicans are scared to show the ad.
Blaming Democrats for North Korea…stupid. Accusing Democrats of turning a blind eye to terrorism…stupider. Implying that Bush and the GOP has done a good job…stupidest. Watching Kim Jong Il dunk a basketball…priceless.
That is a ridiculous video that will do nothing for the Republicans. It’s so over-the-top that it has no credibility. For once they’re using good judgement and not airing it. And putting it on You-Tube won’t do much either. Regular voters will never see it — only political junkies, half of which will roll their eyes and move on to something else.
Now that is funny.Both
Earth to Peach bloggers: it was SATIRE.
OK, move on, folks… There is nothing to see here….
Rick (banging head on desk)
Diplomacy 101 for lightweights:
Threats, insults, intimidation, and saber-wrattling to anyone in China’s backyard constitute a threat to China–which of course results in China supplying more weapons to these people. I don’t find it funny. And we can thank Clinton’s technology transfer to China for Korean missiles in the first place.
(North Korean)
Wow, there sure are a lot of foreign policy experts on this thread.
TBone, no one is expecting this video to do anything for the GOP. It is just a video. It’s funny. Unfortunately it has some accurate facts displayed in the satirical, sarcastic format.
And, for all of you people who think you somehow have the solution on what we should do to further our diplomatic efforts, while protecting the citizens from global terrorism, I encourage you to submit your proposals to the White House, the State Department, or another applicable government agency. Otherwise, quit criticizing GWB like you could do any better.
And Hinton, I’m going to say what everyone on here is thinking: YOUR ANALYSIS SUCKS!!!!
So don’t go international if you don’t want bloggers to go there. Perhaps we should apply the same logic to state issues. Where’s those damn blue pages?
GAWire: so which part sucked? do you prefer fear-mongering and demogoguery to reasoned debate? do you prefer toeing the party line?
Well, I’m not in the party so I don’t have to toe any line.
Or maybe you just prefer ad hominem attacks?
I don’t think anyone here could do worse at foreign policy than the Bush administration
OK how about this: As a frustrated conservative voter the ad just reminds me of both Bush’s reliance on the “Boogeyman factor” as a political shot in the arm. Instead of voting it just makes me want to stay home again. And again, and again, and again.
Yea W has been pretty poor at foreign policy but Clinton was only marginally better. He had good policies but not the courage to act properly when situations arose. A damning quote from Clinton is that he said early in his tenure (I can’t remember when) “Foreign policy is not what I came here to do”. Enough said.
rugby fan,
I think a big problem with Clinton was the American public’s ambivalence to doing anything serious about foreign policy threats. He wanted to do so much but he knew the public would rise against him if he tried, and the GOP would have fanned the flames. Just look at what happened over Bosnia. The public’s determination to do anything substantial about foreign policy threats did not change until 9/11 and W was able to use that and totally f— everything up.
GAW,
One thing the WH or the State Department doesn’t welcome is commonsense ideas being introduced into their decision-making processes.
Geez! You really live with your head so far up the ass of the Republican-mantra it is too funny.
I guess I could always vent here…
http://www.topdog08.com/2006/02/bush_thanks_bin.html
Bill, you apparently missed my sarcasm just as you and others missed the humor in the video. The point is that if everyone here thinks they are so da&% smart on foreign policy, why don’t you go forward and do something?!? Everyone’s an expert and it’s just so simple isn’t it?
Listen, local politics is one thing. Opposing Mark Taylor and Ralph Reed is really pretty simple and basic. However, the same sentiments cannot be translated into foreign policy. It’s an entirely different ballgame, and while I respect that we have some smart and experienced people here, not one single person could do better than Bush, Clinton, or even Carter (well, perhaps Carter is the exception, but you get the idea …).
It’s so easy for people to say “Bush hasn’t done anything with foreign policy, etc, etc, etc …” and “he should of done this” or “why didn’t he do that” but that gets on my nerves more than anything.
Finally, I haven’t been comparing Bush vs Clinton foreign policy, but if you do want to compare, Clinton supporters beware. I would much rather have a leader that does SOMETHING on foreign policy rather than someone like Clinton that d0es NOTHING!
Mojo, your comment is funny to me. What would you do? I’m sure the Mojo Plan is on the docket next for the UN to discuss, but perhaps it was bumped for Hugo Chavez’ “Bush is the devil” speech.
Everybody’s an expert, huh?
Hinton, what problem do you have with displaying the truth even if it is in a satirical or sarcastic format? There is no way one can legitimately say the Clinton Administration had more effective foreign policy initiatives than Bush. You might not like it, but again, some foreign policy action is better than none. Besides, it’s just funny. I bet you’re one of those guys who watches SNL for the issues discussed, totally missing the humor.
Finally, Bill, it has nothing to do with the GOP mantra. However, I would much rather live with my head up the a** of the Republican mantra than with my head up the a** of a donkey!
Pretty pathetic. Doesn’t it ignore that Republicans have been in power for the last 6 years?
GAWire,
“Mojo, your comment is funny to me. What would you do? I’m sure the Mojo Plan is on the docket next for the UN to discuss, but perhaps it was bumped for Hugo Chavez’ “Bush is the devil
Decaturguy,
When do they ever tell the truth?
Oh I am the elitist? You’re the one criticizing foreign policy when you couldn’t even come close to doing a better job. I’m saying none of us could do a better job, including me. That’s why elect candidates I have confidence in.
You can comment all you want. I just think people criticizing foreign policy initiatives when they couldn’t do anything better is absurd.
You can criticize all day long, but when it comes right down to it, you don’t have a solution and certainly couldn’t do any better. Further, you might be a citizen but that doesn’t make you qualified to adequately analyze foreign policy.
Sure, you CAN comment, but that doesn’t mean you should.
BTW, Mojo, name calling really helps your argument, even if it does lack creativity (FYI, that’s sarcasm – I know you have a hard time following such). Good one
GAWire,
Thanks for the tip, I’ll certainly keep it in mind.
[...]name calling really helps your argument, even if it does lack creativity[...]
You’re an idiot.
GaWire
Your logic goes against all that is…….
THE BLOGOSPHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(it’s global doncha know)
Does anyone know what you do with the blue pages?
scroll down
You try to cheer them up. (hehe)
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }