Right-Wing Ad: "Your Life Depends" On Vote
Yep, it's come to this: If you don't vote for the pro-war candidate in your district, you will die. That's literally the message in a new ad that a conservative think tank, The Center For Security Policy, has now released in time for the fifth anniversary of Sept. 11. The ad shows images of the burning Twin Towers and Americans held hostage and concludes by flashing on the screen: "Vote as if your life depends on it. Because it does." While the ad mentions no candidates or parties, it's clearly meant to tell you that you should be very, very afraid of, well, dying should Dems -- OK, unnamed antiwar pols -- win their races. We're trying to determine where the ad's running -- stay tuned.
UPDATE: An official at the Center for Security Policy has confirmed that the ad will run in upstate New York, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia and Vermont. We're still trying to determine the amount being spent on the buy.
The only thing they have to offer is fear itself.
September 11, 2006 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did a cartoon the other day entitled "The only thing we have to fear sell is fear itself." (Hypnocrites) It's all they've got, and we're going to see a ton of it over the next few weeks.
September 11, 2006 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting that Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy is putting the ad in Virginia - where the democratic challenger Jim Webb has military service and civilian security credentials far in excess of republican George Allen. I hope some of the democrats running this year are able to take this ad, make it their own and put the republicans on the defensive.
September 11, 2006 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just checked the Center For Security Policy's 2004 990 (the latest one available at the Foundation Center's 990 finder) and I'd like to know where the folks there are getting the money to run ads.
The Center only took in $2.2 million in 2004 and more than $274k went to Frank Gaffney, President and CEO.
$311k went to the following "consultants":
Thor E. Ronay - $122k
Alex R. Alexiev - $93K
Christopher Holton - $96k
Revenue has increased from $1.2 million in 2000 to the $2.2 million in 2004.
"Professional fees" were $641k and advertising was $83k in 2004.
LOL - Somewhere along the line the Center lost $183k on a "special event".
The Center is also affiliated in some way with the Family Security Group, LLC at 54 Wearimus Road, Hohokus NJ.
IIRC, I visited the Family Security Group and checked out some of the names associated with it. I think it was comprised of all women.
Looked another right wing swindle to me but what do I care? I don't contribute to these organizations.
RWR, Inc. is also associated with the Center but I don't have any info on RWR, Inc. as of this moment.
As always, thanks to the Foundation Center and Guidestar for their invaluable contribution to civil society.
September 11, 2006 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget trash talk, a perennial with Republicans. Even the mild-mannered GOPers will use a mild-mannered version. Rove's mentor Lee Atwater, George H.W.'s campaign manager in 1998, was a master, Rove his disciple.
Great psych-ops.
September 11, 2006 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Presumably they lay mostly dormant and then get a few large donations during every contentious election cycle to fund nasty attack ads against the Dems.
The key is to find out which industries/lobbyists/foundations funded them and then go after the funders. See FoxNews on MoveOn or ACT (Dem 529s) and George Soros. Why isn't Richard Scaife Mellon as much of a household name as Soros?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/scaifemain050299.htm
September 11, 2006 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
The other question is how big the ad buys are in these various places. A lot of head fakes are involved in this business.
September 11, 2006 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
OM, I haven't followed your link yet but I have an idea about how to find out how the commericals are funded.
If the commericals are running in upstate New York, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia and Vermont, we should find out who owns the television stations and if the Center is getting a big discount or even free air time.
I came up with this idea because I think Enron deliberately overpaid General Media for Garden State Paper Mill by tens of millions of dollars in July 2000.
General Media owns television stations and newspapers in the Southeast and I think the Garden State Paper Mill deal was an illegal disguised campaign contribution.
Garden State Paper Mill located in NJ was a millstone around General Media's neck. It was carried on the books for something like $100 million and Enron bought it for $78 million in cash in July 2000.
Garden State Paper Mill had environmental problems, a big pension liability and was not profitable.
General Media did not need Garden State Paper Mill because it had other investments in more modern paper mills elsewhere with bigger capacity.
I think the Dems never wanted to investigate Enron because so many of them were bought off by Enron during the Clinton era.
Here's a small example of what I mean - remember when everyone on the right made a big deal about Paul Krugman's $50k Enron consulting fee?
What the right never made a big deal about was the fact that Irwin Stelzer, the Weekly Standard's economist also was an Enron consultant.
Enron was bipartisan when it came to paying out bribes but I think the big money in the end went to the right.
I've thought about Garden State Paper Mill for more than three years now and I am sure I am right.
If I am, that's a good indication of how corrupt our media is now.
If I am right, you can then buy off on the idea that the Center is not paying very much money or none at all for those commericals.
September 11, 2006 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know why this doesn't backfire on the Republicans. After all, all those images were shot while Republicans were in the White House, while Republicans controlled the Senate, and while Republicans controlled the House of Representatives. It is just stunning that somehow they escape blame.
I think the democrats should run an add showing Pearl Harbor footage and the date "December 7th, 1941." Then another image showing VE and VJ celebrations and the tag "what you get 5 years later, when democrats control the government." The next image would be 9/11 and "September 11th, 2001" followed by the exact same images in the republican commercial with the header "5 years later, when republicans control the government." Then perhaps some Katrina images with the caption "and that's not all."
September 11, 2006 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent idea! This is exactly what the dems need to do. Hit back proudly.
September 11, 2006 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine you go to the Dr. because you have a suspicious mole on your right arm. The Dr. says it looks bad and decides that you should immediately have chemotherapy. You protest that you’d like a second opinion. The Dr. questions your desire to become well and has you incarcerated in a mental hospital citing mental illness. Five years later you find yourself strapped to a gurney without legal recourse due to your ‘mental incapacity’, your body has been ravaged by endless doses of chemo and you still have a mole on your right arm. The Dr., meanwhile, claims you are doing better but are not yet well and that you must stay the course if you plan to get better.
Good Luck.
September 11, 2006 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
So in effect, the so called pro-life crowd are merchants of death.
September 11, 2006 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
You left out the part about the chemo being aimed at your ass instead of the mole on your arm!
Jan Knaus
September 11, 2006 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think your ad idea is absolutely brilliant. It is simple, TRUTHFUL, and appeals to the same emotions that the republicans do when they concoct their ads.
Show the emperer of Japan signing his surrender. (with time line from Pearl Harbor) Show the Potsdam treaty being signed. (with time line from our entry into the ETO) Then show Osama looking healthy and unafraid( 5 years from 911) saying the next attack is immenent, and then Bush and Cheney saying, "Be afraid, be very afraid."
Jan Knaus
September 11, 2006 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
pmooney: I don't have video capabilities, but I liked your idea so much that I created a photo essay. It's posted at my blog: http://kbergend.tripod.com/bellypulpit/. I gave you credit and a link to TMP Cafe. Hope you like...
September 12, 2006 8:39 AM | Reply | Permalink