"A Change of Administrations would make us more vulnerable"

[jedicord]

I heard this yesterday afternoon on NPR. The premise is, because it takes so long for new administrations to fully get up and running, terrorists would seize on our weakness at that time and attack.

Rove sure is smart. Of all of his ruses to lure the American people to Bush's side this one takes the cake. Possibly delaying or canceling the elections fell like a lead balloon. Terrorists trying to upset our democratic process fell like a balloon.

This one kinda even makes sense and I feel will scare the bejeezus out of people enough to keep him in office.

Did anyone else hear this?

[tom_paine]

1. What is more surprising is that NPR transmits the meme without

historic framework nor challenge nor cite of facts.

But then, NPR is as vulenrable as any to the parasitization, weakening, and infiltration of Nazi-style Bushevik Sub-Media.

[porphyrian]

14. NPR Has Sold Its Soul

It is now but another whore of the Empire...

[phantom power]

2. By "us" they must mean themselves, not Americans in general

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. Yeah, look how vulnerable we were last time. We were only 8 months

into the new presidency when those planes were hijacked. :eyes:


This vulnerablity thing is utter crap. There is plenty of time there to make transitions and everyone knows it.

[madrchsod]

4. that places the "blame" on bush

for not stopping the 911 attack. oh ,i`m sorry, it`s wasn`t them,it was the "change of administrations" who is to blame. makes perfect sense to me, does it make sense to you? of course it does...

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

28. 9-11 was Gore's fault

didn't you know that? If Gore hadn't forced * to bring the lawsuit that delayed *'s appointment, then * would have had his administration up and running a month sooner and 9-11 would never have happened.

What bothers me is that I wouldn't be surprised if BushCo floated this meme.

[LittleApple81]

5. BUSH has taken no responsibility.Therefore,he is not the leader. So

changing a non-leader will only benefit us.

[calico1]

6. I heard something to that effect on some program last

night. But does it really make sense? Its not like Kerry has been away in Europe the past few years and doesn't have a clue about what's going on. I am sure that anyone he considers for a cabinet appt is also in the know. Plus the outgoing Administration is supposed to brief the incoming one about what is going on and anything pending, at least that was my understanding. Could be some dopes fall for this though. Its that fear tactic again. Don't change adminstrations because something terrible might happen! :mad:

[jedicord]

8. Too many people vote on looks alone...

Fear Fear Fear is always the leaning factor.

This one really pisses me off, I must say. And to put on my tinfoil hat, think they'll use that as a reason to stay in power forever?

I can just hear them "Wow, it worked so good this time, maybe we can use it to change the Constitution!"

Evil mother f-ers..:nuke:

[lapislzi]

7. I'll play those odds

Thanks for the tip.

Never mind that AQ are rubbing their metaphorical hands together with glee at the thought of GW and another 4 years of his holy crusade. I hear they're busy engraving the gold watch...you know, the one for GW as "Recruiter of the Year?"

NPR has become a bunch of GOP shills. Every time I think it's safe to start listening again they come out with something like that.

[jedicord]

10. NPR really disappointed me yesterday

It seems that in the past, they would discuss issues in a non-partisan manner. But yesterday morning they also had a bit where some guy was talking about how the American press is getting it wrong about Iraq. New schools, clinic, etc. are not as sexy as beheadings and car bombs. Total piece of crap.

Then, this new theory. Did NPR sell out overnight or something? I couldn't stomach listening to it this morning, so I jammed to Outkast instead.

[lapislzi]

They've been drifting rightward for years

I've totally given up on Morning Edition. Cokie Roberts makes me want to vomit; she's so far up bush's ass.

All you need to do to figure out why is follow the money. As soon as you know this program or that is sponsored by ADM et al, there's your answer right there. I'm surprised they keep Garrison Keillor hanging around. Maybe they figure he's harmless.

I get my news from Pacifica and AAR, with a large pinch of salt.

[GiovanniC]

9. So Bush is President-For-Life Now?

Even if he wins 2004, there's still 2008 to contend with. So what difference does it make if we're vulnerable in 2004 or 2008? In fact, it just makes good sense to get it over with now, instead of giving the terrorists an extra four years to prepare.

[liveoaktx]

11. So is this the closest * will get to an apolgy for being such a FU?

Since the change to his administration DID make us more vulnerable?
This one is incredibly easy to counter.

[JohnnyRingo]

12. Even worse...the terrorists may not be the usual suspects....

....and indeed may be those that support Buxh (and Rove), himself.

