Charley Reese says Bush campaign based on fear-mongering

He doesn't have to encourage me to be fearful, not for myself but my children and grandchildren etc. Not for just the war in the Middle East but the way many things are going. All the immorality and sin we just take for granted. I am not a bible thumper but I basically believe in good morals, and love thy neighbor. I hope things will improve for the future generations, otherwise what is the point of living??

The Democrats can play the fear card too, just by reminding people that the alternative is four more years of George W. Bush.

I've got it, Dave. How about a commercial showing a little girl pulling petals off of a daisy and playing "he loves me- he loves me not" with a segue into a.....Oops, that's already been done.
That article said, "You as a citizen ought not to fall for this fearmongering. All we have to do is cut the apron strings from Israel and pull our troops out of the Middle East, where they have no business being anyway, and Middle East terrorism directed toward us would evaporate overnight.".
Dave do you believe that? I would think that you do, as you went thru the trouble to post a link to it.

Name me ONE politician who has run for office since offices were elected for who HASN'T used fear to get votes? Every single candidate has blamed other candidates for something that should be feared just because of what that candidate does or doesn't stand for. Social Security or Medicare reform, higher taxes, new 'social' laws, reform to let blacks and women vote, stronger defense, lesser defense, less education, less police, etc.

Fear will always be the forefront of every candidate's political campaign....and every single one of them will have a cure for what ails us. And when fear doesn't seem to be working, the old standby of smearing the other candidates will muddy it up nicely to the point that people will forget what the smearer actually stood for or against and the win will be all that counts.

I immediately look for three things regarding candidates.... are they going to screw with my already given rights without benefit of vaseline, who is actually standing behind that candidate calling the shots, and are they heavily indoctrinated into some religion? If any of these three rear their ugly heads, they've lost my vote. The rest of their platforms normally mimic everybody else's and you can weigh up the worst of the evils one by one to eliminate until you are somewhat comfortable with the final two.

TONI

and I quote (from the article): "Our hypocritical support of Israel is one of the Middle East's main beefs about the country. Whatever the Israelis do is OK; whatever the Palestinians do is wrong."

So you agree we should stop supporting Israel?

At least the chuckles were worth the read.

Lets see how Democratic presidential front-runner Howard Dean is doing:

Monday night to "break up" the Fox News Channel along with other conservative news outlets owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch.

"Eleven companies in this country control 90 percent of what ordinary people are able to read and watch on their television," the ex-Vermont governor complained to MSNBC's Chris Matthews, who then asked the candidate point-blank:

"Would you break up Fox? ... Rupert Murdoch has 'The Weekly Standard.' It has got a lot of other interests. It has got the New York Post. Would you break it up?"

Dean shot back, "On ideological grounds, absolutely yes."

A moment later the "Hardball" host pressed: "Seriously. As a public policy, would you bring industrial policy to bear and break up these conglomerations of power?"

At that point Dean seemed to sense that he had gone too far and began to equivocate, saying, "I don't want to answer whether I would break up Fox or not."

Give me fear-mongering any day...