Are flag-draped coffins "too much" for a political ad?

[Thomas Veil]

Edwards and Spratt call on DCCC to pull down web video

By Mark Preston
CNN Political Editor

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democratic Reps. Chet Edwards (Texas) and John Spratt (S.C.) have called on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to pull down a controversial web video that uses images of flag-draped coffins and a grave of a fallen soldier.

The two Democrats sent letters to DCCC Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Illinois) asking him to remove the video, "America Needs a New Direction,"external linkfrom its website after Republicans accused Democrats of trying to gain politically from the pictures. Emanuel urged political supporters in a fundraising e-mail sent Tuesday to view the video on the DCCC's website.

"I would not have included the clip showing the flag-draped caskets or the clip showing a soldier standing at the grave of a fallen comrade," Spratt wrote Thursday in his letter to Emanuel. "I strongly recommend that you pull this ad and delete both of these clips before running it again."

Chris Turner, Edwards' campaign manager, told the (CNN Morning) Grind that the Texas Democrat wrote a similar letter to the DCCC chairman.

A DCCC spokesman told the Grind this morning they had no comment on the letters. But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) defended the video yesterday and pointed out that President Bush's top political adviser Karl Rove has spoken about how the GOP needs to capitalize politically on the war.

"I don't know why they are making an issue of this except that, again, it speaks truth to power about what is happening in Iraq," she said.

The video has raised new questions about how the Iraq war can be discussed in the November elections. Privately, Democrats acknowledge that Spratt and Edwards must condemn the video because they represent Republican districts....

House Republican leaders have urged candidates to speak out against the video this weekend as they travel throughout their districts. For example, Rep. Thelma Drake (R-Virginia) is holding a news conference with veterans in Virginia Beach this afternoon to condemn it.
CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/14/mg.fri/index.html)

What do you think? Should the video he pulled as a matter of taste and sensitivity? Should it be pulled because Republicans will use it against the Dems? Or should it be left alone?

I haven't been able to see the video myself, because first of all I can't find the damn thing (the link in the story appears to be wrong), and second, whenever I click on video links on the DCCC website, they lock up my browser. (Way to go, Dems.)

That admission aside, I can't believe the Dems would use the video in any tasteless or insensitive way. If there's any reason to pull the ad, I'd say it has to do with giving Limbaugh, Hannity and others ammunition to use against the Dems. The Democrats probably don't really need to show flag-draped coffins, because they've already probably convinced almost all of the fence-sitters to come out against the war. The few blind fools who still believe in it, well, this video is not going to convince them.

[ham_man]

Republican or Democrat, the idea of using flag draped coffins for political purposes is sickening...

[zimv20]

is the issue that the dems are trying to capitalize on the failure of the war or the images that represent that failure?

if it's the latter, which images should they use? if it's the former, are the republicans allowed to run on what they claim is a successful war?

[scem0]

Sickening or realistic? Lots of soldiers are dying and if Americans can't handle seeing coffins then that says a lot about how much they actually care for the soldiers of their country.

I don't think this is "too much" for a political ad. I think it's realistic. Too many people have a childlike view of what is going on over there.

But I couldn't find my way to the video either, so there's no telling if it's being used in a tasteless or insensitive way.

e

[atszyman]

I can see where it could easily backfire on them. I'd much rather have an add where they take all of the clips from news shows with quotes from Rummy, Cheney, Bush, and the lot, where they claim that Saddam definitely has WMDs, the war would be over in 6 months or less and cost less than $60 billion... be sure to mention that it's cost nearly $300 billion so far, over 3 years, and still no WMDs. End with "haven't we been lied to enough?".....

[ham_man]

Sickening or realistic? Lots of soldiers are dying and if Americans can't handle seeing coffins then that says a lot about how much they actually care for the soldiers of their country.

I don't think this is "too much" for a political ad. I think it's realistic. Too many people have a childlike view of what is going on over there.

But I couldn't find my way to the video either, so there's no telling if it's being used in a tasteless or insensitive way.

e
Its one thing if the images are in a news publication. Its a complete other if they are used in a political video.

[aquajet]

Its one thing if the images are in a news publication. Its a complete other if they are used in a political video.

News publications have a vested interest in publishing the most striking photographs in order to attract viewership. These "things" aren't so different.

[scem0]

Its one thing if the images are in a news publication. Its a complete other if they are used in a political video.

And what about cheering crowds in Iraq and images of grand liberation?

Are those images not a grave insult to the innocent Iraqis who have died as a result of this "war on terrorism :rolleyes:"? Those images have been used countless times.

e

[zimv20]

i'm not convinced that showing a coffin for political purposes is worse than sending the soldier off to die for political purposes.

[pseudobrit]

i'm not convinced that showing a coffin for political purposes is worse than sending the soldier off to die for political purposes.

****, man, haven't you been paying attention? The symbolism is always more important than what it represents.

Works the same for flags, marriage and (now) dead kids in boxes.

[scem0]

i'm not convinced that showing a coffin for political purposes is worse than sending the soldier off to die for political purposes.

exactly.

e

[OutThere]

If all of the republican bullsh** propaganda is fair game, there's not reason this can't be.

