A Rebuttal to the Tim Tebow Ad February 7, 2010

A Rebuttal to the Tim Tebow Ad

The Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad hasn’t aired yet, but Jimmy Kimmel shows us the rebuttal ad that CBS will be airing 🙂

(Thanks to Ungullible for the link!)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • yhj

    In all fairness, “turning out like Tim Tebow” isn’t such a good thing either – jus’ sayin’ 😉

  • Alpharius

    Apparently the video is unavailable in New Zealand. Blast!

  • n00blet

    Not available in Australia either 🙁

  • NewEnglandBob

    Turn out like Tebow? The guy who forgets to wash bullshit off his face?

  • medussa

    While this is funny, and true (they don’t all turn out to be someone you’re proud of), it doesn’t really address the real reason people are upset about the Tebow ad: the fact the in the past, all “controversial” ads, or ads deemed to be political in their message, were banned from the Superbowl, and they suddenly decided to make an exception, but not for both sides of the issue.

  • I can’t watch it. The video doesn’t play on my country.

    Damn republicans.

  • I wonder how many anti-abortion nuts would have objected if the following mothers aborted their fetus: Mrs. Hitler, Mrs. Stalin, Mrs. Pol Pot, Mrs Bin Laden, Mrs. [insert serial murderer’s Moms’ names here], Mrs. Himmler, Mrs. Eichman, Mrs. Nero, Mrs. Caligula, Mrs. Jones (Jim Jones’ mother).

    Of course, I’d add the mothers of The Apostle Paul, Fred Phelps, Tomas De Torquemada, Pat Robertson, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron…oh nevermind, the list is too long.

  • Philbert

    The rebuttal is not that abortion weeds out undesirables from the gene pool. It’s that Tebow’s mother took a serious risk with her life that could have resulted in the death of both her and her son. It paid off and I’m very glad for the both of them, but we indulge the gambler’s fallacy if we use that fact to say that every woman should be compelled to make the same decision.

  • The bottom line is that Mrs. Tebow made a personal decision about the life of her fetus without government interference, which is a choice that every woman should have. This is what I have trouble getting my conservative “pro-life” family to understand. Pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion.

    …but I’m preaching to the choir here. 😉

  • Loren Petrich

    Dromedary Hump thought of something that I’d thought of some time ago. I’ll include some of his names:

    Julia Vipsania Agrippina in 12 CE
    Julia Augusta Agrippina in 37 CE
    Maria Alexandrovna Blank in 1869
    Ekaterina Geladze in 1878
    Sara Ann Delano in 1881
    Rosa Maltoni in 1883
    Klara Poelzl in 1888
    Franziska Tiefenbrunn in 1892
    Wen Qimei in 1893
    Anna Maria Heyder in 1899
    Maria Schefferling in 1905
    Lynetta Putnam in 1930
    Dorothy Emma Howell in 1947
    Pauline LaFon in 1947
    Dell Cassidy in 1948
    Betty Broder in 1952
    Hamida al-Attas in 1956
    Stanley Ann Dunham in 1961
    Isn’t this game fun? 🙂

  • Loren Petrich

    I couldn’t resist this additional one:
    Marian Oldenhausen in 1897

    Some opponents of birth control have also used this argument. They’ve said “Look at who would have been kept from coming into existence with birth control.”

  • @Dromedary Hump


    I demand an apology for you wanting to abort Cameron!

    …or you can toss in Michael Bay, and I may forgive your trespass 😀

  • Mikko

    not available for Sweden

    (if they start to send that program here i’m going to boycott them.)

  • Amen to Jennifer’s comment above.

    I love this response ad. Would have garnered a lot of laughs from the super bowl crowd.

error: Content is protected !!