Posted on 11/21/2001 11:09:34 PM PST by JohnHuang2
With the Afghan war going exceedingly well and his approval rating hovering around 80 percent, President Bush has to be one happy Thanksgiving guy. Thus far, he has risen to the occasion – directing what could turn out to be the most successful military operation of the 21st century. America's cause is just, and the bad guys keep falling without many U.S. casualties.
But hiding in the weeds, biding its time, is an enemy with its sights trained on Mr. Bush. This is the same foe that ambushed Bush's father in the early '90s and President Clinton throughout his tenure in office. This covert enemy lives to bring down the powerful and successful, and the attackers don't need bombs, anthrax or bullets. They use ink and innuendo.
It is a sad fact of life in America that the more successful one becomes, the more media snipers appear to blow your figurative brains out. I've already noticed the first ammunition being loaded against President Bush. The media assault will question his compassion as more Americans lose their jobs in the recession. The strategy will be to portray Mr. Bush's economic stimulus package as ignoring poor and working Americans, by backing corporate tax breaks. Never mind that in order for the economy to rebound, corporations must be persuaded to begin spending again. That will not be mentioned. As soon as the war on terror subsides, Bush's alleged heartlessness will be played up big. You can take this to the bank.
Choking the powerful has become a blood sport in America, take it from me. By some mysterious quirk of fate, your humble correspondent has become a media success much to the dismay of many. The more high profile I become – the more vicious and personal the attacks on me get. Recently, Matt Drudge actually accused me of wanting to do a radio program to exploit Rush Limbaugh's deafness – an erroneous charge so vitriolic it took my breath away.
For the first time, I now truly understand what people like the Bushes and the Clintons have to deal with. Once in power, you can insulate yourself to a degree, but the hateful arrows will still fly and there's nothing anyone can do to stop them.
Of course, the Clintons brought many of the attacks on themselves by behaving badly. But the assaults would have arrived anyway. Once some in the media get a taste of blood, sharks tremble.
So I hope George W. Bush is preparing himself. A grateful America honored his father after the Gulf War, but the party ended long before midnight. A once-invincible president was battered and pilloried as a man who didn't know the price of milk – a man who didn't care about the regular folks.
That perception accomplished, many in the media took glee in watching the fast talker from Arkansas verbally dance his way into the White House, while the low-key blueblood from Connecticut could never shake the "out of touch" tag.
George W. Bush witnessed that media sniper parade first-hand and saw it bring down his father's administration. Mr. Bush must know the same enemy is waiting in the weeds again. Patiently, his foes are polishing generalizations of insensitivity and domestic incompetence. Ready for when the time is right to fire those flaming arrows directly into the Bush courtyard.
As the philosopher Rod Serling once said, "There's a sign post up ahead." That sign post may well spell big trouble for President Bush.
Related offers:
Purchase a copy of Bill O'Reilly's new book, "No Spin Zone," autographed and personalized, and receive a free "No Spin Zone" bumper sticker and a free three-month trial offer to Whistleblower magazine.
Check out WorldNetDaily's full line of Bill O'Reilly products at ShopNetDaily.
The link I provided, "Irresponsibile Media Anger Public," provides the clarity regarding the statement I made and to which you refer. As I'm sure you know, no one but the President has the power to command the military and no one but Congress has the power to declare war. Obviously, we are not in "war" as declared by Congress. We are, however, engaged with the enemy and our President is taking action, through his Administration or otherwise, to carry that out. Making utterances against him/his Administration that appear to comfort the enemy, giving away positions of our military over the airwaves, is treasonous. But, I'm sure you're aware of this. So, what you are quibbling over is your preference that clarity be provided in a stand-alone posting rather than a link to another thread which provides greater clarity. I am glad we are not in college and receiving a grade from a stand-alone term paper rather than a collection of thoughts by which clarity may be reached. Toward that end, I now provide the information from that link to clarify my position regarding reporting the media to the FBI or Homeland Security:
Seven weeks into the war in Afghanistan, many Americans say the nation's news media are behaving irresponsibly - some even say treasonably - by providing coverage that helps the enemy and unnecessarily alarms people here.__________
Critics maintain that ego-driven journalists are so determined to break stories that they will do so even at the risk of jeopardizing the safety of U.S. troops and the security of their missions.
_____________
"Some Americans are so fearful now that when they read information they don't like, they question the newspaper's patriotism," says Gina Lubrano, reader representative at the San Diego Union Tribune. "People are actually complaining about having too much information."
_____________
. . . readers were furious. One threatened to report the paper to the FBI. Another said he was mailing the story to the Homeland Security Office "to see if you have violated a law." A third reader accused the paper of doing "leg work" for terrorists.
If we can get that number down, maybe, to 10%, would be better.
"Many, however, watch Katie Kuric, or Matt Liar. If that's not convenient (or entertaining enough), they go to Rosie " . . . Those who watch these imbiciles are "lost causes"
Or brain dead?
Gotta go all. Happy Thanksgiving! God President Bush and God Bless America and our troops.
It needs a name. How about the "*Crinton/Gore recession"?
"But hiding in the weeds, biding its time, is an enemy with its sights trained on Mr. Bush. This is the same foe that ambushed Bush's father in the early '90s..."
It could be called the "Bush recovery" - eh?
The Pew Research Center in a 1997? study found TV NEWS VIEWERSHIP DECLINES
Television news is in trouble with the American public. Fewer adults are regularly watching it these days. Viewership of nightly network news is particularly hard hit. Fewer than half the public (42%) now says it regularly watches one of the three nightly network broadcasts -- down from 48% in 1995 and 60% in 1993...I didn't do the math, but if there are 100M plus households, that puts the viewership of the "big three" at something approaching 50M.
And their viewership is probably mostly left wing activists, college professors, high school teachers and the like. In a land of 280 million, thats peanuts.
Far from peanuts IMO. Way too many people get their "news" from the networks; most are clueless to the mind bending they're getting.
FGS
The thing I noticed about Dubya that my hubby didn't notice was during the inauguration. When Dubya held up his hand and took the oath of office, he shook his hand at each pledge--as someone would do when they are trying to emphasize something or be emphatic about it. When Dubya took the oath, he meant every single word, and he swore with his heart and soul.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/000/606gdhpt.asp
Absolutely unfair! And when they did that I thought, "Wow! If this is the worst thing they can come up with, Dubya must be pretty clean!" HildeBeast's FBI files are useless against him.
I cannot post the link to this Weekly Standard article but I hope someone will. It is excellent. Thanks for pointing it out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.