An advantage Bush should press

By

In his San Diego Union—Tribune commentary, 'A political battle Bush is winning,' Robert Caldwell notes the following regarding Americans' opinions concerning press revelations of classified programs that are part of the war against terrorists:

An Opinion Dynamics Corp. poll conducted for FOX News after the Times revealed the administration's secret tracking of terrorist financing resoundingly affirmed the Bush position.

First, 70 percent of those polled in this nationwide survey conducted over two days at the end of June supported tracking terrorist financing. That 70 percent included 83 percent of Republicans, 67 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats. [snip]

The same polling found that 60 percent of Americans believe that the Times' decision to reveal this secret intelligence program 'did more to help terrorist groups like al—Qaeda' than to 'help the American public.' This damning, for The New York Times, conclusion was held by 84 percent of Republicans, 53 percent of independents and 42 percent of Democrats.

For the Times and its editors, the most stinging poll result of all was what respondents thought should be done about media organizations that 'report and publish information about national security secrets that may make it easier for terrorists to operate.' Two of every three respondents — 84 percent of Republicans, 58 percent of independents and 55 percent of Democrats — believe that those news organizations should 'face criminal charges.'

Mr. Caldwell asserts that 'Bush and the administration won't go that far, obviously.'

One must wonder, 'Why not?' After the mainstream media have spent years excoriating Bush for minor offenses such as Plamegate while mockingly revealing honest—to—goodness classified information regarding CIA terrorist holding tanks in Europe, warrantless NSA intercepts of international communications and now, thanks to those all—American patriots at the New York Times, the SWIFT terrorist finance tracking system, Bush will just let it ride with only a few remarks about his dismay over the revelations?

Sorry, it's time to play some hardball! The reporters and editors of the Times and Washington Post should all be in jail until they reveal the names of those who 'leaked.' Leaked? Pardon my posterior, but that is unmitigated horse pucky. This is out—and—out treason. If official investigatory action isn't taken and taken soon, the negative impact of these revelations on Bush's political enemies will fade. Force the MSM to keep this 'issue' front and center every day. Even if Bush runs the risk of overdoing it.

You're up at the plate, Prez. Time to take a full swing for the fence.

What may be most interesting, is that the Washington Post and the New York Times may end up between the two of them, perhaps single—handedly by the Times, giving the midterm elections to the Republicans because of their treacherous national security blunders in the name of a free press and 'the public interest' — which 'interest' appears unshared by the 'public.'

Wouldn't that be sweet irony?

Hat tip: Real Clear Politics

Dennis Sevakis   7 10 06

In his San Diego Union—Tribune commentary, 'A political battle Bush is winning,' Robert Caldwell notes the following regarding Americans' opinions concerning press revelations of classified programs that are part of the war against terrorists:

An Opinion Dynamics Corp. poll conducted for FOX News after the Times revealed the administration's secret tracking of terrorist financing resoundingly affirmed the Bush position.

First, 70 percent of those polled in this nationwide survey conducted over two days at the end of June supported tracking terrorist financing. That 70 percent included 83 percent of Republicans, 67 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats. [snip]

The same polling found that 60 percent of Americans believe that the Times' decision to reveal this secret intelligence program 'did more to help terrorist groups like al—Qaeda' than to 'help the American public.' This damning, for The New York Times, conclusion was held by 84 percent of Republicans, 53 percent of independents and 42 percent of Democrats.

For the Times and its editors, the most stinging poll result of all was what respondents thought should be done about media organizations that 'report and publish information about national security secrets that may make it easier for terrorists to operate.' Two of every three respondents — 84 percent of Republicans, 58 percent of independents and 55 percent of Democrats — believe that those news organizations should 'face criminal charges.'

Mr. Caldwell asserts that 'Bush and the administration won't go that far, obviously.'

One must wonder, 'Why not?' After the mainstream media have spent years excoriating Bush for minor offenses such as Plamegate while mockingly revealing honest—to—goodness classified information regarding CIA terrorist holding tanks in Europe, warrantless NSA intercepts of international communications and now, thanks to those all—American patriots at the New York Times, the SWIFT terrorist finance tracking system, Bush will just let it ride with only a few remarks about his dismay over the revelations?

Sorry, it's time to play some hardball! The reporters and editors of the Times and Washington Post should all be in jail until they reveal the names of those who 'leaked.' Leaked? Pardon my posterior, but that is unmitigated horse pucky. This is out—and—out treason. If official investigatory action isn't taken and taken soon, the negative impact of these revelations on Bush's political enemies will fade. Force the MSM to keep this 'issue' front and center every day. Even if Bush runs the risk of overdoing it.

You're up at the plate, Prez. Time to take a full swing for the fence.

What may be most interesting, is that the Washington Post and the New York Times may end up between the two of them, perhaps single—handedly by the Times, giving the midterm elections to the Republicans because of their treacherous national security blunders in the name of a free press and 'the public interest' — which 'interest' appears unshared by the 'public.'

Wouldn't that be sweet irony?

Hat tip: Real Clear Politics

Dennis Sevakis   7 10 06