THe Full Frontal Assault (Dems in Full Attack Mode - Wash Post, NY Times, CBS Coordinate Attacks)

RealClearPolitics.com ^ | 3/22/04 | Tom Bevan

[bootless]

Glad to hear it, Huck. I read your account of 9-11 a few mnths ago - it gave me chills.

[NYC Republican]

We can go into a littany of examples of BLATANT liberal bias, but besides this event, the 2 most recent ones that come to mind are Rush's 10 questions (that were never asked of Richard Clarke), and the total ommission of Bush's 8 point lead over Kerry in CBS' OWN poll! Imagine Kerry was up by 8! It would be all over the newscast...

[Right_in_Virginia]

BTTT (Big time!)

[roses of sharon]

Remember this?

Clinton gets caught with a 21 year old intern in the oval office, and asks her and her friend Linda Tripp to lie under oath in a sexual harrassment case.

After CBS,ABC,NBC,CNN,NPR get thru:

Ken Starr is the Christian pervert.

Linda Tripp is the disloyal, vast right wing friend.

I would love to find out what 60 min., did to her in their reports.

[eeriegeno]

Let's remember that CBS also has not only a political stake but also a financial stake in the success of Clarke's book according to Drudge --- NEWS FOR SALE: CBS PUSHED BOOK IT OWNS; '60 MINUTES' DID NOT REVEAL PARENT COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STAKE IN CLARKE PROJECT

[LS]

Actually, the "get Bush" campaign has been VERY well orchestrated for more than two years. It began with Hillary's "Bush Knew" rant, and included a constant sniping with the uranium/18 words crap.

All that was designed to plant in the minds of the public that Bush cannot be fully trusted in national security matters. They never cared about the "18 words." Nor did they care if Saddam had actually bought six suitcase nukes and had them lined up on 5th Avenue!

Next, we had the Dem primaries. Do you think it was any accident that they ALL just attacked Bush, and never challenged each other?

Three weeks ago, I was in a book store and noticed the shelves were COVERED with anti-Bush books---Franken, Conasen, etc.---and ALL had in the title either "deception" or "lies."

Folks, this is an all-out concerted attack, and it isn't over. I do think Kerry is hopeless as a candidate---not as bad as Dean, because he's so boring no one even listens to him. But this is all the Dems have. They CANNOT offer anything.

Now, what the grand strategery is behind this, I don't know. I DON'T think Hillary is going to be "substituted" for Kerry at the convention. It ain't gonna happen. And I think all this will backfire, as the polls already seem to suggest. But no one can doubt that SOMEONE has organized all this, and started doing so years ago!

[King Black Robe]

Yes, you're right.

[luvbach1]

Superb post. Overly aggressive, unilateralist cowboy is a "do nothing" on terrorism. That sums it up for me.

[RJayneJ]

It seems to me that our form of government is always going to be basically reactive rather than preventive. It's just the nature of the beast. Can you imagine making the changes at American airports if 9/11 had never happened? So, Dubya being unable to smell what the terrorists are thinking is something the Dems are going to try to use against him. The media are giving that kind of criticism much more credibility than they should. You can't blame them of critical thinking.

[MeekOneGOP]

[Savage Beast]

"That's what is so ridiculous (and audacious) about this..."

"Audacity is 90 percent of the battle." ~Karl Marx

[potlatch]

Bump for good graphics, Meek!

Just read this on another thread and thought it was interesting;

Did anybody see Mansoor Ijaz (SP) this morning around 7:30 EST, on FOX, he was hot, he issued a challenge to this Dick Clark saying he would go toe to toe with him on any TV show refuting all of his claims and remarks. He also said that when he (Mansoor) had helped with the deals in the Sudan to hand over Bin Laden that Clark was one of the ones that nixed the deal. I want to see that one. 27 posted on 03/22/2004 8:11:09 PM CST by Ethyl

[DoctorMichael]

Ding, ding, ding!!!!!!!

On the same subject...............O'Reilly tonight devoted a whole segment to a meeting that took place at Al Franken's apartment involving a a cabal of Lib reporters to coordinate their attacks during the primaries.

[DoctorMichael]

Check it out..........

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103384/posts

[NYC Republican]

Thought you might find this interesting...

[alnick]

Let's not forget that the Bush admin did do something about Al Qaeda before 9/11. It's just that the plot was too far along when Dubya took office and there wasn't enough time to implement his war plan against Al Qaeda before they struck. The president's war plan against AQ was far more comprehensive than anything that Clarke was advocating.

[Mo1]

Kerry is already falling too far, too fast. These coordinated media attacks may help him remain as the Dems' candidate, however. Otherwise, if he continues to fall, the Dems will backstab him and replace him at their Boston convention this Summer

It all depends on what Queen Hellary wants to happen

[backtothestreets]

From the news:

"Clarke "wasn't in the loop, frankly, on a lot of this stuff," Vice President Dick Cheney asserted."

That validates part of Clarke's claim.

Like it or not, I have strong suspicions Condoleezza Rice DID keep Bush in the dark on many matters that might have led him to direct our resources in foreign policy in other ways. Somebody fed President Bush faulty information and that's why this whole discussion is going on. If she, for personal reasons, downplayed the threats by al-Qaida prior to 9-11, she mishandled her role in foreign policy. If on Iraq, she purposely gave Bush information that misguided his judgment, and withheld intelligence, she has to go.

With friends like this, who needs enemies?

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[Spotsy]

It's fun to go back and read things written pre-9/11:

Bruce Shapiro, National Correspondent, Salon.com

THE HYPING OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM---June 12, 2000

. . . Chartered two years ago by Congress, the [National Commission on Terrorism] released a report last week that unleashed a dire drumbeat about a coming wave of violence on American soil.

"The threat from terrorists is so high," began ABC News correspondent Martha Raddatz's news account, "the potential for massive casualties is so real, that an independent panel is pushing the government to take immediate, drastic action." Warned commission chairman L. Paul Bremer III at a press conference: "The threat of international terrorism is becoming more deadly." In the Los Angeles Times, commission advisor Brian Michael Wilson of the Rand Corp. called the report "a wake up call to a more violent future." ~snip~

By attempting to set off a panic over external enemies, the National Commission on Terrorism is serving those inside-the-Beltway policy goals. But if it resonates with the press and public, it is because exaggerated fear of terrorism serves as a useful distraction from sweeping national anxiety over globalization and the growing power of transnational corporations. ~snip~

But the fear of external enemies resonates deeply in the American psyche, a fact demonstrated, as well, by the xenophobic terms of congressional debate over China's entry into the WTO. Look for Republicans to go on the offensive about terrorism -- and for Democrats, fearful of being labeled soft on terror, to go along, perpetuating the con job unleashed this week in Washington.