Reply
Sun 28 Mar, 2004 12:53 am
Can any of you republicans explain that one to me?
Seems that if "George W. Bush" is narrating his own campaign commercial, it would, by any common sense understanding, imply that he approves of it since he voiced it!!
For me it just adds to his image as a twit. Sorry for being insulting, but that's how I see it!
They have to be in the commercial now and endorse it due to some campaign reform programs. Its so that the candidates can't make a misleading ad and then claim it wasn't them who did it.
Oh brother. How absolutely lame!
Thanks for the explanation though. Still....wouldn't the words "approved by the Bush campaign" at the end of the message do the job? Bush saying it sounds so....well....stupid.
Hehe. Pretty much anything Bush says sounds stupid.
Can't say for sure, but I think that it had something to do with an ad that was highly criticized. I believe that Bush claimed that he had no input into the ad. Now he will give his "seal of approval" to show that he knows about, and endorses the ad.
Can anyone help me with the particulars?
This is a part of John McCains finance reform bill. This was passed just about a year ago I believe. All candidates running for office that have TV ads have to be on that commercial stating that they endorse that message so that they can't go back and say they had nothing to do with the ad.
Windtamer's right. McCain-Feingold campaign reform legislation requires it.
I am Setanta, and i approve of this eye-roll . . .
I'm delighted to hear it.
Then, I know it's time to change the channel. :wink:
Ya see it's the pop culture invasion that allows we canajuns to know so much about Americans. We get their t.v., their movies, their music, their magazines (sometimes the "canajun" version, such as with Reader's Digest)...though I think t.v. is the biggest influence.
Somehow I just don't wanna know about Bush's campaign message.
Funny, those American campaign commercials. Always so, I don't know...fuzzy. Here in the Netherlands, commercials of political parties are always so unprofessional. The leader of the party, saying some words about what they are gonna change, just straight to the point...I think image is just not so important here in politics as it is in America (look at our prime minister - Jan-Peter Balkenende! We know where Harry Potter's dad is!)
"John Kerry will raise taxes by 100 zillion dollars.
He will increase fees on gasoline by $500.00 per gallon.
He will allow terrorists to take over our country.
He will rape Christian women and imprison Christian men.
I don't make George Bush's commercials...I make George Bush's commercials BETTER."
I heard some guy from the Netherlands on a radio talk show last night. He was talking about how the Moroccans had formed a political party and were trying to take over the government so they could make the Netherlands an Islamic state. But he said they didn't win any seats in Parliament.
I wish the campaign ads would focus on what the candidate plans to do if elected, rather than ripping on the opponent. It seems like the winner is determined by how much mud can be slung and how many campaign signs can be erected. That's not how politics should operate.