Republicans Upset Over Bush Plan to Use Reagan Images, Speeches in Campaign Ads
 

Republicans Upset Over Bush Plan to Use Reagan Images, Speeches in Campaign Ads

By TERESA HAMPTON
Capitol Hill Blue Staff Writer
Jun 10, 2004, 08:15


As the nation prepares to bury former President Ronald Reagan, Republican insiders fight among themselves over plans by the political team of President George W. Bush to use images of and speeches by Reagan in new television ads aimed at jump-starting a faltering campaign.

“They’re disgusting,” says one long-time Republican who participated in a focus group to preview the new television ads. “They dishonor the memory of Ronald Reagan and if President Bush allows these ads on the air I, for one, will not vote for him in November.”

The ads, ordered up by Bush political advisor Karl Rove immediately after Reagan’s death last Saturday, use images of Reagan and excerpts from his speeches in what one angry GOP conservative describes as a “callous attempt to tie George W. Bush to the legacy of Ronald Wilson Reagan.”

One proposed ad even goes so far as to show Reagan saying “George, go out and win one for the Gipper.” The clip comes from Reagan’s speech to the 1988 Republican National Convention where the former President’s request was to Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, in his successful 1988 run for President.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artma...cle_4667.shtml

You can rest assured they will find someway to use RR's death to there advantage. It does not really bother me that they will use it, I just think W in no way empowers the spirit of cooperation or friendliness amongst rivals that RR did nor does W have the ability to say "the buck stops here" like RR did. So, any comparison is incorrect IMO.

I think the "George" quote is being used incredibly innapropriately.

Yep - Rove sometimes amazes me. I mean although I disagree with him almost all of the time, I think he is a cunningly smart guy. So, when he does things like this - I just do not get how he can think he can get away with that.

Hmm that's sad..that they would exploit his death like that for their own benefit...I sure hope they rethink that decision.

Chris

Doesn't surprise me, after using the emotional blackmail of 9/11 to push his campaign I'm sure anything is fair game.....

Good to see the Republicans themselves are denouncing this. Just goes to show Dubya is really just about his own agenda.

Good gravy...
 

Not Suprised
 

Well as one Democrat hoping for a Kerry win, I can only say I hope they do use them and are completely trounced for it.
That said, I’m not surprised, Bush’s (the younger) public rendering have always had a sort of shallow showmanship. The problem (depending on your point of view) is that he is surrounded by yes men that spend tax payer funded salaries coming up with ways to convince him these tacky offerings are appropriate and loved by the people.

Hello all I’m new to this forum.

Welcome! :wavey:

And it's great to see another liberal!

Welcome! Your point of view is interesting. I myself have always seen Bush as a figurehead who is really being told what to do by the man behind the curtain-Dick Cheney ( and the rest of the cast of PNAC). I also happen to think that the reason we don't see him in public very much is becuase he is either still drinking or suffers petit mal seizures from a vitamin b deficiency due to his long term drinking. Bob Woodward stated in his book that Bush takes some sort of mystery medication twice daily. I think it would also explain his bizarre speech patterns. The man attended two Ivy League schools after all. I would think they would include public speaking in their curriculum.
As for our taxpayer dollars, I would love to know how much that little golf cart that he is driving in my sig photo cost. It was produced exclusivey for him to drive at the G8 Summit.
Anyway, nice to have you around. :wavey:

HEY - I LIKE the golf cart LOL

Anyway - here is a cool take from the nytimes:

WHITE HOUSE LETTER
Trying on Reagan's Mantle, but It Doesn't Exactly Fit
By ELISABETH BUMILLER

Published: June 14, 2004

Washington -- George Bush begins today to try to refocus the nation on his presidency after a week when it seemed, at least from the constant replays of 1980's-era videotape on CNN, that Ronald and Nancy Reagan were fox-trotting in the White House again.

At times it also seemed as if Mr. Reagan were running for president one more time. This past weekend, the White House Web site prominently featured a collection of Reagan remembrances and a photo essay of Mr. Bush at the funeral for the former president. The Bush campaign Web site went one better, offering a video of Mr. Reagan uttering his most famous lines - "These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc" - interspersed with Mr. Bush's own words - "He had the confidence that comes with conviction, the strength that comes with character."

