Democratic Response To Terrorism: Don't Worry, Be Happy

Glad to see someone else riding tall on my hobbyhorse:

Critics of President Bush's conduct in the War on Terror get testy when they are accused of not taking the threat of terrorism seriously, but with increasing prominence, they are making their true feelings known.

Quite simply, they don't think terrorism is a big deal.

In a recent American Prospect column, Mathew Yglesias wrote that the Bush administration has been "fostering a climate of panic and paranoia" and "blowing the risks of conventional terrorism all out of proportion..."

John Mueller, who has lately been making a career out of downplaying terrorism, has an article in the current issue of Foreign Affairs entitled, "Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?" In it, he writes: "The massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists."

Etc.

Shall we stop the massive funding and "scare campaign" for AIDS, then, I wonder?

Call me crazy, but when a disease is killing people, I say fight it.

Hugh Hewitt recently posted on "reasonable liberal" Cass Sunstein's advice to Democrats: Whatever you do, keep terrorism out of the news.

Sunstein is just telling it the way it is. Democrats have a huge reason to deny the dangers to the nation's security. And they routinely do. Which is why you can't trust them on this issue, and why you shouldn't vote for them in this time of war.

Larwyn makes her own point: Doesn't this imply that Democrats control, or at least strongly influence, what gets covered in the MSM?

posted by Ace at 08:46 AM

| Access Comments