Al Quada may find themselves in a long line waiting to overthrow our newly elected administration.

http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/

excerpt:
If Kerry thought Viet Nam was tough, he hasn’t seen nutthin’ yet. Governing this country is going to be a more difficult task after the election than we can imagine today. As noted below, Seymour Hersh recently spoke to the ACLU and said that we are facing the most important election since 1860. And I worry that the consequences will be equally as grave.

[seabeyond]

13. but per bush words, we dont want terrorist

to determine our vote. so we should ignore the we would be more vulnerable

[kysrsoze]

15. That's one of the stupidest logical leaps I've ever heard

Naw, don't believe it for a second. The only reason we had our huge security lapse between Clinton and Bush admins was because they didn't give a shit about what the outgoing administration had to say - ignored EVERYTHING.

[jedicord]

18. Yep, they said the transition was the best ever...

The Clinton team did everything they could to give information to the new Bush administration. Of course, the fact that it was ignored wasn't brought up in this report. Only that Ashcroft didn't assign his Chief Deputy until after 911. Not because he was caught with his pants down, oh no. It was because it takes so long to make that decision, according to NPR.

This admin really freaks me out, scares the heck out of me so much I am really looking into what to do to get a work visa in Canada.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

16. Decommission NPR!!! My tax dollars should NOT pay for....

this crap!!!

[giant_robot]

17. That's an easy choice for me

I'll take a Kerry administration in transition over and established Bush regime any day. And I don't buy the argument that Karl Rove is smart. As someone else on DU noted, he just throws mud against the wall until something sticks. Unfortunately for us, tenacity and a total lack of scruples count more than smarts in politics.

[jedicord]

20. Sure, all of us at DU would take Kerry first - no doubt.

That's because we're informed. We've looked behind the curtain. Average Joe out there just hears the surface propaganda. The terror alerts, Bush looking great in a flight suit, Cheney looking tough.

Too many Repubs say they like Bush because they "trust him". If that ain't uninformed, I don't know what is. I'm afraid this one will stick. People are scared, and will do anything they think necessary to be safe. Even give up their freedoms.

Of everything I've heard, save black box voting, this one gives me the jitters.

[Ready4Change]

19. Then why no attack during Clinton->Bush transition?

.

[DinahMoeHum]

21. IOW, don't change dicks in the middle of a screw, right?

n/t

:evilgrin:

[lapislzi]

23. I think the current VP would go with that

As an American, I feel I just haven't been screwed enough yet!

[jedicord]

26. LOL! eom

[emulatorloo]

22. Easy fix - start transition/briefings on Nov 3rd

this is the worst talking point ever.

[ProfessorGAC]

24. Data Please!?!?

That's what i would ask these cretins! Where is the data to show that changing administrations in a democratic country makes that country more susceptible to attack.

Let's be more clear! It has NEVER happened. So, the evidence is non-existant. Even France, after their revolution had their problems come from within! (Excluding border skirmishes.) And, their democracy didn't even begin to take shape at that point.

There is absolutely no evidence of it, and it's a complete lie or idiotic wishful thinking by a bushbot.
The Professor

[jedicord]

27. Great Point!

Besides all of us saying "that's a bunch of crap", I haven't been able to come up with a good retort if someone brings this one up. And trust me, they will. Someone put the Kerry/Heinz/offshore companies e-mail up on the door to the copy room today (I'm about it around here as a Dem). I immediately printed out the Snopes retort and taped it underneath. I like to be prepared, 'cause I know it's gonna come.

The Professor is now "Ammo Man"!

[kentuck]

25. We have never been more vulnerable than right now, except perhaps..

on Sept 11th...

[lapislzi]

29. Or September 10...or September 12...

We're just more aware of it now. It's always been there.

[Soth]

30. That's precisely why this is so stupid.

As long as this country has existed, we've been supposedly "vulnerable" during times of transition (at least if Captain Crackpot BushCroney is to be believed). So why, exactly, should it matter this time? Just because people are AWARE of terrorism now doesn't make a terrorist attack in that time period any more or less likely.

It's kind of like saying that a person has a slightly increased chance of being hit by lightning on Tuesdays. Even if this is true, why should it matter now? They've been out on countless Tuesdays, and the odds are still ridiculously slim. Just because they're aware of that fact doesn't mean they should change their whole damn routine.

This is just too stupid.

[lapislzi]

31. Sure it's stupid. That won't prevent it from being repeated endlessly

...side by side with bush's assertion that we're safer now.

How can we be both safer and more vulnerable??

Welcome to DU, by the way, Soth!

:toast:

[Lerkfish]

32. Don't change skeletal horses in the middle of the Apocalypse...nt

[iconoclastic cat]

33. How safe are we when Chimpy goes on his 2 week vacation?

Et tu, NPR?

[Viking12]

34. Don't change Horesmen in the Middle of an Apocalypse..eom