You can tell it is an election year- the race pimps are at it again. Here is Ryan Lizza in his debut as an Al Sharpton wannabe:
Bush’s first round of ads became immediately famous for using images of Ground Zero and a flag-draped body being carried away from the rubble of the World Trade Center.
His newest spot, “100 Days,” might soon become famous for another campaign first. It is the first ad to use the image of a dark-skinned man who is obviously meant to be a terrorist.
The ominous slow-motion footage comes about halfway through the 30-second ad. A female voiceover darkly warns about John Kerry’s agenda, charging, “On the war on terror: weaken the Patriot Act used to arrest terrorists and protect America.” On the left of the screen flash the words “John Kerry’s Plan.” On the bottom a red box warns, “Weaken Fight Against Terrorists.” If you look closely, on the right side of the screen you can see an airplane taking off.
The center of the screen is filled with three different rectangles of slow-motion video. In the top panel travelers at an airport study the arrivals and departures monitor. In the center panel there is a shadowed image of a person wearing a gas mask. And on the bottom there is a close-up of a swarthy, somewhat sinister-looking man with darting eyes who slowly turns toward the camera. He is clearly the terrorist in this scary montage.
The Bush campaign held a conference call for the press this afternoon to unveil the ads, and one reporter asked whether it was appropriate to use an Arab-American to depict a terrorist. Campaign aides said the actor in “100 Days” wasn’t Arab-American. One official on the call insisted it was just a “very generic” image.
A.) The actor who played the mythical terrorist was not arab.
B.) Even if he was, so fucking what?
These are the same idiots that think because in Gibson’s Passion, some Jews crucified Christ, therefore the film is anti-semitic. You know, there is a difference between these sentences:
“Some jews crucified Christ.”
“THE JEWS crucified Christ.”
Race pimps. They will do anything to divide.
*** Update ***
Dumbest comment of the month- “Why didn’t they just use a real terrorist.”
Umm… Then the image would probably have been ofArab descent, and your reaction to that would be rather predictable.
Jon Henke
I am curious how the Democrats would have cast that role. A woman? An asian? An android? A small dog named Spot?
And don’t try to tell me they should have not presented an image. It’s a tv ad, for gods sake…you need images.
Bloggerhead
Hey, Jon. How about an image of a real terrorist? I’m sure they used an image of a real moron in the ad.
And John, re: the subsequent post. That’s my boy; take off that dress. Show your buddies how liberating it can be to acknowledge what dividers we all tend to be in this polarized nation and how absurd “uniter not divider” really is.
John Cole
??
Terry
Blockhead seems a little more obtuse than usual. That comment about a dress perhaps suggests that Blockhead is a female…or just a transgendered entity??
LP
They couldn’t use the picture of a real terrorist like OBL, because…that would remind everyone OBL hasn’t been caught.
Jon H
How about a picture of a real terrorist, like Eric Robert Rudolph or Timothy McVeigh?
Jeff G
Um, using the photo of a “real” terrorist wouldn’t be in keeping with the idea, which is that there are unknown terrorists out there waiting for their marching orders. The message required an anonymous face.
Christ, I’m so tired of this kind of mock outrage over race, particularly when it’s coupled with veiled suggestions of deep-seated racism on the part of those who believe in the wisdom of a particular foreign policy strategy. It’s phony, it’s cynical, it’s sanctimonious, and it’s deplorable. Buy your grace elsewhere.
Russell
Dumb, Jon H, really dumb.
So I suppose the people we should be worried about in the WOT are militia types, and not islamic fundamentalists?
Ok.
Terry
Gee…compared to Jon H, Blockhead is a bloody genius and a very perceptive individual.
Gary Farber
You know, that’s not the reasoning used by those who have found anti-Semitic aspects to the film. And there are various complaints. But that William F. Buckley is such an anti-Catholic bigot, isn’t it?
Most of the complaints stem from Gibson’s insertion of lots of material not found in any Gospel, such as personal appearances from Satan amongst the Jews. Others stem from use of classic anti-Semitic imagery.
This is quite unlike your calm use of moderate language that brings people together. I’m so glad you’d never be divisive and inflammatory, because that would be wrong, as you condemn.
But, then, I missed the pieces by Buckley, Krauthammer, Sullivan, and Wieseltier complaining about Bush commercials. I must have just overlooked them.
Here is a good resource for discussion of the movie, by the way.
It’s “anti-Semitic,” by the way, and spelling “jews” lower-case is generally considered offensive.
John Cole
Gary-
The reason I like you is because you are a cantankerous fart.
A.) If you scroll down, you will note I have keyboard problems. The word ‘Jews’ should have been capitalized every time, but it is not. On ‘anti-Semitic,’ I just blew it. I hope all the anti-Semites out there will forgive me.
B.) I did not state that this was the only reason people have claimed the film was anti-Semitic. I stated it was analagous or similar to that kind of block-headed claim.
C.) Calling the race hustlers ‘race pimps’ is not divisive. it is accurate.
D.) Once again, you reference to your post in which you cut and pasted my use of harsh language competely out of context is, well, ‘fucking stupid.’ Now you can cut and paste that, separate it from everything else I have stated in this comment, and claim I am divisive. Which, of course, is precisely what you did the last time, and equally meaningless.
