Transcript of the new Republican Attack Ad:

[Q]

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: "It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known."

CHYRON: Strong and Principled Leadership

BUSH: "Our war against terror is a contest of will in which perseverance is power."

CHYRON: Some are now attacking the President for attacking the terrorists.

BUSH: "Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?"

CHYRON: Some call for us to retreat, putting our national security in the hands of others.

CHYRON: Call Congress Now

CHYRON: Tell them to support the President's policy of preemptive self-defense.

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN ED GILLESPIE: "The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."

CHYRON:  Ed Gillespie

CHYRON:  Chairman, RNC

CHYRON:  The Republican National Committee paid for and is responsible for the content of this advertising. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee. www.gop.com 

----------------

- Support Preemptive self-defense? Is there such a thing in a rational world?

[Q]

1. Does anyone else detect a bit of insanity in this ad?

- The concept of 'preemptive self-defense' is the same thing as aggressive war. Such a doctrine allows ONE MAN to determine which countries should be attacked based on evidence that never has to be shown to the people or their representatives.

- And given this administrations secrecy and poor record on telling the truth...how could we ever trust this type of doctrine in their hands?

[maddezmom]

2. call Congress now....

and tell them you don't support preemptive self-defense. I think after the holidays we all should call.

[bitchkitty]

3. Preemptive self defense -

double plus good!

[veganwitch]

16. its an oxymoron and euphamism all in one!

its called aggression, offensive, starting wars.

[Minstrel Boy]

4. It wasn't even preemptive. Did Bush preempt an attack by Iraq?

Its justification is as a "preventative war." If the Administration now denies that Iraq was ever an "imminent threat," then a threat was not preempted; a threat was prevented from arising. And that's a Nazi doctrine.

From a sensible Republican, Dwight Eisenhower:

"All of us have heard this term 'preventive war' since the earliest days of Hitler," he said. "I don't believe there is such a thing; and, frankly, I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."

[meti57b]

6. that's a better point than mine. I think it has been demonstrated that ...

Iraq was in no position to attack us and was indeed not about to attack.

[meti57b]

5. this ad is an excellent snapshot of how truly corrupt the republican party

and the bush administration are.

Particularly because the first statement ("it would take one vial") is in itself true. But the ad of course leaves out what is the best way to prevent that from happening and whether it is even likely to happne It leaps to the conclusion that the only solution is so-called pre-emptive war.

This is an ad truly designed to persuade the stupid and ignorant.

[carpediem]

7. so by this logic

would this be ok?

I wake up one day and find out my neighbor has been attacked in his home. I find out who did it and go and eliminate the threat. In court, I claim preemptive self-defense, by the logic that if the person is a "bad guy" and had attacked my neighbor, he may come back and attack me, therefore I needed to take the action I did.

Yea, that will work...

actually while I am typing this it occurs to me that some of the people who think this war was a good idea would support what I just described. Very scary.

[Yupster]

19. It might work

down here in Texas.

[Snellius]

8. What Bush really said was ""It would take one wial"

They played the original State of the Union Address on Olbermann and he flubs the line so they digitally altered it. (If you look closely you can see the electrodes attached to the back of Bush's brain.)

[maddezmom]

13. where are the wials? have we found any WMD's yet? n/t

[CatWoman]

15. the wascally wabbit took the wials

:D

[maddezmom]

17. LOL

:) now we wust need to find the wabbit and we'll be all wet.

[maxanne]

9. given the lousy job

they've done funding and ensuring homeland security, the Democrats have a lot of ammo to counter this ad. I hope it happens.

The best thing the Democrats can do is to show the lies behind the promises.

[EV1Ltimm]

10. stick a fork in em.

they're done.

[Q]

11. "Strong and Principled Leadership"?

- What's 'principled' about using fear to drive this nation to war? What's principled about lying about Iraq's offensive capabilities or terrorist 'connections'?

- This ad is one big stinking lie.

[havocmom]

12. this ad may be good for TV sales

cuz where I live, there might just be some TVs suffering fatal injuries from shotguns. Many folks here abouts are sending food and water to kin in Iraq and getting some first hand reports about that "pre-emptive war". Many more are facing a Christmas they fear may be their last together, as a bunch of locals are shipping out after the first of the year.

This is GOP stronghold, farm and ranch country and the war is not playing well here. Also not playing well here, where the VFW hall is the center of community activities, is the cuts in benefits.

That ad may backfire big time with the folks who are actually facing the sacirfices of war.

[Q]

18. The ad may indeed backfire...

...but the Dems should help it along. Dems need to point out the obvious fabrications and appeal to nationalism.

[cspiguy]

14. Demo leaders have been saying - No Imminent Threat for months now

and that has been the talking-point, mantra, etc. It sounded like Bush was claiming the threat was imminent. If this is really from his SOTU speech, then this was a stupid talking point and will bite someone (Kerry and Levin to my memory) in the cheney.