Powder Surprise
First, the preface:
Leave aside that Operation Iranian Freedom is about as likely as Bush diddling an intern, to say nothing of in the next five weeks. Or that if the Bushies were going to fake a bin Laden capture, they'd have been much more likely to do so for the President's own re-election bid two years ago. Or that the energy markets do not have a magic green curtain for Dubya to hid behind pulling strings.
The fact is, as David Frum goes on to detail, it is the Democrats who pull "October surprises." Remember Bush's DUI revelation four days before the 2000 election? Remember Rathergate? Remember the al Qaqaa flap about unguarded Iraqi ammunition stockpiles the week before the 2004 election? How about Cap Weinberger getting gratuitously indicted by Lawrence Walsh the Friday before the '92 election? What in blazes else is this Mark Foley flap all about?
It's just another reflection of the Democrats' superiority complex that tells them there's no way they can lose legitimately, so when they do - as has been the case for over a decade now - it has to be a "vast right-wing conspiracy" screwing them out of the power to which they believe themselves entitled.
Meanwhile, how's this for an October surprise:
I'm amazed that the AP reported this incident at all. I do notice, however, that they left out three pieces of information that I guarantee you would have been splattered all over front pages across the country if Bush were a Democrat: Braun's political affiliation, ideological leaning, and religious identity. That's what I want to know. Is Braun a fever swamp Bushophobe? Is he a Muslim? I can't help but suspect that one or both are true simply from the AP scrupulously avoiding mention of either one.
Can you imagine what the coverage of this story would be if it had been a decade ago, Bill Clinton the target, and the perpetrator a militia kook? Forget imagination, just remember the press smearing the entire conservative movement after the Oklahoma City bombing.
You'd think that libs would eventually accept that one-way streets have a way of doubling back on them. But if defeat after defeat will teach them nothing, perhaps they're beyond instruction.
Heck, they've been beyond reason for years. Why should instruction be any different?
"It should come as no surprise if the Bush Administration undertakes a pre-emptive war against Iran sometime before the November election." So blogged former U.S. Senator Gary Hart at HuffingtonPost.com on September 23rd.
No, replied a Democratic congressional candidate on another left-wing Web site four days later, the Bush Administration is not plotting to attack Iran. It is plotting to produce a fake capture of bin Laden.
Other Democrats hypothesize that the Administration will somehow contrive to lower gasoline prices.
But all Democrats are buzzing with one angry certitude: Karl Rove is planning an "October surprise" to cheat the Democrats out of victory in the November elections.
Leave aside that Operation Iranian Freedom is about as likely as Bush diddling an intern, to say nothing of in the next five weeks. Or that if the Bushies were going to fake a bin Laden capture, they'd have been much more likely to do so for the President's own re-election bid two years ago. Or that the energy markets do not have a magic green curtain for Dubya to hid behind pulling strings.
The fact is, as David Frum goes on to detail, it is the Democrats who pull "October surprises." Remember Bush's DUI revelation four days before the 2000 election? Remember Rathergate? Remember the al Qaqaa flap about unguarded Iraqi ammunition stockpiles the week before the 2004 election? How about Cap Weinberger getting gratuitously indicted by Lawrence Walsh the Friday before the '92 election? What in blazes else is this Mark Foley flap all about?
It's just another reflection of the Democrats' superiority complex that tells them there's no way they can lose legitimately, so when they do - as has been the case for over a decade now - it has to be a "vast right-wing conspiracy" screwing them out of the power to which they believe themselves entitled.
Meanwhile, how's this for an October surprise:
An engineer at a nuclear power plant has been charged with sending threatening letters containing a powdery substance to a country club where President Bush is scheduled to appear Tuesday for a Republican campaign event.
Michael Lee Braun, 51, appeared in court Monday on two federal charges of sending threats through the mail. The FBI said he also is a suspect in mailing dozens of similar threats since shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
I'm amazed that the AP reported this incident at all. I do notice, however, that they left out three pieces of information that I guarantee you would have been splattered all over front pages across the country if Bush were a Democrat: Braun's political affiliation, ideological leaning, and religious identity. That's what I want to know. Is Braun a fever swamp Bushophobe? Is he a Muslim? I can't help but suspect that one or both are true simply from the AP scrupulously avoiding mention of either one.
Can you imagine what the coverage of this story would be if it had been a decade ago, Bill Clinton the target, and the perpetrator a militia kook? Forget imagination, just remember the press smearing the entire conservative movement after the Oklahoma City bombing.
You'd think that libs would eventually accept that one-way streets have a way of doubling back on them. But if defeat after defeat will teach them nothing, perhaps they're beyond instruction.
Heck, they've been beyond reason for years. Why should instruction be any different?
posted by JASmius at 6:58 AM
<<< Home