Posted by: chatblu on: January 30, 2010
Dear Mrs. Tebow,
Like millions of other college footballistas, I have watched your son develop into one of the game’s most memorable players. His heart, talent, personal ethics, and ability to run are like those of Georgia’s own Herschel Walker, and that’s saying something. (Yes, yes. I know he broke Herschel’s rushing touchdown record, but he took four years as opposed to Herschel’s three.) Your maternal pride in this fine young man is justifiable, but I must say that utilizing him to further your religious convictions is anything but.
Your family is deeply religious, and appears to live their beliefs. In and of itself this is absolutely laudable, but your rights and beliefs end right at the point where mine begin. As a mother, I can only imagine your agonizing decision to carry Tim to term despite medical advice to the contrary. Many would have chosen differently so as not to leave four motherless children behind, but your choice is personal and that is precisely as it should be. That said, your personal choice should be kept en famille rather than being a highlight of the bloody Super Bowl. Most people have long since made up their minds in this regard, and I assure you that no 30-second spot during THE football game of the year will have the impact for which you so hunger. I have watched the Super Bowl commercials for many years, and have yet to purchase Gillette shaving cream, Budweiser beer, or the services of e-Trade. I can also assure you that this really isn’t personal – I don’t want to spend Super Bowl Sunday pondering capital punishment, bigamy, or any other burning moral/ethical issue about which I have already made up my mind. I want to watch the damned game and be entertained, not lectured by the commercials, and I couldn’t possibly care any less about Sarah Palin’s support of your venture even if I tried.
As far as Tim goes, he has a bright future ahead. If he’s able to fix that funky throw, he’ll be a tremendous asset both on and off of the gridiron. Any team that drafts him will sleep soundly with no worries of DUI’s, bar fights, domestic violence or any of the other personnel plagues of the NFL. I just don’t want him, or any other male for that matter, advising me how to manage my reproductive system. Personally, I believe that his time might be better spent by imploring the “deadbeat dads” of America to be the kind of man that both he and his father exemplify – but I’ll bet you dollars to doughnuts that this type of public service/morality message will never air during the Super Bowl despite the fact that every struggling single mother in America would throw in a few bucks to make it happen.
CBS spokesperson Dana McClintock advised the AP that, despite the long-standing policy of eschewing this type of commercials during major sporting events, “we have for some time moderated our approach to advocacy ads after it became apparent that our stance did not reflect public sentiment or industry norms.” He then stated that CBS “will consider responsibly produced ads from all for the few remaining spots in Super Bowl XLIV”. I have a few suggestions, Dana. How about messages from MADD and the American Heart Association? Follow it up with ads about children lost in the foster system for 15 years because no one will adopt them. That should do it. Your audience can then feel guilty about their snacks, drinks and homes and a ripping good time will be had by all.
Terry O’Neill has stated that “The goal of Focus on the Family ad is not to empower women. It’s to create a climate in which Roe v. Wade can be overturned. ……….. NOW respects every woman’s right to plan her own family and insists that our laws do the same.”
I join Terry O’Neill in her sentiments, and add that CBS should respect my feelings, my privacy, and mind their own damned business.
Before I close, Mrs. Tebow, just one little suggestion: perhaps Tim should place all but about $40,000/year (about the average family income in Florida) into a fund so that unwanted foster children awaiting adoption will be able to go to school and further their lives. That would be the embodiment of pro-life values.
This is an open thread.
Chat: Has the Super Bowl broadcast ever allowed a commercial dealing with controversial social issues before? I don’t think so. Then why is this one being aired? I don’t understand it.
So more boobs are going to be exposed this SuperBowl? Hmmm, I’ll boycott (not exactly a hardship for me)
Super Bowl commercials cost big bucks. I bet NOW doesn’t have the $$$ that Focus on the Family does. A pity.
Why don’t liberal women work better together? It seems that conservative women do.
Just asking….
I had read/seen that the cost of the commercials for the S.B. were going down, i.e. ad revenue was off for the event. Supposedly this commercial cost $2 mill.
