Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-23 06:08pm

The new Bush add shows a pack of wolves sitting in a field. These are supposed to represent "terrorists" and only Dubya can save us from the marauding beasts.

Where do we start?

1) These wolves look about as menacing as a bunch of Girl Scouts peddling chocolate chip cookies.

2) Even if wolves are a metaphor, doesn't that make Numbnuts the boy who cried "wolf!" and got his flock killed?

3) Wolves don't attack human beings, but do kill and eat sheep and swine, so maybe Bush supporters have good reason worry about them.

4) Bush's environmental policies have done much more damage to wildlife (including wolves) than his "War on Terror" has to Al-Queda.

http://www.wolfpacksfortruth.org/

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-10-23 06:11pm

Elfdart wrote:4) Bush's environmental policies have done much more damage to wildlife (including wolves) than his "War on Terror" has to Al-Queda.

OH YES, we all know that the evil BushCo has proceeded to clear cut forests and pour hot radioactive waste into pristine wilderness!

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-23 06:30pm

Not hot, Shep -scalding hot!

You forget that Dickhead Cheney was opposed to allowing the wolf back into Yellowstone, either being reintroduced by the Department of Interior or moving in naturally. Well the wolf is back and Yellowstone is thriving because of it.

You also forget that the loony Right are devastationists who would love nothing more than to pour asphalt and tar over as much of the country as possible. Of course, if I looked like Rush Limbaugh I'd have a grudge against nature, too. Look what it did to him!

Gustav32Vasa · Post by **Gustav32Vasa** » 2004-10-23 07:17pm

MKSheppard wrote:OH YES, we all know that the evil BushCo has proceeded to clear cut forests and pour hot radioactive waste into pristine wilderness!

They did that?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-10-23 07:22pm

Gustav32Vasa wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:OH YES, we all know that the evil BushCo has proceeded to clear cut forests and pour hot radioactive waste into pristine wilderness!
They did that?

Well, first they gathered up baby seals and single mothers and put them out in the wilderness. Then they poured the radioactive waste on top of them.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-10-23 07:23pm

Gustav32Vasa wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:OH YES, we all know that the evil BushCo has proceeded to clear cut forests and pour hot radioactive waste into pristine wilderness!
They did that?

I know you Swedes are a little slow but come on.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-10-23 07:35pm

RedImperator wrote:
Gustav32Vasa wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:OH YES, we all know that the evil BushCo has proceeded to clear cut forests and pour hot radioactive waste into pristine wilderness!
They did that?
Well, first they gathered up baby seals and single mothers and put them out in the wilderness. Then they poured the radioactive waste on top of them.

Well actually, the liquid nuclear waste was poured on them as a side effect of it being used to hydraulically mine ultra high sulfur coal, which is to be used to power a new generation of Texas produced steam cars.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-23 07:47pm

Elfdart wrote:The new Bush add shows a pack of wolves sitting in a field. These are supposed to represent "terrorists" and only Dubya can save us from the marauding beasts.

Where do we start?

1) These wolves look about as menacing as a bunch of Girl Scouts peddling chocolate chip cookies.

2) Even if wolves are a metaphor, doesn't that make Numbnuts the boy who cried "wolf!" and got his flock killed?

3) Wolves don't attack human beings, but do kill and eat sheep and swine, so maybe Bush supporters have good reason worry about them.

4) Bush's environmental policies have done much more damage to wildlife (including wolves) than his "War on Terror" has to Al-Queda.

http://www.wolfpacksfortruth.org/

I'm am seriously becoming very humored why you find it necessary to disect every ad created by the Bush campaign and every statement released to try and spin it into something that supports your liberal hate mongreling

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-10-23 08:01pm

No, my liberal hate is purebred.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-23 08:27pm

Elfdart wrote:No, my liberal hate is purebred.

ROFL!

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-10-23 08:54pm

Talon Karrde wrote:I'm am seriously becoming very humored why you find it necessary to disect every ad created by the Bush campaign and every statement released to try and spin it into something that supports your liberal hate mongreling

Is this what you do now? Go into threads, take potshots, contribute nothing, and then leave?

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-23 08:58pm

RedImperator wrote:
Talon Karrde wrote:I'm am seriously becoming very humored why you find it necessary to disect every ad created by the Bush campaign and every statement released to try and spin it into something that supports your liberal hate mongreling
Is this what you do now? Go into threads, take potshots, contribute nothing, and then leave?

Do you dispute the point I bring up? It seems Elf (and quite honestly, not just him, but others on this board) love to analyze ever facet of the campaign of Bush and try to find some faulty logic or something to complain about. Funny thing is, I hardly see the same response to ads supporting John Kerry.

The Silence and I · Post by **The Silence and I** » 2004-10-23 09:01pm

In fairness there is not much anyone has contributed to this thread...

Drooling Iguana · Post by **Drooling Iguana** » 2004-10-23 09:02pm

RedImperator wrote:Well, first they gathered up baby seals and single mothers and put them out in the wilderness. Then they poured the radioactive waste on top of them.

And then the baby seals grew to be 50 feet tall and set off to attack Tokyo.