It was difficult to tell where the 40th president ended and the 43rd began, a blurring further promoted by Ken Mehlman, the president's campaign manager, who told an Iowa Republican Party convention on Saturday that Mr. Reagan's spirit lived on. "Every time an American soldier, sailor, airman or marine risks his or her life to ensure our security and peace, Ronald Reagan will be there," Mr. Mehlman said.

Of course, Mr. Bush's effort to wrap himself in the Reagan legacy drew plenty of skeptics, including a number of top Reagan officials, who said, all anonymously, that the presidencies could not have been more different. Mr. Reagan was pragmatic, they said, but Mr. Bush is ideological. Mr. Reagan was a unifier, they argued, while Mr. Bush has polarized.

"Bush wants to defeat his opponents, Reagan wanted his to join him," one former official of the Reagan White House said.

Leaving aside what many historians call a nostalgic rewriting of the Reagan era - plenty of Democrats despised and derided Ronald Reagan in a highly partisan time -there are still striking and significant contrasts in the politics, artifice and style of the two presidencies.

The first that leaps out is Mr. Reagan's ease with the camera and the way it captured his personality and seemed to enhance who he was. Americans felt they knew Mr. Reagan, who was little different off television than on.

"He had so much experience - he knew the expressions, the posture, the lighting, the angles," said Michael Evans, Mr. Reagan's White House photographer, who recalled that Mr. Reagan, so used to Hollywood sets, had no problems letting him into the Oval Office on historic occasions to shoot through the day.

"I'd say hello in the morning, and then he'd just totally ignore me," Mr. Evans said.

Mr. Bush, in contrast, is stiffer and often more tongue-tied on television than in person. He finds the camera so distracting that his staff quickly shoos photographers away. "He just likes to get it over with," said David Hume Kennerly, who has photographed every president since he was Gerald R. Ford's White House photographer. "If he had his choice, he wouldn't do it."

The second difference is in the business of politics. Mr. Bush, who is his own de facto campaign manager, loves the combat and gossip. His advisers say he knows his exact standing in recent polls, the names of his chairmen in the battleground states and probably the names of important county chairmen.

Mr. Reagan, in contrast, did not. "Are you kidding me?" said Kenneth M. Duberstein, who was Mr. Reagan's last White House chief of staff. "He didn't want to hear about the political ups and downs." Mr. Reagan's detachment meant that his operatives handled the dirty work, while Mr. Bush's immersion has helped drive one of the most politically aggressive White Houses in decades.

The third difference is their style in the capital. Both men ran against Washington, but once elected, Mr. Reagan was determined to be different from Jimmy Carter, who had ignored the city's power elite. "When you come to town, there's a tendency as an officeholder to act as if you're a detached servant," Mr. Reagan said at a party he gave at the F Street Club in Washington when he was president-elect in 1980. He invited the capital's political, business and social leaders, many of them Democrats. "Well, I decided it was time to serve notice that we're residents."

The Bushes, in contrast, have gone to bed early and kept largely to themselves, socializing mostly with old friends from Texas and some of the president's Yale classmates. On the campaign trail, Mr. Bush takes frequent swipes at Washington, drawing big applause, but Democrats say his approach has helped polarize the mood in the capital.

In any case, Mr. Bush, not Mr. Reagan, is this year's candidate. After a hiatus of nearly two weeks - when he spent time in Europe, at the Group of 8 summit meeting in Sea Island, Ga., at the observances for Mr. Reagan and at a celebration in Texas for his father's 80th birthday - Mr. Bush will spend four of five days this week on the campaign trail.

Even so, Mr. Bush will have an odd opening act today, tied to yet another previous presidency: the unveiling of former President Bill Clinton's official portrait at the White House.

You should, baby. Your tax dollars paid for it. Think he'll let us use it? ;)

LOL - I guess I just do not get too upset over things like this. I mean they all do stuff like this. So, I just accept it, esp. when there are far larger things to be upset about :cool:

Well considering the Bush people didn't have a problem with using the images of flag-draped bodies being carried out of the WTC site, I'm sure that it will be no moral problem for them whatsoever to use Reagan to try and guarantee Shrubbie another 4-years in the White House. And you know the really sad part? There are far too many people out there who will have no problem with it and won't see it for what it really is.

Big Mouth Strikes Again!
 