Tatterdemalian
I’m guessing that it’s because real terrorists won’t cooperate with the cameramen.
of course, it’s also pretty likely that, if they ever did use “real” terrorists, the same people would be rushing to condemn the “politicization” and “unlawful use” of the terrorists’ images.
Still, it would be funny to see Oliver Willis jumping to the defense of Mohammed and Malvo. Maybe they should do it after all.
Mason
By God, I wish the fucking election were held tomorrow so I wouldn’t have to listen to this insane Bush-hatred shit for another eight months.
Gary Farber
I didn’t make a deal out of it, John; I noted it. Are you offended that I responded to what you wrote, rather than what you thought?
You didn’t note that there was any other possible reason for anyone to object to the film or find anti-Semitic aspects to it. Are you upset that I responded to what you wrote, rather than what you thought?
I don’t understand the meaning of this sentence.
You’re objecting to the standard online practice of quoting what one is responding to? You feel this is unfair? Or what? You would rather I did not quote what I’m responding to?
You’re saying you are not? You are attempting to persuade Democrats or those so leaning of the correctness of your positions by insulting them? You’re trying to bring Democrats and Republicans together?
Are you kidding, John?
Cantankerous, yes. How would you advise I take your calling me a “fart”?
Gary Farber
Incidentally, who are these people, John?
This appears to be a significant enough problem that you are quite upset by it. So it should be no problem for you to, say, cite three at-least-semi-well-known professional writers who have taken such a position. Or three well-respected bloggers. No rush; I’ll drop by tomorrow evening to familiarize myself with these silly people, so as to better understand what you are referring to.
Thanks.
HH
If Bush had used an image of a known terrorist waiting to attack, the Dems would launch into attack mode with “This shows Bush is a failure, they haven’t caught him!”
HH
FYI, the claims of “Satan among the Jews” are distortions, as even the Daily Howler has pointed out this week. He also pointed out the flaws in the TNR and Sullivan writing on this.
HH
Daily Howler on Wieseltier
Daily Howler on Krauthammer, Rich, etc.
On “Satan among Jews”
Gary Farber
“FYI, the claims of ‘Satan among the Jews’ are distortions, as even the Daily Howler has pointed out this week.”
Since you didn’t give a link, I had to hunt for it. Here it is.
“…in The Passion, Satan appears among Jewish crowds only twice, out of four appearances.
Italics there are Sommersby’s.
Quite a devastating rebuttal, indeed.
And they only killed Christ once.
Italics mine.
I should make clear that I’ve not seen the film, and therefore do not have an opinion on it; my point was that there has been plenty of criticism of it other than that which John referred to.
However, I would be very interested in a cite for a Scriptural quote on Satan’s appearance in the Gospels, since this film is, of course, entirely authentic and it is as it was.
Dodd
I loved Zogby’s suggestion that if they’d put Osama in there, he’d have been fine with that. Of course, that’s what Saxby Chambliss did – used Osama as a prop for a “weak on terror” message – and we’re *still* hearing about how that means he questioned Cleland’s patriotism.
M. Scott Eiland
Speaking of race pimps, I spotted Sheila Jackson Lee on C-SPAN early Friday morning, still whining about Aristide and pushing for an investigation (dream on, Sheila). Directly behind her was a banner for the group sponsoring that particular National Press Club event–our old friends at International ANSWER. I guess if you’re a small time collection of race pimps, hanging out with a bigger collection of race pimps who also happen to be apologists for genocidal dictators is the equivalent of hanging out with the cool kids.
Father of Dirt
Let’s just hope the actor or generic image wasn’t a Boy Scout at one time. We all know that institution is a fount for all forms of insular, extremist, anti-social behavior. Unless he was Moslem Boy Scout of course, then his actions would only be a response to the past injustices of the Anglo-American Crusader Colonialist Infidels. Wrong! Any Blue eyed Episcopalian Boy Scout I ever knew had the shit slapped out of him the first time he ever even contemplated shoving a firecracker up a cats ass, followed with admonsihments about Jesus being a heeler and sanctuary for the weak, such as that poor innocent kitty. What would Mahmud have to follow as an example of justice. Look no farther than the Quoran and Hadiths for what the Prophet did to the innocent that opposed him.
bittern
Hey you Balloon-Juice idiots, is there a conservative-leaning blog out there developing ideas rather than inane idiotic invective? I’m tired of this left-right garbage posing as discussion. I’m a Dem. I nearly outscored your idiotic dictator-host John Cole on the Libertarian idiot test with a 42. Just asking.
John Cole
Bittern gets the award for comment of the day.
HH
Actually I did give the link… and Satan appearing among crowds some of the time which include Jews doesn’t mean anything. Anyway Somerby’s seen the movie… I’ve heard from others who saw the movie who saw nothing like this at all.
Caroline
Forget the racism. The commercial just flat stunk like all the others. No specifics just general blah blah blah.
IXLNXS
Yeah dividing people is a good thing to do.
Because if all those blacks, hispanics, gays, dope heads, drunks, prescription drug users, senoir citizens, ect got together they might vote out both parties for being the lting sacks of shit they are.
Arguing about Dem/Repub is as stupid as arguing about which manure is better for your lawn. Your still arguing about manure.