Basic decency.
It seems to me that if only ONE person related to a victim is offended by GWB & Co. trying to make political profit from the death of their loved one, only ONE, it should be stopped.
If the "angst" of only ONE relative is increased every time they see that site on TV, just ONE person is hurt, it should be stopped.
That's just common decency.
It's kind of humorous to see conservatives decry the political motives of people who see GWB trying to use the death of their relatives for political gain.
They say the reluctance to allow their pain to be continually revisited as "political".
It is especially humorous because it's entirely possible GWB could have stopped it had he done his job. He will not share the info he had with the commission he appointed, won't take an oath. Neither will Cheney, or Rice. It's safe to assume they are not doing that because they are hiding something.
Making political profit from a tragedy they could have stopped, well, that's not really OK.
Now, the ads aren't "political". The resistance is "political".
Ya gotta wonder, don't you?
Current Events » in reply to A slightly different opinion from those who lost people on 9/11
Back to basics. Remedial Decency 10.
The whole thread (24 posts)
- A slightly different opinion from those who lost people on 9/11
- The liberals don't give a flip about the 911 families or decency. It is all about controlling what we discuss in the election
- Back to basics. Remedial Decency 10.
- If you liked that ad, boy have we got a great follow-up!
- re: Back to basics.
- A small note on media tilt
