Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 1:03 am
You last visited June 24, 2017, 12:07 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

They'll Do Anything

Published:

Last Edited: November 1, 2004, 1:36 pm

"They'll Do Anything
Why Democrats and the media think they're entitled to do whatever it takes to win this election.

by Fred Barnes
11/01/2004 12:00:00 AM

THE SCARIEST THING about this election is not the prospect of a contested outcome with no winner declared for weeks, just as in 2000. No, the most scary thing is the sense of entitlement that many Democrats and their allies have about tomorrow's election. It goes like this: Bush stole the presidency four years ago, then proceeded to act as if he had a mandate, so now we're entitled to do whatever it takes to defeat him, to say whatever we want.

You see it in the bumper stickers that call for the "re-defeat" of President Bush. You see it in the destruction of Bush yard signs and posters all across the country. You see it in the harassment, at least in blue states, of anyone wearing a Bush pin or button. You see it in the hatred of Bush by his opponents, who think they're only venting righteous indignation.

You see it in the religious bigotry against the president, a born-again Christian, and against his conservative Christian supporters. Without any evidence, Bush's opponents accuse him of believing that he has a direct line to God and that God gives him instructions, such as when to invade Iraq, and that any criticism of him is illegitimate. You see the bigotry as well in the belittling of Christians who support Bush as if their political views have no standing or worth because they may have been influenced by their religious faith.

You see it in the now exposed plans of Democrats to claim intimidation

of minority voters even if no intimidation actually occurs. You see it in the voter registration efforts by Democrats that have made the number of people on the voting rolls in some jurisdictions larger than the voting age population. You see it in the plans of Democratic lawyers to file lawsuits all over the country, challenging the outcome unless Bush is defeated.

You see that same sense of entitlement in elements of the national media--especially CBS News--who jettison the normal rules of journalism when Bush is the target. CBS not only rushed out with forged documents to torpedo the Bush campaign in September, the network intended to take another bite at Bush two days before the election by airing a dubious story about stolen explosives in Iraq. Would CBS have dared to do this against any other public figure but Bush? No.

And you see it in the victimization that is claimed for John Kerry. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth? Anything they say about Kerry is automatically a smear and thus doesn't have to be examined or even considered. And Kerry has no obligation to answer questions about his Vietnam experience, though he's played it up in the campaign. Bush's record in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war, however, is fair game.

And you see the feeling of entitlement in comments by the Democratic candidates and their backers, who seem to feel they're free to say anything they want about Bush and Vice President Cheney. So we get the targeting of Mary Cheney as a lesbian and the criticism of Laura Bush for having worked in jobs that weren't real jobs. And when anyone accuses Democrats of debasing the campaign, the answer is always: it's Bush's fault. Bush is hardly without fault, but the shabby style and substance of this campaign is the fault of his opponents.

Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/859goxwi.asp

Entry #30

Comments

1.
Comment by Babel - November 1, 2004, 4:09 pm
Yes because it's not like the Republicans have any lawyers filing any lawsuits. It's not like Bush supporters are destroying Kerry signs. It's not like a Bush supporter threatened to kill his girlfriend if she voted for Kerry. It's not like 10's of thousands of citizens right to vote has been challenged in nets and definitions so broad that life long Republicans who have voted in the same precent for years are caught in it too. It's not like senior Republican and Bush campaign officials are being investigated and have had to step down in disgrace over voter fraud in the current and 2002 elections. Oh... wait... all of those things are happening. Methinks if you are going to demonize the other side your own house must be in order first.
2.
ToddComment by Todd - November 1, 2004, 6:47 pm
Konane,

I learned a while ago when posting political Blog entries, it can be a good idea to lock the entry so you don't get annoying, illogical counter-arguments posted. Then again, perhaps you enjoy the banter, but I tend not to like that stuff.

Anyway, just a tip if you're interested.

-Todd
3.
Comment by Babel - November 1, 2004, 7:44 pm
I tried to think of a way to respond to that without breaking my no more partisan bickering pledge and here's what I came up with...

Yeah us pinko commie leftists just love to infest your honorable, red, white, and blue conservative purity. I don't think my logic in that post was at all illogical. I simply aim to point out that both sides are guilty of trying to manipulate the vote and it smacks of hypocracy to demonize the other side and not say word one about abuses on your own side.
4.
ToddComment by Todd - November 1, 2004, 8:42 pm
You liberals use that tactic of "both sides are equally bad" in order to justify your bad behavior. No, both sides are NOT equally bad. The liberals are constantly more negative, and they have been ever since GWB was elected.
5.
Comment by dragon - November 1, 2004, 9:09 pm
We have FDR, JFK and LBJ. I am used to those.

I actually had to think first to recognize GWB -- was that Freudian?

I am not sure GWB is the league of presidents that will be known for their initials. But then again GW (the first George) is not know for his either.
6.
ToddComment by Todd - November 1, 2004, 9:13 pm
Well, I think you're one of the few who doesn't recognize GWB. I guess just because you think we shouldn't call him GWB, we shouldn't. (NOT!)

And in case you didn't know (which you don't appear to) the first Bush president was GHWB, not GWB.
7.
konaneComment by konane - November 1, 2004, 9:34 pm
Todd, have been posting on another political forum for over 2 years so am accustomed to short bus rider comments which clearly define the poster. Have heard every half baked idea spun every illogical bassakwards way anyone can imagine. Liberals never cease to amaze me ... also provide comic relief.   

However, it is worth leaving everyting unlocked to have you, Whodeani, Reddog, ALL others who are sufficently informed comment on these blog entries. Thanks all!!!

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.