Bush campaign is crying wolf

[sandraj]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/orourke/cst-edt-rour08.html

The first thing to notice about the elevated orange terror alert is that it is confined to Democratic stronghold cities and states. The next is to realize that no battleground states will be subjected to formal elevated alerts, lest the security interruptions sour the swing voters residing therein.

Terror alerts are mini-"October surprises" for this administration, ready to be employed anytime President Bush wants to move the Kerry-Edwards campaign off the front page for a few days. The ''cry wolf'' factor is high. Tom Ridge's claim that his Homeland Security Department ''doesn't do politics" rings hollow, given his political background and the boss he is beholden to. Bush can shout, ''We're a nation in danger'' in the Rose Garden anytime he wishes, but the public may yet conclude that the danger is the president's judgment.

(more)

[Cha]

1. That was refreshing.

There's a lot of smart people in this country who aren't going to take this lying down.

[sandraj]

7. I was pleasantly surprised

to see it in the Sun-Times

[scarletwoman]

2. Wow! Pulls no punches!

Great editorial, thanks for posting it!

His particularily notable last paragraph:

For what is going on in Iraq is more bad news for Bush. Al-Qaida in the Big Apple is, perversely, a safer topic. The president will keep reminding the public that ''We're a nation in danger.'' The photos associated with terror alerts are now familiar: police wearing layers of military protection, an arm cradling an automatic rifle. It's the GOP convention theme to come -- A Nation in Danger: Re-elect Bush-Cheney.

Playing the fear card -- that's all the bushco criminals have.

sw

[sandraj]

8. fear card

it is a pretty sick campaign tactic.

[aquart]

3. I like this line:

"Unlike Ronald Reagan, Bush is no father figure: He is the big brother who will beat up -- or have beaten up -- anyone who offends his family."

[RodneyCK2]

4. How many more scare alerts is the public going to take?

That is my question. I am already fed up with the Minister of Fear.

[radfringe]

5. Playing Politics With Terror Warnings

Playing Politics With Terror Warnings http://www.roaringbird.com/blog/_archives/2004/8/6/119754.html
August 6, 2004

Many thanks to some diligent researchers from the Democratic Underground website for digging up this information. It leaves little doubt that there is indeed a direct correlation between news that is unfavorable to the Bush administration and the bogus terror alerts that have been issued over the last few years.

So here is the compiled evidence:

Last week of October, 2001: A wealthy Saudi businessman who lives and works in the U.S., with many ties to important American businessmen is found to have funneled money to terror organizations.

October 29, 2001: Terror alert. F.B.I. and Tom Ridge cite no specific evidence for basis of alert.

======

my terror-poll charts: http://radicalfringe.freeservers.com/about.html

[sandraj]

6. I'd been hoping

someone would compile a timeline. I think it helps to see them in total.

The alerts always seem to follow a pattern - when first issued they are shrill and alarmist, and then a few days later there's often an "oops, we used outdated info" or "oops, we were tricked into issuing the alert."

[yellowcanine]

9. The "W" stands for "WOLF!" - great bumper sticker/T-shirt

Business opportunity for the enterprising amongst you.