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/ne...morrissey.html

'Bush should have died, not Reagan': Morrissey

CONTROVERSIAL: Morrissey

MANCHESTER music legend Morrissey sparked controversy when he announced Ronald Reagan's death live on stage during a concert - and then declared he wished it was George Bush who had died instead.

Thousands of fans at Dublin Castle, in Ireland, cheered when the ex-Smiths frontman made the announcement that the former American president, who had battled with Alzheimer's Disease, had passed away.

And an even bigger cheer followed when Morrissey - who is no stranger to controversy - then said he wished it had been the current President, George W Bush, who had died.

Fan Tony Murray said: "He commented about the death of Ronald Reagan and when he wished that it was George W instead the crowd went wild."

The Dublin concert was the latest leg of Morrissey's European tour, which began at the M.E.N. Arena last month when the ever-popular performer made his first appearance in the city for 12 years.

He is due to appear at the Move festival at Old Trafford cricket ground next month.

A spokesman for Morrissey's record label, Sanctuary Records, said: "We do not have a recording of the gig, but as far as we can tell, Morrissey was just alerting the audience to the fact that Ronald Reagan had died.

"He then simply followed that up with his comment about George Bush, which was his own opinion. He is no stranger to controversy."

Yes we tend to speak our minds here in Manchester... :nod: :nod:

Good on you! They're trying to outlaw it over here. :laugh:

...she says from the free speech zone she's been relegated to. :laugh: :wavey:

Hee. The DNC showed up at my front door today for some grassroots fundraising.

:thumbsup: I already gave more money than I could afford to them this year. :laugh:

A little harsh LOL

Ron Reagan, a television commentator who has frequently been critical of Mr. Bush, has already said as much. In 2000, he fired a shot at Mr. Bush in Philadelphia during the Republican convention, which featured a tribute to his father. "What's his accomplishment?" Mr. Reagan asked then. "That he's no longer an obnoxious drunk?"

_______________________________________________________________

Reaganite by Association? His Family Won't Allow It

June 15, 2004
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

WASHINGTON, June 14 - As Republicans try to cloak President Bush in the mantle of Ronald Reagan, their biggest obstacle may be Mr. Reagan's own family.

Even before Mr. Reagan died, Nancy Reagan and her daughter, Patti Davis, made their opposition to Mr. Bush's policy on stem-cell research well known. But on Friday, at the culmination of an emotional week of mourning for the former president, his son Ron Reagan delivered a eulogy that castigated politicians who use religion "to gain political advantage," a comment that was being interpreted in Washington as a not-so-subtle slap at Mr. Bush.

The remark has provoked intense debate among Republicans about precisely what the younger Mr. Reagan meant. Some saw the reference to religion as a message to the administration on stem-cell research. Others saw it as a possible critique of the war in Iraq. Still others insist there was no deeper message at all.

But a friend of the Reagan family, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Mr. Reagan, who did not return a call seeking comment on Monday, was deeply uncomfortable with the way the Bush administration intertwined religion and politics and felt compelled to say so at the burial of his father, a ceremony watched by millions.

"I think he was making a more profound statement about style," this friend said, "and the danger of religion in politics."

First families often cause trouble for presidents. Jimmy Carter, Richard M. Nixon and Bill Clinton each had brothers who made them uncomfortable from time to time. But rarely does the family of one president step on the toes of another. The Reagans and Bushes, who have had famously strained relations throughout the years, may be an exception, as Nancy Reagan and her children guard Ronald Reagan's legacy, fending off efforts by both the right and left to trade on it for political gain.

"I think Nancy would not want that," said Barbara Kellerman, a Harvard expert on leadership who has written a book on first families. "She is not mad about the Bush family, and the last thing she intends is for W. to inherit her beloved and sanctified husband's mantle."

Ron Reagan, a television commentator who has frequently been critical of Mr. Bush, has already said as much. In 2000, he fired a shot at Mr. Bush in Philadelphia during the Republican convention, which featured a tribute to his father. "What's his accomplishment?" Mr. Reagan asked then. "That he's no longer an obnoxious drunk?"

Last year, in an interview with the online magazine Salon, Mr. Reagan renewed his critique, making clear his distaste for the Bush administration.

"The Bush people have no right to speak for my father, particularly because of the position he's in now," Mr. Reagan said then. "Yes, some of the current policies are an extension of the 80's. But the overall thrust of this administration is not my father's - these people are overly reaching, overly aggressive, overly secretive and just plain corrupt. I don't trust these people."

