May 26, 2004

One photo-op a month
vis_rad_bomb3I try and keep my political feelings to myself, but you have to wonder about today's terror warning after reading a quote like this (via pandagon):

Administration sources tell TIME that employees at the Department of Homeland Security have been asked to keep their eyes open for opportunities to pose the President in settings that might highlight the Administration's efforts to make the nation safer. The goal, they are being told, is to provide Bush with one homeland-security photo-op a month.

With GW's poll numbers at an all time low, isn't it convenient that all of a sudden we have an alert about an unspecified attack, that we: 1) don't know when it will happen 2) don't know where it will happen 3) don't know how it will happen. How do we know it's supposed to happen at all? Tom Ridge tells us not to worry, and go about your day like any other-- it's no big deal that a major U.S. city might be nuked/gased/infected in the next few months. Why should something like that bother you?


Hey, Great site. Love the simplicity. As for the fearmongering, I would tend to agree with you that the timing seems a little suspicous; however, what else are they supposed to do? Given the fact that they are not prophets, and they do not use a crystal ball, they cannot come out and directly tell you where or when the attack would be. Furthermore, I do not see the causal connection between higher alerts of terrorist attacks and higher ratings for George Bush. To me, more threats would lower his ratings, vis, we are still under attack and thus, not protected.

that's true- especially when you see that an actual terrorist attack in Madrid ended up upsetting the election and got the incumbent booted. So maybe fear mongering and terror attacks are not good for standing administrations.

Keep your feelings to yourself? Why? Speak loud, and everywhere, about your displeasure in the state of union! We're being led by a babbling, alcoholic, awol'd, druggie, moron! The world, that was at our feet, now hates us. And on top of that the economy sucks! The terror alert is a sham - what color is it today, marroon? What about "No child left behind..."? My daughter's 2nd grade inner city pen pal can't even read! Schools in Cleveland, OH are crumbling, schools in Philadelphia, PA are abolishing their arts programs... What's the answer? Certainly not "Faith based initiatives"! Whatever happened to the separation of church and state? We can't tolerate another 4 years of this - register and do your duty come November.

Thanks for the vent, the soap box is yours mon frere.

I agree with Dunc that the freedom we have in this country to protest is indeed a special right, and it bodes well to use it. But, I would respectfully disagree about the sky is falling argument. Also, some of the things that were mentioned preceded the present administration. For instance, I can remember way back when I was a youngster and our schools were much in the same state. I don't think that we can pin all of societies perceived ills on one man. That is absurd; he simply does not have that much power. So maybe the lesson is to ask not what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country.

Thank you for the soapbox, et je vous dis, merci.

By the way, this is a great site.

When your plat-form was No Child Left Behind I believe we have a right to finger point. Especially when you have children and support the public school systems.

Wag the dog this administration gets everyone all worried and fear. Should we go get the plastic and duct tape once again? Aren't we safer now?

Iraq is a mess we blamed Saddam for torture once the WMD were a joke. Then we're doing the same things to his own people who didn't ask for democracy, just a new leader.Since this is all over the news, Karl Rove has to do something.

I wanted McCain so save the liberal rants.

Wow - your posts don't usually generate this many comments. Of course, it had to do it on a political note...

As for the fear mongering, what president wouldn't? We got duped into going into Iraq. Democrat or republican, we all fell for it. (All you democrats saying you didn't... uh huh... sure.) Any president worth his salt is going to take as bleeding-edge of a chance as his administration can to capitalize on the situation.

This came up at the DLCIC this year- it was mentioned that none of my friends discuss politics around each other. I try and not get into politics with my friends-- as a few that are very close and important to me (but might be mentally insane) believe in the Bush/Republican machine. It's not worth the enviable late night argument fueled by one too many pitchers of beer. I respect them. I respect their opinion- even though I don't agree with it. Despite the constitution crushing kung-foo that Ashcroft is pulling, we do still live in a country where people can have and express different opinions... Though I find Bush debates with Republicans always end up like an abortion debate with a diehard pro lifer- you'll never get them to change sides, or even consider another point of view... and things get ugly fast. I'm sure the Republicans think the same about rabid Liberals.

Also- adding to the original post "how do we know that there's an attack planned at all?" Terror warning for political gain? Tom Ridge is now saying that yesterday's alert has more than likely disrupted the terrorists plans and adverted any potential attacks. Isn't that handy?

Dunc- we're registered to vote.

I do have to add to my earlier post that I'm moderate. I just think it's ridiculous to think Kerry would be 'above' this kind of fear mongering.

But, clearly, the terror warning is as much (or completely) FUD as anything else.

I think this has been a great discussion. But I think that most of you have forgotten that Bush may not be the best diplomat, but he has helped reintroduce a moral compass in this country. I mean, after the last president, our country was going to hell in a handbasket. The highest office in this country was being denigrated by a heathen. Not to be too fanatical about this, surely we all can see the need for this country to be virtuous. It helps in sustaining the republic.

You're kidding right? A need for this country to be virtuous? Take a president who cleaned up the mess left behind from W's daddy - he turned the economy around and things were booming, he befriended the world, he essentially eliminated the deficit. Then he got a blow job and we tried to impeach him... Now consider an alcoholic, coke addict that bought his way out of Viet Nam and went AWOL from the Air National Guard (and was somehow still honorably discharged?!?) who ran our economy into the ground, created the largest deficit on record, and literally turned the entire world into our enemies, and then lied to each and everyone of us about Iraq! I think your virtues are screwed up my out-of-the-loop friend - we, essentially, tried to impeach the wrong guy!

Hey, aren't you Canadian?

Your friends do discuss politics--Hello? Spider?--but we'd much rather discuss pop culture, copious amounts of beer, and nerd stuff. We're all pretty much your basic yuppie urban liberal moderates, you and Murph more liberal than Spider and I, but Bill Gates has more of an impact on our feelings than W.

Oh, and on the approval ratings/terrorist threat topic, check this out:

Hudson, you should put out your political beliefs more often. It brings almost as much traffic to your site as hacking 4 gig mini drives.

Leave a comment