Deep Thought
If the Republican party is so "tough on terrorism," why is it that the people who live in places that terrorists have attacked or might conceivably attack--places like New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., etc.--always vote overwhelmingly Democratic? And conversely, why is it that the people who claim to be the most concerned with fighting terrorism live in places that have precisely zero chance of ever being targeted by terrorists? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this terrorist mailer from the McCain campaign was sent almost entirely to people living in the safe zones.
posted by A.L. at 10:42 PM
4 Comments:
Davis X. Machina says:
It's a logical response if you correctly apprehend the threat.
The existential threat to our institutions and way of life that the GOP is trying to forestall isn't a terrorist attack, it's losing control of both elected branches of government.
To them, this is a threat of far greater magnitude than anything terrorists can do, and those mailers are not only an appropriate response, but are being used in the right places -- places where the real threat -- Democrats -- is correctly apprehended
In a similar vein:
Those areas of the country where prosperity is, and always has been, but a distant rumor -- are seemingly most concerned that Democrats will stifle the economy.
Places (I can name a few) where a black (or even asian) face is seen only on TV are violently racist.
That these areas overlap and are GOP strongholds is quite a coincidence.
As Olberman pointed out, terrorists have yet to attack real America.
Oh, except right wingnut terrorists...
A.L.,
The second largest terrorist attack on U.S. soil was in OKC, a republican state & city.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home