I think a good number of americans don't understand just how bad it has been, is, and is going to get in the middle east, maybe this could help...

[leekohler]

Republican or Democrat, the idea of using flag draped coffins for political purposes is sickening...

Really? You know what? As far as I'm concerned it's THE only thing worth using politically. The Bush administration has gone way too far trying to justify a stupid, wasteful war.

The Bush administration should be embarrassed that they caused this in the first place, now that we really need our soldiers elsewhere.

I'll tell you something else ham_man, my cousin is still over there (after being told he'd be home months ago). If that kid dies, I'm going to be the next Sheehan. You can count on that.

As long as it isn't you or your family doing the fighting, it's OK, right?

[Trowaman]

i'm not convinced that showing a coffin for political purposes is worse than sending the soldier off to die for political purposes.

. . . .

GENIUS! Seriously, well put.

Last I heard, pictures of soldier's funerals or of the planes full of bodies coming home were technically illegal because . . . BECAUSE! Anyone know what the status of said ruling is nowadays?

I'd contact my congressman about this but he quit last June because he was a corrupt liar. I'm hoping it means that with no representation I don't have to pay taxes. :D

[pseudobrit]

As long as it isn't you or your family doing the fighting, it's OK, right?

On that note, my brother goes back in August. I know no words to describe how upset I am.

[zimv20]

meanwhile... (http://www.dispatch.com/?story=dispatch/2006/07/15/20060715-E1-04.html)


NEW CAMPAIGN AD
DeWine uses 9/11 images to attack Brown on terrorism

WASHINGTON – Using vivid images of smoke pouring from one of the towers of the World Trade Center, Republican Sen. Mike DeWine unleashed a commercial yesterday that charges Democratic challenger Sherrod Brown with casting votes in Congress that could have weakened America’s response to terrorism.

The TV commercial, which also flashed images of the 19 hijackers who took part in the Sept. 11 attack, is an apparent effort by the DeWine campaign to jar Ohio voters into remembering the terrorist attack in New York and suburban Washington and to convince them that the senator will support tougher anti-terrorism measures than Brown, a congressman from Avon.

(more)

[aquajet]

Last I heard, pictures of soldier's funerals or of the planes full of bodies coming home were technically illegal because . . . BECAUSE! Anyone know what the status of said ruling is nowadays?

The pictures aren't illegal, but it is official policy to bar any sort of media coverage of returning bodies. Probably for the best, really. After all, we wouldn't want to jeopardise our mission by inundating Americans with realism.

Link (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB152/index.htm)

[FFTT]

I find any use of soldiers as political pawns offensive.

Even so, we can not turn a blind eye or sanitize the realities of
war and the results of the Bush administration's lies and blunders.

I also think we have a responsibility to show the effects of this war addressing the numbers of fallen soldiers and the wounded who will bear the physical and emotional scars of this conflict for the rest of their lives, but doing so with all due respect.

Our involvement in Iraq now exceeds the time we were involved in WWII.

Now with new hostilities mounting all over the middle east, there is no way
we can safely reduce the number of troop deployments.

As much as I detest war and violence and want to see our soldiers come home, I don't think it's wise or realistic to raise our hopes any time soon.

Even with a complete change of our leadership, the damage has been done
and it will take decades before things return to some version of stability.

[Thomas Veil]

meanwhile... (http://www.dispatch.com/?story=dispatch/2006/07/15/20060715-E1-04.html)
Hmm. If you read deeper into that story, DeWine's people are citing Sherrod Brown's votes, um, creatively:

The votes cited, while accurate, are selective. Eight times from 1993 through 1999, Brown voted for amendments to the annual intelligence bills that would have reduced or frozen spending for the CIA and other intelligence agencies. The House killed the amendments by large margins.

But the DeWine commercial fails to mention that Brown in 1993 and 1994 voted for the overall intelligence bills after the amendments he supported failed. Brown also voted in favor of the intelligence bills in 2005 and 2004, and supported the 2004 creation of the National Intelligence Agency, which supervises the CIA and every other intelligence agency. In my book, using the WTC images to fudge someone else's record is not fair game.

[solvs]

Republican or Democrat, the idea of using flag draped coffins for political purposes is sickening...
Why not? Not saying I like it when either side does stuff like that, but it is the reality. People are sick of our troops getting killed in Iraq and he's implying that if elected, he'll actually be able to do something about it. Which he probably won't. Anymore than the other one helped cause 9/11.

Yes, it's sickening on both sides, but welcome to politics.

[zimv20]

the coffin ad got pulled (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060715/ap_on_el_ho/democratic_ad_1).


Democrats pulled an Internet ad that showed flag-draped coffins Friday after Republicans and at least two Democrats demanded it be taken down on grounds the image was insensitive and not fit for a political commercial.

[mactastic]

Once again the Democrats will capitulate and pull the ad in the face of criticism, while the Republican will likely continue his ad through the criticism...

Telling, no?

[solvs]

Once again the Democrats will capitulate and pull the ad in the face of criticism, while the Republican will likely continue his ad through the criticism...
You're surprised?