The single mothers, on the other hand, just got cancer.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-10-23 09:09pm

Talon Karrde wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
Talon Karrde wrote:I'm am seriously becoming very humored why you find it necessary to disect every ad created by the Bush campaign and every statement released to try and spin it into something that supports your liberal hate mongreling
Is this what you do now? Go into threads, take potshots, contribute nothing, and then leave?
Do you dispute the point I bring up? It seems Elf (and quite honestly, not just him, but others on this board) love to analyze ever facet of the campaign of Bush and try to find some faulty logic or something to complain about. Funny thing is, I hardly see the same response to ads supporting John Kerry.

What he does in other threads has no bearing on this one. His point in this thread is valid--it's a terrible ad. The first thing I thought when I heard of it was the same thing he did--"The boy who cried wolf". Considering this administration's history, it's not the connotation you want your ads to create.

As for how the board in general reacts to Bush ads as opposed to Kerry ads, so what? This board doesn't like Bush. The Democrats don't like him, the Republicans don't like him, the international posters don't like him. If you'd like to critique Kerry ads, by all means, be my guest, but you doing nothing but taking potshots and pissing and moaning about how the board isn't fair to Bush is getting old.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-23 09:13pm

RedImperator wrote:
Talon Karrde wrote:
RedImperator wrote: Is this what you do now? Go into threads, take potshots, contribute nothing, and then leave?
Do you dispute the point I bring up? It seems Elf (and quite honestly, not just him, but others on this board) love to analyze ever facet of the campaign of Bush and try to find some faulty logic or something to complain about. Funny thing is, I hardly see the same response to ads supporting John Kerry.
What he does in other threads has no bearing on this one. His point in this thread is valid--it's a terrible ad. The first thing I thought when I heard of it was the same thing he did--"The boy who cried wolf". Considering this administration's history, it's not the connotation you want your ads to create.

As for how the board in general reacts to Bush ads as opposed to Kerry ads, so what? This board doesn't like Bush. The Democrats don't like him, the Republicans don't like him, the international posters don't like him. If you'd like to critique Kerry ads, by all means, be my guest, but you doing nothing but taking potshots and pissing and moaning about how the board isn't fair to Bush is getting old.

I haven't said anything about it not being fair to Bush.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-10-23 09:18pm

Talon Karrde wrote:I haven't said anything about it not being fair to Bush.

Oh?

You wrote:Do you dispute the point I bring up? It seems Elf (and quite honestly, not just him, but others on this board) love to analyze ever facet of the campaign of Bush and try to find some faulty logic or something to complain about. Funny thing is, I hardly see the same response to ads supporting John Kerry.

Perhaps you'd like to clarify what you meant, since I'm having a hard time seeing how that means anything besides it's unfair.

Talon Karrde · Post by **Talon Karrde** » 2004-10-24 01:20am

RedImperator wrote:
Perhaps you'd like to clarify what you meant, since I'm having a hard time seeing how that means anything besides it's unfair.

Certainly. I was merely bringing up the point that he is trying to find offense to every aspect of the Bush campaign, but turns a blind eye to anything that has to do with Kerry. It has nothing to do with fairness, it hasn't to do with objectivity.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-10-24 03:28am

Quit arguing semantics you pedantic fool.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-10-24 03:32am

This ad was obviously trying to build on that Reagan ad that portrayed the evils of communism as a bear.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-10-24 03:36am

Holy shit, Bush is doing a halfass shitty copy of a Reagan idea?

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-10-24 03:40am

Talon Karrde wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Perhaps you'd like to clarify what you meant, since I'm having a hard time seeing how that means anything besides it's unfair.
Certainly. I was merely bringing up the point that he is trying to find offense to every aspect of the Bush campaign, but turns a blind eye to anything that has to do with Kerry. It has nothing to do with fairness, it hasn't to do with objectivity.

You call that a point? Do you really think that posting your tremendous insight that Elfdart doesn’t like Bush and likes to criticise him qualifies as a point? I’ve never known Elfdart to make any claims to be objective he’s always proudly worn and expressed his extremely partisan views so what was your point again?

If Elfdart was a major broadcaster who kept on telling us that he was ‘fair and balanced’ you might actually have a point but seeing as he’s a poster on a politics forum who’s always been pretty damn honest about his views please do clarify further what exactly it is you think you’ve contributed to this thread?

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-10-24 03:40am

Howedar wrote:Holy shit, Bush is doing a halfass shitty copy of a Reagan idea?

Just like with the economy.

Post by **Cairber** » 2004-10-24 08:36am

Im not a fan of the ad ( i happen to think wolves are very neato animals..LoL) but where I work we were discussing this ad. Two mothers said that they didnt mind the ad and were considering voting for Bush just because they think he would bring them more safety. I didnt think all that BS about "safety moms" was true until that moment. On the other hand, there were lots of people arguing that the ad is stupid.

Kerry is doing a shitty job with women voters, I dont think anyone on this board can deny that. But at least hes not trying to scare them into voting for him. Thats the last thing this society needs...freaked out mothers who teach their children how to be that way.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-10-24 08:40am

Of course, in a recent speech Bush said that on Nov 2nd voters will "reject the politics of fear". Not only is that ironic, but it reminds me of a Simpsons quote, uttered by either Kang or Kodos during their bid for the Presidency;

"The politics of failure have failed! It is time to make them work again."

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Re: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?