February 08, 2005

British media critic politicizes Budweiser "Heroes" Super Bowl ad

Stefano Hatfield, media critic of the UK's Guardian newspaper, was not happy with Budweiser's Super Bowl ad honoring returning GI's -- and neither did his neighbor.

It was described as "moving" and "powerful" by the obsequious Fox critics, and "obscene" by my furious upstairs neighbour who called me straight after because he regarded the spot as incitement to war with Iran, and knows I write about such things and so it was of course my fault.

Pass the sick bag, Alice. I was too stunned by the spot to really take in the full import of a beer company waving off "our boys" (and girls) to battle. But battle? Where? The war in Iraq's over, isn't it or so they keep telling us? With Rice's thinly veiled threats towards Iran everywhere, it is hard not to see the spot as anything other than hailing the troops off to war. Pure propaganda, and it picked up on one of the themes of the night: patriotism.

First off, this retard seemed not to realize that these troops were returning home.

Secondly, what did he expect the fellow travelers to do, spit on the troops?

Then again, the liberal Guardian hates the Administration and anything that we find patriotic. But they're not here. They don't -- or do not choose to -- understand. That's their loss. And our gain.

(Courtesy Opinion Journal)

Posted by mhking at February 8, 2005 08:56 PM

First off, this retard seemed not to realize that these troops were returning home.

That would only make it worse, in his eyes. Moonbats like Hatfield don't think American soldiers should be returning home from war alive and in one piece. Failure to come home in a body bag is deliberate sabotage of the America-haters' anti-war message; thus they're class traitors (enlisted men being the military's proletariat).

Posted by: McGehee at February 8, 2005 09:54 PM

"First off, this retard seemed not to realize that these troops were returning home."

Any word other than 'retard' would have been nicer.

Posted by: CrzyDJM at February 9, 2005 05:46 AM

Love the blog Mike but your offhand comment inspired a post on my own blog....

Posted by: CrzyDJM at February 9, 2005 06:25 AM


loved the add, loved the post.

Posted by: Curtis at February 9, 2005 08:39 AM


Read the piece over at your place, and I certainly understand your ire at the use of the word. I definitely didn't mean to offend; the word was merely a "throwaway" for me, and could have just as easily come out as idiot, moron or any number of other words.

Again, I apologize, most sincerely for offending you.

Posted by: mhking at February 9, 2005 12:14 PM


I think that I overreacted, seeing as it was before 6am when I initially read the post (and had not had my breakfast yet OR the sleep wiped from my eyes!). I know you meant nothing by it and I apologize for MY outburst.

I've been dealing with that particular word spoken in a derogatory manner for all the years that my sister was alive and it was the quickest way to provoke my other sister and I into a fistfight (not with EACH other!) back then as younger kids. The word still makes me bristle and get stand-off'ish when I hear it used in casual conversations.

Thanks for the apology and please accept mine as well!

Keep up the great blog and I'll be back for sure (thanks once again for the well-wishes with my son's surgery)

-Crazy Dave

Posted by: CrzyDJM at February 9, 2005 12:40 PM

I opposed the first gulf war (I went over there, did nothing) and Bosnia. Not once did I feel hatred for my country nor wish any soldier harm.

Is it OK to question the patriotism of Americans who utter this nonsense too?

Posted by: Steven J. Kelso Sr. at February 10, 2005 01:37 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?