Yahoo! News-

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republicans unveiled an advertisement on Friday featuring the image and words of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and a warning to voters that "these are the stakes" in the November 7 election.

 

The Republican National Committee ad, first shown on its Web site and scheduled for airing on cable television early next week, also includes images of al Qaeda fighters in training and other al Qaeda leaders.

 

"What is yet to come will be even greater," the ad quotes bin Laden as saying, before concluding with the words: "These are the stakes. Vote November 7."

 

President George W. Bush's Republicans, slipping in the polls from public dissatisfaction with the

Iraq war, are fighting to retain control of Congress in the election. Democrats must pick up 15 House seats and six Senate seats to win a majority in each chamber.

 

Republicans hope to turn the debate in the campaign's closing stages back to their traditionally strong issues of national security and the war on terrorism, although recent polls show Democrats overtaking them on that turf.

 

Democratic Senate campaign committee spokesman Phil Singer called the ad a "desperate" effort to spur Republican voter turnout.

 

The bin Laden ad recalls one of the most famous American political ads, the 1964 "Daisy" ad used by Democratic President Lyndon Johnson in his race against conservative Republican Barry Goldwater.

 

It featured a small girl picking a daisy and a countdown to nuclear explosion before an announcer says, "These are the stakes."

 

Here's a link to the actual video:

 

Bin Laden GOP Video

IMO its a very good ad....i havent seen it on tv though

The footage of the terrorists doing those TKD kicks always cracks me up, you'd think they could pick something more reliable style to train.

It's a symbiotic relationship. The GOP needs Bin Laden to impose fear and Bin Laden needs arbitrary foreign policy to alienate moderates.

fear mongering

 

 

"We have absolved the imperial senate, the Regional Governors will use FEAR to keep the populace in line"

I think it's wrong to use Bin Ladin in an advertisement like that and they shouldn't do it, however the message and point they're trying to make is very true, I just believe they should do it in a more tasteful way.

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

:|

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

well clinton had the chance too.....

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

As if the democrats never had a chance to get him when they were in power.

politics aint pretty and usually the dirtiest dog in the fight wins. Bin Laden and gay marriage is about as ugly as it gets and repub strategists will push them hard...I still think both Houses go Dem, which I think would be good. I like the idea of balance between legislature and president.

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

As if the democrats never had a chance to get him when they were in power.

hey...the russians didnt get him either if you want to go that far back...or you could put the blame on his parents for not smothering him when he was little...or you can just admit we have a president currently in power that couldnt find his way into water from a boat stranded in the pacific ocean

politics aint pretty and usually the dirtiest dog in the fight wins. Bin Laden and gay marriage is about as ugly as it gets and repub strategists will push them hard...I still think both Houses go Dem, which I think would be good. I like the idea of balance between legislature and president.

 

as do I.

 

Sometimes that's the best situation. The sides are pretty much forced into either working together (as they did during some of Clinton's terms) or just sitting around & getting zero done.

politics aint pretty and usually the dirtiest dog in the fight wins. Bin Laden and gay marriage is about as ugly as it gets and repub strategists will push them hard...I still think both Houses go Dem, which I think would be good. I like the idea of balance between legislature and president.

 

as do I.

 

Sometimes that's the best situation. The sides are pretty much forced into either working together (as they did during some of Clinton's terms) or just sitting around & getting zero done.

most likely the latter

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

As if the democrats never had a chance to get him when they were in power.

hey...the russians didnt get him either if you want to go that far back...or you could put the blame on his parents for not smothering him when he was little...or you can just admit we have a president currently in power that couldnt find his way into water from a boat stranded in the pacific ocean

I am not getting into it with you again. I will simply say that my point was valid and you're wrong when you try and pass off the blame somewhere else - Clinton had at least a dozen solid chances, even as late as 1999 which was the best chance yet, and he failed to pull the trigger. The best chance we had to catch Bin Laden was 1999 with Clinton, and he let him get away because he didn't want to wag the dog, this is irrefutible.

Message should read;

 

"We couldnt get him before, we outsourced getting him. Vote for us now to do it again and send your children off to die for our greed."

 

Or how about,

 

"We SWEAR we'll get him this time! Vote GOP."

 

:lol

As if the democrats never had a chance to get him when they were in power.

hey...the russians didnt get him either if you want to go that far back...or you could put the blame on his parents for not smothering him when he was little...or you can just admit we have a president currently in power that couldnt find his way into water from a boat stranded in the pacific ocean

I am not getting into it with you again. I will simply say that my point was valid and you're wrong when you try and pass off the blame somewhere else - Clinton had at least a dozen solid chances, even as late as 1999 which was the best chance yet, and he failed to pull the trigger. The best chance we had to catch Bin Laden was 1999 with Clinton, and he let him get away because he didn't want to wag the dog, this is irrefutible.

 

You can't really complain about him passing the blame somewhere else when you're doing it by blaming Clinton. Still, Clinton didn't send a whole military after him and find nothing either. Thae guy is obviously good at hiding.

Sorry, but our best chance was in 2001 in Tora Bora. Just ask the leader of the CIA strike team, Gary Berntsen. His book details how close we really were to getting him, but then we couldn't finish the job because his requests for a detachment of Marines to guard the last escape point from Tora Bora was denied. Instead, they were forced to give that job to a group of Northern Alliance soldiers, who were either paid off or just let Bin Laden go. No one is 100% sure.

 

Yes, Clinton had a chance to take out Bin Laden. However, I do not believe that we were as close to getting him in 1999 as we were in 2001, after he had become the most wanted man on the planet. Hindsight is 20/20.