Someone Else's Alex

[Warrior-Mentor]

New York Times
June 23, 2008
By William Kristol

The people at MoveOn.org have a new Iraq ad that is, if they do say so themselves, their most effective ever. Then again, for the group that brought us the “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” ad last September, that might not be saying much.

Nevertheless, the organization boasts on its Web site, “This isn’t your average political ad — it lays out the truth about McCain’s Iraq policy in a personal and compelling way.” MoveOn also claims, “We just got the results back and polling shows that voters found it to be more persuasive than any other ad we’ve tested before.”

I’m not persuaded. Having slandered a distinguished general officer, MoveOn has now moved on to express contempt for all who might choose to serve their country in uniform.

Their new and improved message is presented in a 30-second TV spot, “Not Alex,” produced in conjunction with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. It’s airing for a week on local broadcast stations in markets in the swing states of Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, and on two national cable channels, with a reported buy of over half a million dollars.

The ad is simple. A mother speaks as she holds her baby boy:
“Hi, John McCain. This is Alex. And he’s my first. So far his talents include trying any new food and chasing after our dog. That, and making my heart pound every time I look at him. And so, John McCain, when you say you would stay in Iraq for 100 years, were you counting on Alex? Because if you were, you can’t have him.”

Take that, warmonger!
Now it might be pedantic to point out that John McCain isn’t counting on Alex to serve in Iraq, because little Alex will only be 9 years old when President McCain leaves office after two terms.

And it might be picky to remark that when McCain was asked whether U.S. troops might have to remain in Iraq for as long as 50 years, he replied, “Maybe 100” — explaining, “As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it’s fine with me, and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world. ...”

In other words, McCain is open to an extended military presence in Iraq, similar to ones we’ve had in Germany, Japan or Kuwait. He does not wish for, nor does he anticipate, a 100-year war in Iraq.

But it is surely relevant to point out that the United States has an all-volunteer Army. Alex won’t be drafted, and his mommy can’t enlist him. He can decide when he’s an adult whether he wants to serve. And, of course, McCain supports the volunteer army.

All of this is pretty much par for the course in political advertising. And I’m of the latitudinarian school when it comes to campaign discourse; politics is supposed to be rough and ready. So, why, I wondered after first seeing the MoveOn ad, did I find it so ... creepy?

I was having trouble putting my finger on just why until I came across a post by a mother of a soldier recently deployed in Iraq, at the Web site BlueStarChronicles.com.

Here’s what the mother of an actual soldier has to say about the remarks of the mother of the prospective non-soldier in the ad:

“Does that mean that she wants other people’s sons to keep the wolves at bay so that her son can live a life of complete narcissism? What is it she thinks happens in the world? ... Someone has to stand between our society and danger. If not my son, then who? If not little Alex then someone else will have to stand and deliver. Someone’s son, somewhere.”

This is the sober truth. Unless we enter a world without enemies and without war, we will need young men and women willing to risk their lives for our nation. And we’re not entering any such world.

We do, however, live in a free country with a volunteer army. In the United States, individuals can choose to serve in the military or not. The choice not to serve should carry no taint, nor should it be viewed with the least prejudice. If Alex chooses to pursue other opportunities, he won’t be criticized by John McCain or anyone else.

But that’s not at all the message of the MoveOn ad.
The MoveOn ad is unapologetic in its selfishness, and barely disguised in its disdain for those who have chosen to serve — and its contempt for those parents who might be proud of sons and daughters who are serving. The ad boldly embraces a vision of a selfish and infantilized America, suggesting that military service and sacrifice are unnecessary and deplorable relics of the past.

And the sole responsibility of others.

[Gypsy]

The folks at moveon.org need to...move on.

[Geo]

My little boy was born eleven days ago. My wife is somewhat emotional right now as most of you have experienced. She saw this ad and was holding our little boy in her arms. When the tears started flying, she said she was thinking of our baby going off to the Army. Now, she is not from a military family. We met and married after I got out of the Army. I had to explain to her that some people actually consider it an honor to join the military. It bothers me that she, along with the rest of your average civilian are eating this ad up. I regret I never got to show her what it means to serve. The bond between families and friends in your unit is something I miss to this day. I hate moveon.org. Now, If I could get her to let me check out the 19th group......hmmm

[nmap]

It sounds as if the Moveon ad is propaganda - and, frankly, cleverly designed propaganda. It creates images that appeal to the emotions, thus bypassing any rational analysis. The effectiveness is illustrated by Geo's wife's reaction.

To fight propaganda, it would be necessary to come up with something just as hard-hitting on the other side. Values other than mere consumption would need to be promoted, and it would have to be done in a visual medium.

