Jackson Free Press

It's official. The decision was made some two and a half years ago, but the first airings of the Bush campaign's television ads brought the strategy fully into play. The horrible events of Sept. 11, 2001 will be a central issue in the campaign to elect George W. Bush. The outcry from victims' families was fierce and immediate. Across party lines they saw the ads for what they were, a crass and opportunistic run on the deaths of their loved ones. Good for them. Monica Gabrielle, one of thousands of 9/11 widows, put it this way: "It's a slap in the face of the murders of 3,000 people. It is unconscionable." My sentiments exactly, Mrs. Gabrielle.

How wise a decision this turns out to be for Team Bush still remains to be seen. The fact is, 9/11 affected us all. For most, more indirectly than in the way the victim's families were. Perhaps the majority of Americans, distanced from events by television screens and geography will see these ads differently. That's exactly the gamble Karl Rove is making.

If they are indeed going to make 9/11 a central issue in the campaign, however, let me take a page from John Kerry's book and quote the president himself: "Bring it on." Seriously. If there's any single event in the long list of dark moments we've suffered through since Bush was installed into power, it was that day in September three years ago.

Never mind the intelligence reports of just a few weeks prior, warning, in no uncertain terms, that Al Qaeda was planning to use hijacked commercial airliners as missiles on American targets.

Never mind that Bush took that as his cue to leave Washington, D.C., for Crawford, where he stayed for the next month, the longest vacation taken by a president in U.S. history. Never mind that.

Never mind that when he came into office, George Bush was warned in equally certain terms that bin Laden and Al Qaeda represented the greatest threat to America, and was urged to pursue ongoing efforts to bring that criminal to justice with a heightened sense of urgency.

Never mind all that. What America really needs to focus on are Bush's actions, that very day. "When I was waiting in that school to go into the classroom," he's quoted as saying, "I was watching the television and when I saw that jumbo jet fly into the World Trade Center, I thought to myself, 'Wow, there's one really bad pilot.'"

Never mind that we wouldn't see footage of the first impact for weeks. Never mind that the FAA already knew four planes had been simultaneously hijacked.

Even so, it was turning out to be quite an emergency. Sure of step and purpose, Bush went on inside that classroom. The commander in chief, the only man in America with the authority to order Air Force jets to take down a commercial airliner. The second plane hit. America was now, quite obviously, under attack. The president's chief of staff came in and informed the president of what had just occurred. There was only one thing to do—stay in that classroom another 20 minutes. No jets were scrambled, no action taken to prevent what was turning out to be a widespread attack on the nation. The president never left the room. No. Mustn't spook the children; they really are the future, you know.

Showtime made-for-TV movies notwithstanding, the president acted neither decisively nor heroically. He was flown around the country, from location to location. When the smoke cleared, and America was looking for a national leader to guide them through the horror of what followed, there he was—Rudy Giuliani.

Bush's wasn't the only plane in the air though, despite a blanket grounding of all non-military flights. There were other jets crisscrossing America's airspace, picking up bin Laden family members and Saudi nationals, whisking them off U.S. soil before they could be questioned.

Finally, days after the fact, the president showed up at Ground Zero and threw his arm around the shoulder of that retired firefighter. It was still weeks before his administration would lie outright to the very same Americans who cheered his get-tough tone from the bell of a megaphone.

Despite conclusive evidence to the contrary, the Environmental Protection Agency told those working the ground, some for 24 hours at a stretch, that the air posed no threat to their health. Heroes, they would have been in there regardless, but they could have at least been told the truth. The repercussions of these lies will be felt for many years to come.

Despite all that, Karl Rove saw gold. Like a vision: the grandest and most bulletproof of political campaigns, one that would indisputably bring Bush back to the White House in 2004. Nothing could stop them. To quote God (by way of Pat Robertson): "George Bush is going to win in a walk. I really believe I'm hearing from the Lord it's going to be like a blowout election in 2004."

Rove has had amazing successes in the past. Once again, whether this will be another still remains to be seen. For what it's worth, it doesn't seem to be getting off to such a great start. I hope America sees what the victims' families see. We'll just have to find out. Maybe, just maybe, the opportunistic glitter Karl Rove saw in the murder and destruction of that horrible day was nothing but fool's gold.

But you know, never mind all that. We need to talk. Bring it on.
Mitch Cohen is a freelance writer & media analyst living in Oxford.

Previous Comments

ID

69285

Comment

Michael Slackman writes in the NY Times today about the dangers of exploiting 9/11 as the Bush team is doing: "There is one clear lesson nationally that everyone should take from New York on 9/11, which is tread very carefully on this issue because you won't know you've crossed the line until you've crossed it," said Robert Bellafiore, a public affairs strategist in Albany who was a senior adviser to Gov. George E. Pataki. "That line separates talking about it as a legitimate issue and exploitation - and that line shifts over time." President Bush's team may not have examined the New York experience before introducing its own campaign advertisements with images of the ruins of the World Trade Center and firefighters carrying flag-draped remains from ground zero. If they had, they would have seen that Mr. Pataki benefited by highlighting only very gently his role during the crisis. The president's Democratic critics may also have missed the lessons of 2002, where efforts to attack Mr. Pataki's continued connection to Sept. 11 backfired at times. For Democrats, the message may be one of caution: charges of exploitation can boomerang and appear themselves like exploitation. Monica Gabrielle, whose husband, Richard, died in the attack on the World Trade Center, and who has since pushed for a through investigation of the disaster, had a warning for both parties: "Use me if you want to get to the truth; do not use me to play your political games." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/nyregion/15tragedy.html?hp

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-03-15T17:21:13-06:00