A Super Bowl ad I can’t wait to see (UPDATE: SARAH PALIN RESPONDS TO NOW)

Posted by: ST on January 26, 2010 at 8:20 pm

Most of the time, Super Bowl ads are either cute, funny, sexy, over the top, or a combination of the above. Rarely do they preach any particular social awareness message – in fact, in the past oftentimes when advocacy groups have tried to place such ads during the Super Bowl they’ve been shot down by the network airing the SB.

This year’s a little different. CBS has “moderated” their policy on advocacy ads and as a result, Florida Gators QB and Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother Pam will be featured in a Focus on the Family ad in which Mrs. Tebow will discuss the time when she was pregnant with Tim and how she decided to keep him – in spite of doctors telling her to abort him:

He was the first sophomore in history to win a Heisman trophy. He was the first college football player both to rush and pass for 20 touchdowns in a season. Last year, he led his college team, the Florida Gators, to their second national championship in three years. At 6 feet 3 inches and 245 pounds, Tim Tebow may go down in history as the greatest college football player who ever lived.

And to think none of that would have happened if not for a decision his mother made nearly 23 years ago.

That is the message of a controversial new ad starring Tebow and his mother, Pam. Paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, the ad tells the story of Bob and Pam Tebow, who was pregnant with their fifth child when the couple travelled to the Philippines on a missionary trip.

While there, Pam contracted amoebic dysentery and the medicines used for her recovery threatened her unborn fetus. Doctors advised her to abort the fetus. Pam ignored their advice and gave birth on Aug. 14, 1987, to a baby boy. That boy was Tim Tebow.

Now arguably the highest profile player in college football for the past several years, Tebow cites his mother’s decision as a key reason he chose to participate in the Focus on the Family ad, which created a mild uproar after CBS agreed to air it on Super Bowl Sunday.

“I know some people won’t agree with it,” said Tebow of the 30-second ad at a press conference in Mobile, Ala., on Sunday, in preparation for next weekend’s Senior Bowl. “But I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe. I’ve always been very convicted of [his views on abortion] because that’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman.”

Of course the feministas are going nuts and are demanding the ad be pulled:

Jehmu Greene, president of Women’s Media Center, asked CBS on Monday not to air the commercial, saying, “An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sporting event of the year.”

The Women’s Media Center is coordinating the effort to have the ad pulled with support from the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority Foundation.

An ad that “uses sports to divide”? LOL. I wonder if Ms. Greene – or any other “feminist” who has objected to this ad – also objected to the “Super Bowl abuse” ad that aired before the 1993 Super Bowl which reported an outright false statistic about how men supposedly abuse their wives or girlfriends more on SB Sunday than on any other day of the year? Something tells me they didn’t.

I know most people – including most political junkies like you and me – tune in to sports to get away from politics for a few hours, and some may have concerns about the possibility that a wave of advocacy ads will hit future SBs but I wouldn’t worry about the Super Bowl becoming one pro or anti ad after another. Most advocacy groups don’t have the money it takes to pay for ads for the SB (they go for over $2 mil). And the few ads like that that do run, well, they’ll (hopefully) make everyone think – think about how ridiculous the left’s ads are and how the right’s ads make so much sense :D

Your thoughts?

Update – 8:45 PM: Sarah Palin responds to the “outrage” being expressed by women’s “rights” groups (via PalinTwibe):

NOW is looking at the pro-life issue backwards. Women should be reminded that they are strong enough and smart enough to make decisions that allow for career and educational opportunities while still giving their babies a chance at life. In my own home, my daughter Bristol has also been challenged by pro-abortion “women’s rights” groups who don’t agree with her decision to have her baby, nor do they like the abstinence message which she articulated as her personal commitment. NOW could gain ground and credibility with everyday Americans, thus allowing their pro-women message to be heard by more than just their ardent supporters, if they made wiser decisions regarding which battles to pick. They should call attention to and embrace the Tebow’s message, instead of covertly and overtly disrespecting what Mrs. Tebow, Bristol, and millions of other women have chosen to do (in less than ideal circumstances).