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of material that presents the other side.

[ZonieDiver]

Originally Posted by Gypsy

The folks at moveon.org need to...move on.

Very well said! I just wish we could be so blessed that they would actually move on. Many of my fellow teachers eat that "stuff" up with a big spoon, and then try to pass it along to their students. Emotional blather instead of rational discourse. What a shame.

[Shar]

Originally Posted by Warrior-Mentor

The MoveOn ad is unapologetic in its selfishness, and barely disguised in its disdain for those who have chosen to serve — and its contempt for those parents who might be proud of sons and daughters who are serving. The ad boldly embraces a vision of a selfish and infantilized America, suggesting that military service and sacrifice are unnecessary and deplorable relics of the past.

And the sole responsibility of others.

I heard this ad on Rush (I think) last week and it pissed me off something fierce. The liberals run around saying that they "support the troops" but this is absolute proof that they do no such thing. I know we haven't gotten anywhere near the vitriol of Vietnam - but the venom is there, it's just vieled in a haze of PC-talk. That article does a good job of describing the many reasons why the ad does a number on my nerves, but it just FRIES me.

[enterfirst]

suggesting that military service and sacrifice are unnecessary and deplorable relics of the past

The Democrats of today have changed so much from the Democrats of the Kennedy years. Their naivity is amazing to me. They make noise about all these injustices in the world and in the same breath talk of how "military force" is outdated. The perfect example is BHO. He'll state how dangerous terrorists are, yet apparently believes that "sitting down at the table" with Ahmadinejad and other terrorist will magically and peacefully make them see the light, and everyone will hug each other, smoke the peace pipe, and the world will be such a wonderful place.

Ah, if ONLY us warmongerers could see the truth...

I have seen the ad and it is very effective on it's target audience. All the above analysis is just wasted typing. To me (Mr. Non-PC) this is the poster child for why the majority (not all, but many) women should not have been allowed the vote. Many of them Cant Understand Normal Thinking. That being said, I have to admire it because it works.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Remington Raidr

I have seen the ad and it is very effective on it's target audience. All the above analysis is just wasted typing. To me (Mr. Non-PC) this is the poster child for why the majority (not all, but many) women should not have been allowed the vote. Many of them Cant Understand Normal Thinking. That being said, I have to admire it because it works.

I do not believe that this thinking is limited to females.

As far as the vote goes, I am with Heinlein. You should have to serve your country to have a say in the running of it as a fully-vested citizen.

Otherwise, you may not get it.

TR

[ZonieDiver]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I do not believe that this thinking is limited to females.

As far as the vote goes, I am with Heinlein. You should have to serve your country to have a say in the running of it as a fully-vested citizen.

Otherwise, you may not get it.

TR

In order to vote, I think people should, at the very least, have to pass the same test that people who wish to become citizens of the USA have to pass.

[echoes]

Agree with Gypsy...Moveon.org should just m-o-v-e-o-n.

Holly

[tom kelly]

Who are the people (scum) that make up this ultra liberal left group? Does anyone reading this site know any of the members or better yet their financial supporters? Please PM me with names if you do not wish to post in an open forum. I can guess that some if not most of their support comes from the preverted moguls in Hollyweird Ca. Please send some names...Regard's, tom kelly

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by tom kelly

Who are the people (scum) that make up this ultra liberal left group? Does anyone reading this site know any of the members or better yet their financial supporters? Please PM me with names if you do not wish to post in an open forum. I can guess that some if not most of their support comes from the preverted moguls in Hollyweird Ca. Please send some names...Regard's, tom kelly

George Soros. Billionaire socialist political activist and tax evader. Man (and money) behind moveon.org.

http://rightvoices.com/2006/10/06/ge...an-in-america/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

TR

[PSM]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

George Soros. Billionaire socialist political activist and tax evader. Man (and money) behind moveon.org.

http://rightvoices.com/2006/10/06/ge...an-in-america/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

TR

And largest shareholder in JetBlue.

Pat

[Shar]

Soros has stated his stake in the company is at about 11% now, down from around 33% at its highest. The largest shareholder right now is Lufthansa. I know this because I am a big believer in taking my business elsewhere when I don't like where the money goes and this one has been tough on me.

I like Neeleman and Jetblue - good airline, good business practices. Mostly.

What I think is funny is that Jetblue's executives did a whole lot of Romney backing. I wonder how Soros liked that? Regardless, Jetblue sat all over that fence. Therefore I am on the fence with Jetblue.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...aign_financing

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/.../jet_blue.html