Dems try to be sensitive, makes them look weak. Which is pretty accurate actually. Reps raise a stink when it's the other side, continue to do so after they concede, criticize them for being spineless flipfloppers, then does the same thing only worse and calls it patriotism. People fall for it, Dems left scratching their heads as to why they lost (again) calling everyone else stupid. America continues to bend over while the neocons do as they please with the support of moderates who just want to get elected while the "opposition" does nothing but complain.

Again, welcome to politics.

[mactastic]

You're surprised?
Not surprised at all. Just making a note of it.

[mactastic]

Interesting rationalization (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060717/NEWS01/607170327/1056) by Boehner here about why it's OK to show flag-draped coffins in ads if you're a Republican, but not if you're a Democrat...
House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, called on Democrats last week to pull a TV ad that shows images of flag-draped caskets of U.S. soldiers, calling the spot "outrageous."

"To use those images to rally Democrats and to raise money is, I think, appalling," said Boehner.

But the outrage from Republicans comes after Democrats complained in 2004 about a campaign ad from President Bush that showed firefighters carrying a flag-draped coffin from the ruins of the World Trade Center.


Questioned by reporters on what the difference was, Boehner seemed tongue-tied. "These were American citizens killed by terrorists. That is a very different policy issue than American soldiers dying on the battlefield protecting the rights and freedoms of American people."

"How so?" a reporter asked.

"How so? You want me to describe the difference between men and women of the military out there defending the American people, and victims - victims - of terrorist activities?" Boehner asked.

"They were both killed by opponents, right? Terrorists or Islamic insurgents?" a reporter pressed.

An exasperated Boehner said: "The World Trade Center victims were victims of a terrorist act here on our shore and I think all Americans were appalled that this did in fact happen. But I think the differences, in terms of the images, are as clear as night and day."
Once again, IOKIYAR...

[zimv20]

tongue-tied, indeed.

[aquajet]

Interesting rationalization (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060717/NEWS01/607170327/1056)

Blah blah blah...

Give me a break.

[solvs]

tongue-tied, indeed.
Makes perfect sense to me... in Bizarro World!

Why don't they just come out and claim Repubs are strong against terrorism and Dems are weak? They've done it before, despite all evidence to the contrary. They can wrap themselves in flags and Dems can run ads saying they don't actually stand for anything and refuse to fight back against the massive corruption and screw ups of the opposition. They're sure to win elections then. :rolleyes:

[Thomas Veil]

Once again, IOKIYAR...:rolleyes: Took me a moment to figure that out: "It's okay if you're a Republican."

Yeah, Boehner comes across like a jackass. And yes, the Dems are wimps for capitulating. Even more:

The ad by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called for a "new direction" and displayed...a photograph of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay doctored to look like a police mug shot.Now, if someone Photoshopped a picture of Harry Reid or Ted Kennedy to look like a police mug shot, we'd probably call it a cheap shot, right? So why does the DCCC think their tricked-up photo of DeLay is better than an actual video of an actual tragedy?

(Never mind, I think I just figured it out. It's probably something along the lines of, "You don't like the coffin video? Here, maybe you'd prefer this." :D )

[pseudobrit]

Now, if someone Photoshopped a picture of Harry Reid or Ted Kennedy to look like a police mug shot, we'd probably call it a cheap shot, right? So why does the DCCC think their tricked-up photo of DeLay is better than an actual video of an actual tragedy?

Why did they have to doctor a photograph? Isn't the real mug shot enough?

[solvs]

Now, if someone Photoshopped a picture of Harry Reid or Ted Kennedy to look like a police mug shot, we'd probably call it a cheap shot, right?
I think a mugshot of Ted would be funny. Even better if it was the real thing. Tom was arrested, fair play too if you ask me.

If it's real, just like with the coffins, they can do what they want with it.

[zimv20]

link (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060719/19dewinead.htm)


The controversial video of the burning World Trade Center towers in a television campaign ad for Ohio Sen. Mike DeWine is doctored, U.S. News has learned. The television spot, which has been lambasted by critics as a political exploitation of the Sept. 11, attacks Democrat challenger Rep. Sherrod Brown for being weak on national security.

On the air in major Ohio markets since last Friday, the ad shows the towers, with the south building billowing smoke, which gradually drifts upward. In the video, the north tower, which was struck first on September 11, is undamaged.

"This particular image is impossible," says W. Gene Corley, a stuctural engineer who led FEMA's building performance study on the World Trade Center after the 9/11 attacks. Corley reviewed the ad atwww.brownvotes.com for U.S. News. "The north tower was hit first [so] the south tower could not be burning without the North Tower burning."

Corley also says, "the smoke is all wrong." The day of the attacks, the plumes of ash were drifting to the southeast. "The smoke on 9/11 was never in a halo like that," Corley says.

DeWine's office acknowledged the error. "The Senator was unaware that the image of the towers was a graphic representation and has instructed the campaign to replace the footage with a picture of the Twin Towers," his office said in a statement on Wednesday evening.

why was it doctored? to fit the ad better? any other reason?

[solvs]

any other reason?
Incompetent interns who weren't paying attention when it came time to pick royalty free pseudo-patriotism?