Mr. Reagan was not quite so pointed on Friday night. "Dad was also a deeply, unabashedly religious man," he told mourners gathered at sunset at the Reagan presidential library. "But he never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians - wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage. True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference."

The remarks caused jaws to drop in California and Washington. One Republican strategist, who would not be identified for fear of repercussions to his business, said he interpreted the remarks as a clear reference to stem-cell research, which Mr. Bush opposes on moral grounds because they require the destruction of human embryos.

"I thought clearly Ron Jr. was sending a message to the administration to be tolerant and understanding of this issue," the strategist said.

He said he was also struck by Mr. Bush's eulogy during the service at the National Cathedral. "I thought his speech was deliberately biographical in nature about Reagan, to try to show people that his biography is close to Bush's."

A number of Republicans are openly making that association. "Bush's name may be Bush," said Kenneth M. Duberstein, Mr. Reagan's former chief of staff, reiterating a comment he made last week, "but his heart belongs to Reagan."

But Mr. Duberstein, who is close to Nancy Reagan and guided her in her advocacy of stem-cell research while her husband was suffering from Alzheimer's disease, said that did not mean Mrs. Reagan would let the stem-cell issue subside.

"Nancy Reagan is not somebody who walks away from anything," Mr. Duberstein said. "When she takes on a cause and a belief, she is very much like her husband. I think this one is very dear to her heart."

It is also dear to her family. Ms. Davis wrote passionately about her father's illness in the online version of Newsweek, this week and last month. "A messy, horrible war that has spun out of control could very well determine the next election," Ms. Davis wrote before her father's death. "So should the miracle of stem-cell research - a miracle the Bush White House thinks it can block."

Such pronouncements could spell trouble for the president, said James A. Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. "Nancy Reagan is now an icon, related to someone that America thinks very highly of who had the disease that might be cured by stem-cell research," he said. "That's pretty powerful."

But Republicans who are promoting the idea that Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's political heir say the dispute over stem cells and the Reagan family's comments will not put a dent in the association.

"Ronald Reagan has to be looking down from heaven and smiling at the way the current president, generally speaking, stands and the things he's doing, even though they might well disagree on some specifics," Newt Gingrich,
the former speaker of the House, said Monday. He added, "In eight days of nonstop nationwide focus, you get on the ninth day a slight hiccup."

Funeral Draws 35 Million Viewers

Just over 35 million viewers tuned in to the channels carrying the funeral of President Ronald Reagan on Friday night, the high viewing point for the coverage on the Reagan funeral events last week.

That was a big increase for the cable news networks that carried the events, though it represented a small decline compared with the entertainment programming on the broadcast channels the previous week. Among the broadcast networks, ABC had the largest audience, with 8.1 million viewers. On cable, Fox News had by far the biggest audience with about 5 million viewers.

Compared with other news events covered by all the broadcast networks, plus CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and CNBC, the funeral did not have an especially high number of viewers. The last State of the Union address, for example, was watched by 43.4 million viewers on those channels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/15/po...baf22243bd4051

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

At least in public...but that could be up for debate.

I watched very, very little of the Reagan-related news coverage last week, but I happened to catch a replay of Ron Jr.'s eulogy over the weekend, and was VERY surprised by the religion comment.

To me, at least, it was a clear jab at W.

As I've said before, I have a lot of respect for the Reagan family, even though I didn't care for Ron Sr. as a president... and I think a LOT of people will pay very close attention to their opinions in regards to Bush.

It was. When asked about it at his press conference today, between bitching about the heat, :lol: Bush said he "didn't hear it." :rolleyes: You can watch it on CSPAN or they might have it linked on their website, if you're interested. :thumbsup:

Now they've got me interested in giving money to Stan Matsunaka in his run against the "one trick pony" Marilyn Musgrave. It's not even my district and I think Matsunaka can win. Mrs. Musgrave is a one issue candidate, with her platform being that she never, ever wants to see homosexuals marry each other. She is of course, a Republican. :rolleyes:

Musgrave is a cold sow. She's made an ass out of herself so much this past year, I hope she gets the boot. She makes me sick. Maybe I should donate money to Matsunaka...and I live a thousand miles away. :laugh: