(From the department of "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back")
Just saw this on Slashdot and thought my fellow Kossacks might be interested.
There was a coloring book, with a cover that featured a child's rendering "of the Twin Towers ablaze with an airplane heading for them" put out by Minnesota’s Freeborn County Crisis Response Team. At first glance, I was more than a little appalled--I hadn't seen this before today.
UPDATE: This just in from CNN: Boehner's office has released a web video attacking Obama and the Dems on security issues, featuring footage of a burning Pentagon from 9/11. Have they no shame?
Update: First, I'll cover the original purpose of the diary, the WTC coloring book that's been making the rounds today. If you're looking for the Pentagon ad, scroll down a ways. I can't seem to edit the poll, so just to clarify, the poll is referring to the FEMA book, not the GOP ad. I have a feeling we're all of one mind on that.
It was put on FEMA's website back in 2003, and has been pulled as of this week. As another article by the Christian Science Monitor put it:
The idea behind the downloadable book was to help children cope with disasters, says the organization responsible for it. So on page 12, there are three images of the burning twin towers for children to color.
Now, I'm interested to see how people feel about this. I'm sure the people who put this together had good intentions, but this just seems weird.
Also, according to the CSM, the pulling of the coloring book is part of a wide-scale effort by Obama's FEMA to remove many traces of the Bush administration's mark on FEMA.
Of course, not everyone's happy. Guess who!
(Again, h/t to the Christian Science Monitor's article)
Not everyone agrees with the decision to pull it down.
The conservative PowerLine blog sees this as a troubling trend.
“It isn’t hard to see where this is going. It started with the television networks imposing de facto censorship on all footage of the September 11 attacks. The pace of revisionism is accelerating as Obama’s executive branch reviews everything produced by “the previous administration.” Eventually the only public legacy of the September 11 attacks will be photos of American soldiers brutalizing detainees.”
But a blogger on the conservative Lew Rockwell website says the government is too “obsessed” with 9/11.
“Is it that they want to keep the “fear” factor ever-present in the sheeple’s minds? After people complained, FEMA removed the coloring book from its site. Too bad we can’t remove FEMA from our sight.”
Sheeples, huh? Classy.
What are your thoughts? My main thought is that, maybe in the days after WTC, something like this might have helped kids who were really freaking out (though I'm still not sure about that. Encouraging your kid to color in the fire of a terrorist attack is not "Family Friendly" in my book.) What strikes me is that this was put out in 2003. Hopefully, your kid has recovered by then.
Curious, I did a quick Goodsearch (which, if you're not familiar, is like Google, but gives money to the charity of your choice. I highly recommend it, and, if you can't think of a charity to give to, help me raise money for the Comprehensive Therapy Center, a great organization I used to work for), and found an ABC News article on the coloring book's origins.
Asking children to draw and color to express their feelings after experiencing a traumatic event -- also known as art therapy -- is common, according to mental health professionals. This type of therapy is best when it's tailored to each individual child, however, some warn. Olmsted said the idea for the book came after a tornado touched down in southern Minnesota in 2003 and parents looked for ways to help their kids understand what they had experienced.
"We became aware that we had no coloring book that would help children to be able to put words to what they had experienced and the devastation they had seen," said Olmsted.
OK, enough from me. I turn the discussion over to you folks. What do you think?
Update #1: Looks like I just barely beat someone to the punch--the next diary after mine in the queue is also about this. I'm all about encouraging discussion, so here's a link to her diary.
Update #2: Footage of a Burning Pentagon used in GOP web ad:
(Hat tip to CNN)
Apparently feeling like national security is still a winning issue, Boehner's office just released a web video employing footage of the Pentagon:
The campaign-style video, created by a Boehner aide in his Capitol office, begins with the question, "What are Democrats doing to keep America safe?"
Then, with ominous music in the background, it splices sound bites from news reports and Republicans talking about the dangers of President Obama's decision to close Guantanamo Bay and to release Bush-era memos about harsh interrogation techniques.
The video's climax races through images of Obama hugging the Saudi king, shaking hands with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and ends with an image of the Pentagon burning on September 11, 2001, followed by a final question: "Do you feel safer?"
The Republican's damage control:
Boehner spokeswoman Antonia Ferrier defended using the 9/11 image.
"The events of September 11 happened. Pretending they didn't won't make America any safer. And ignoring the fact that it happened is even worse," Ferrier said.
When asked by CNN why he released what some will view as an alarmist video, Boehner said he is trying to "push the administration to tell us: What is the overarching strategy to take on the terrorists and defeat them and to help keep America safe?"
The Democrat's initial response:
Democrats said such "politics of fear" are scaring voters away from the GOP.
"Is it any wonder that voters and senators alike are running away in droves from the Republican Party? Looks like they have taken a page from the discredited Rove/Bush/Cheney playbook. This ad is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to play up the politics of fear and smear," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Something tells me that this is not going to wow the moderates, and continue the GOP's long, proud history of dog-whistle politics.