Well, here we are a few weeks out from election day, and the MSM is working hard to create a Democratic victory. They portray Bush and Rove's assessment that both the House and Senate will remain Republican as "self-delusion" amid "widespread panic in the Republican establishment." If you've ever seen widespread panic, you probably know that that description of "the Republican establishment" (wouldn't that be the optimistic, unshaken Bush, Rove, Cheney, Mehlman and the like?) is a bit of hyperbole.
The recent Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 53 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of terrorism, the lowest number he has ever received on what has been a signature strength.
Fine, but it does not follow that 53 percent of Americans favor the Democrats handling terrorism, and if it did mean that, it may mean something and may mean nothing in the state and local races in play.
But in every campaign appearance, Bush continues to attack Democrats for being purportedly soft on national security.
I am very sure that Bush has not attacked Democrats for being *purportedly soft* on national security. I have heard several of his recent speeches, and he has attacked Democrats for being *soft* on national security.
The frustration for the White House is that, until two weeks ago, the Bush-Rove plan seemed to be having an impact. The White House used the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as an opportunity to redefine the Nov. 7 elections around the terrorism issue. A modest uptick in Bush's approval ratings followed, and GOP lawmakers began to feel better about their prospects. But recent events combined to change the campaign conversation. These include the leak of a classified intelligence document suggesting that the Iraq war was complicating the fight against terrorism, a Bob Woodward book alleging administration deceptions about the war, and -- perhaps most critically -- the Foley scandal, which raised questions about whether the GOP tolerated the abuse of minors to protect one of its own.
That the Iraq war is separate from the war on terror is a Democratic rhetorical strategy parroted here by a purportedly fine reporter.
Bob Woodward to the rescue! Remember, Republicans can't be trusted... Nixon... Nixon... Foley...
As for the Foley scandal, admittedly I haven't paid much attention to it, but until now I had not heard anyone describe his conduct as child abuse, which I thought had a pretty specific and commonly understood meaning, nor had I heard the purported abuses described in the plural.
Aside: I don't know what impact it may have on the polling or the outcome in PA, but Santorum absolutely undressed Casey in their televised debate the other night. Santorum clearly articulated his position on every issue and pointed out the differences between his and his opponent's. Casey responded to pointed questions about his record and his voting intentions with deflection, duck and dodge, redirection, how dare you, finger pointing and yelling. As Peggy Noonan wrote last week, the Democrats may well achieve substantial gains in both houses in November, but they have done nothing to earn it.
No comments:
Post a Comment