If the Party of *BDS wins next month, Americans are in for a bad season. And for good reason.
* Bush Derangement Syndrome "BDS: The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush."
Our economy is booming.
The job market is the lowest it has been in years.
National Debt has been reduced.
There is progress in the fight against terrorism.
Gas prices are way down.
Our nation is more secure than it has ever been.
What's gone wrong?
Two fundamental, precipitating phenomena, in my humble opinion:
1) The Bush Derangement Syndrome has finally seeped through to middle-America.
While liberal media and talking heads have harped headlines and sound-bytes on the foibles of Foley-gate and Abramoff-gate (nevermind that these gates swing both ways), the party of hype and histrionics has dominated the media and the Internet. "Blame Bush" has also been the undertone from both sides of the aisle.
Can Bush awaken the nation during the next three weeks?
Yes, if he is allowed to focus on issues and rattle a few cages.
2) Americans FEEL secure. With security comes complacency. With complacency, comes low voter turn-out.
Low voter turn-out means that hype and histrionics will prevail.
Complacency at the ballot box also results in political laissez-faire, which, under the guise of band-aid diplomacy, has historically provided a fertile field for liberals to AGAIN front secret deals at taxpayers' expense and to AGAIN trade critical security secrets to appease our sworn enemies.
Think North Korea and Iran .... Think Clinton and his "secret deals" with China and Russia. Think Carter and his love-fest with North Korea and Chavez. Think Sandy Berger stuffing national security documents into his undies.
Think February 26, 1993.
Remember September 11, 2001.
I can't imagine an America that would vote for a party or congressional leadership that has YET to visit or commemorate the six victims of the first WTC attack in 1993: A terrorist attack that included unexploded biochemical weapons (which may be why Clinton did not visit the site) and a homemade 1,500-pound bomb that badly damaged the tower's inner support beams and caused $500 million in property damage. Yet the twin towers were repaired, cleaned, and reopened in less than a month .....
Amazingly, an MSM that devoted gallons of ink and immeasurable air-time to a forged document to discredit George Bush and HIS responsibility for 9/11/01 -- never investigated the responsibility of the Clinton administration or a correlation between the collapse of the WTC towers on 9/11/01 and the damages done to the structural integrity of the towers on 2/26/93 -- during the Clinton administration.
In addition -- I hold MSM responsible for feeding a growing anti-war frenzy; yet, neither the MSM nor its constituent Party of BDS have shared any viable suggestions (beyond the ole "cut and run" partisan puke) for how and when.
If the Party of BDS, the Party of Hype and Histrionics, wins in November -- we can blame ourselves for our own complacency.
And our inevitable self-destruction.
Vote, America. Have the foresight and resolve to vote.
Posted at 11:36 am by Gull
 |  |  |
anonymous October 14, 2006 02:39 PM PDT
You make some strong accusations about Clinton and Carter and Democrats.
What is your source for these accusations? |
 |

 |  |  |
GULL October 14, 2006 02:51 PM PDT
Sorry, Charlie (as in tuna). You need to do your own research on Clinton and Carter.
Go to google.com. Type in "Clinton and WTC 1993" or "Carter and Chavez" .... Read more than one item, by the way. Google tends to bury items that don't reflect the BDS perspective. Sorta like YouTube (which Google has purchased) banning videos that are anti-muslim or pro-America.
Which makes my point, btw.
I didn't use the term "Democrats" in this post, by the way. You must have been reading between the lines or transposing your own thoughts!!!!
Respond again, please, anytime. I'd like to know what you actually find.
|
 |

 |  |  |
AnnaAgain October 14, 2006 03:23 PM PDT
HA!
I'll take odds anonymous does not post his/her findings, Gull.
Good response. Good post, too. |
 |

 |  |  |
Herb October 16, 2006 07:24 AM PDT
Good post. Everyone must vote. The idea that, since the speaker of the house is 3rd in line, we could conceivably be saying, "President Pelosi" gives me the creaming heebie-jeebies.
I never post or comment anonymously but anon has a blog I guarantee it will be filled with BDS. Commenting is a good way to advertise your blog, anon. I would come and read what you have to say and comment on it. You need to look to sources other than 30 second attack ads for your information. |
 |

 |  |  |
Sandblast October 16, 2006 09:11 AM PDT
Anon appears to be of the "hit and run" variety. He/She won't be back, betcha.
Libs seem to function best at running -- mouths, away from, taxes up, scandals, etc. You get the picture, I'm sure. |
 |