My message to these groups who are inexplicably offended by a pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life message airing during the Super Bowl: please concentrate on empowering women, help with efforts to prevent unexpected pregnancies, stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our “modern” culture and that we can expect better in 2010. But don’t let your double standard glare so vividly as to undo some of the good to which you could contribute.

And CBS: just do the right thing. Don’t cave. Have the backbone to run the ad.


RSS feed for comments on this post.


10 Responses to “A Super Bowl ad I can’t wait to see (UPDATE: SARAH PALIN RESPONDS TO NOW)”


  1. LC Gregory says:

    One thought I’ve always had about that stupid “statistic” about the Super Bowl.

    Back when that charge came out, there were only 28 teams in the NFL, compared to the 32 now. But still, that means that the fans of TWENTY-SIX teams were thinking primarily that their teams were NOT playing. As such, I always thought that, if there were any truth to that stat, it should be much worse on a Sunday during the regular season, when more fans actually had a stake.

    The Super Bowl has, for a LONG time, been more pageantry than football – the importance of the ads at a typical SB Party shows that. C’mon, “ladies” – next time you make up a phony talking point, do a little more work on it!

  2. If we had a black athlete doing a commercial for the NAACP about civil rights, would anyone argue that “sports shouldn’t be used to divide us” because there are Kluxers and other racists out there? I didn’t think so.

    But if they really believe that, there should be not a single photo of Barack Obama — the single most divisive president of my lifetime — anywhere in in evidence during the game or the commercials. After all, his negatives are high, his approval ratings are low, and he has been rejected by voters in the last three states that spoke their will.

  3. Great White Rat says:

    I don’t see anything in the message of that ad that calls for overturning Roe v. Wade or placing any new restrictions on abortion. The feministas are having a cow over nothing.

    It’s an ad with a positive message: where there is life, there is hope.

    It’s an ad where a solid young man with character to spare gets to send a heartfelt “thank you” to his mom in a way none of us here ever will.

    And someone named Jehmu Greene finds this offensive? I have a few questions for her. Are you saying his mother should have aborted him? Are you saying that thanking your mother for giving you life is “divisive”?

    Here’s the real reason they’re going ballistic: they have absolutely no way to respond to it. Do an ad calling for banning abortions, and they can respond with one about the “right to choose”. But run an ad that celebrates live and expresses love….and they have a big problem. Because abortion has nothing in common with either.

    They can’t run an ad with someone saying they’re glad to be aborted, for obvious reasons. The closest they could come is a spot featuring a woman saying how glad she is to have had an abortion, and that runs a huge risk of her coming off as a self-centered jackass. Celebrating death isn’t going to win many converts.

    And they wouldn’t be able to make the case that abortion is love either.

    So with no good response, and with the potential for this ad resulting in a downturn in women taking the sacrament of abortion, they do what statists always do: try to stifle speech. We don’t like it, so you shouldn’t be allowed to say it.

  4. Marilyn says:

    If the feminista types don’t like the ad, they can just change the channel while it runs. No one is forcing them to watch.

    I’m very happy to see this kind of message and hope the network doesn’t cave in and cancel the ad.

  5. Tom TB says:

    No mystery why the pro-abortion crowd would not want to see this; had they made another “choice” they might have had a son who would take care of them for the rest of their lives.

  6. John says:

    What does NOW want, an ad where Tiller’s wife is awarded a Gold Plated Spike by Obama posthumously for Dr. Tiller’s 18,000 late term abortions?

  7. listingstarboard says:

    Well how about showing a sonogram of an abortion right after the Tebow ad -you know equal airtime for both sides! That way women can make up their minds what to choose. Thats what it is supposed to be about,right? THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE???

  8. Excellent idea, listing!

  9. Carlos says:

    If CBS crumbles under the pressure of this “community activist” group (does that remind you of anyone?), I’d be all in favor of promoting watching something else during the game, or turning the cotton-pickin’ idiot box off! Especially since it seems the NOWzis don’t have a clue how to do that. It would be nice to show those weasels that a minor league bigmouth bunch like that doesn’t hold much sway with people who actually buy the products being advertised…