Gloria Allred thinks the ad may be misleading:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/29/tim-tebow-super-bowl-ad-m_n_442808.html
my comment at 117 p.m. is in moderation
Although not terribly germane to the issue I think the kid (tebow) is being manipulated in this situation.
One thing that professional sports doesn’t like is controversy (see leBron James and gun). From some things I’ve read Tebow has some things going against him to get into the pros. If he starts a controversy regarding being in this commercial he may only hurt his own chances of getting into the NFL.
Why is it that FL quarterbacks don’t seem to do well in the NFL? I’m thinking Wurfel (sp?) and another wunderkin who was at FL whose name I forget right now.
chat: thanks. I don’t know if what she says about the Philippines and abortion is true or not but yes it would be interesting to see it filed.
Chat: what the hell is up with Charlie and this?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100130/ap_on_re_us/us_medical_airlift_haiti
Apparently the Tebow fans aren’t too happy with this commercial idea either:
http://www.alligatorarmy.com/2010/1/19/1258224/tebow-his-commercial-and-the-nfl
chat-thanks for the info. Grossman was the other I was thinking of. They do great in college but aren’t “versatile” (?) enough for the pros?
re-the injured Haitians and Jackson Memorial. You’re right, that is a mess.
But CBS rejected this one. Can’t imagine why.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/mancrunch-superbowl-ad-ga_n_440773.html
What movie did that scene come from? Everyone has had a field day with doing these little things but now I’m curious about the original movie.
DYB@29: It’s actually humorous in an SNL kinda way.
@32: I wonder if they have it with subtitles?
@34: Thanks!! I would really like to see it now that I have some background on it.
Tried checking to see if blockbuster had it-they did, but no blockbuster in immediate area. I may just buy the damned thing off of Amazon.
MB@38: Eh, you could be right and most probably are.
I signed it.
MB@41: LOL! I believe it. If you’ve got a good contract, do you get travel time and a standard min. amt. for having to go in for a call?
What network is it on?
Aw shit!! I just saw it’s on the NFL Network.
DYB: I think it was something like $9.00 or so on amazon so I may buy it.
Brrrrr…it’s 33 here with a wind chill in the 20s. Looks like tonight is Papa Johns $10.00 pizza night.
While we are all Ga Ga over Pam Tebow, we should also thank Eunice Durden for giving birth to another Heisman Trophy winner, as you mentioned.
Uh no. No one mentioned O.J.
Sorry.
Re #32. ” loyal to him as a person “, regardless of ideology. Hmmmmm…. Now where have we seen that recently? Not so strange.
Just cruisin’ around the blogs (sigh-no other cruising for me
and I ran across this piece which is hysterical and shows the idiocy of trying to work with the repugs.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_01/022152.php
Chat, I think this part just summed it up:
Just a few years ago, a handful of Senate Republicans — Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, George Voinovich, and John McCain — argued that paygo should be brought back. They were unsuccessful in persuading their Republican colleagues at the time, and yesterday, they voted with their Republican colleagues to reject the idea that they’d already embraced.
Saying no just to say no.
Now I’m not sure how good an idea I think it is right now, but as we get out of recession (if?) it needs to be looked at. As the article stated, paygo was in effect when Clinton was in and made it possible to stop deficit spending.
DYB@56: You’d think that would be right up their alley, being fiscally conservative and all but nope, not gonna happen!
Well, I guess all’s right with the world and there’s nothing to worry about if he has time for this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_basketball
So, no Mamma Mia, huh?
Comments are closed.
January 30, 2010 at 9:06 AM
Reacting to an ad before it is even aired will only draw more attention to it.
Time might be better spent teaching our girls and women not to hero worship; not to be slaves to movie and sports stars. Surely we can admire what these people accomplish without surrendering our minds.
I have worked for reproductive rights for years but no more. All our struggles were worth it and not begruged, but now it appears that women have not evolved enough to continue their battle for their rights if they are influenced by a hunk of testosterone.
And it is difficult to think that the male and female electorate will be swayed by this ad since most of the viewers go out to the kitchen for refreshments during commercials and never see it. And most of the others will be so smashed they won’t even remember it.