If It Don't Rain, The Roof Don't Leak

And if it's not raining it won't.

It's necessary to make things perfectly clear:

First, there is no Islamic threat. Proof: 9 / 11. Once. We had one attack. One! A bunch of nut jobs. Nothing since. There is no threat. And anyway, I hardly even remember that 9 / 11 stuff. I don't live in the past.

Second, "If we don't fight them over there we'll have to fight them over here; we'll face nuclear, chemical, and biological attack" Who says? Just a bunch of Republicans and they just want to get reelected. Leave them alone and they'll disappear. It worked before and it will work again. I've been around a long time and nothing like this ever happened when I was a kid. Just ignore them, they'll go away.

Third, and this is the big one. The War Is Over! We won, Bush lost. Finitio! Oh, it was a hard fight, we fought with everything we had: Quagmire, Brutality, Murder, Gitmo, Massive Numbers of Innocent Lives Lost, Abu Grahib, Homeland Spying, The War Against Our Own Citizens, Incompetence. It was a tough fight but we won.

There is the matter yet of Iraq... Who Cares? This war never had anything to do with Iraq anyway and anyway it's not our problem. Now that Bush is gone, or as good as gone, Iraq will go away too... There is the situation with Iran and Syria... Good people. You can reason with them, and they hate Bush too. But you've got to watch that Bush guy. He's dangerous, he thinks he's still President, he could screw this up too. We can't drop our guard. No way are we going to let him move against Syria or Iran and make matters worse.

All in all, things are looking up. In two years we'll have the White House as well as Congress and there won't be any problems anymore.

If it's not raining it won't rain. And I don't want to think about it.

Happy Days, guest blogger.

................
Mouse here:

Note to Hugh Hewitt, and others critical that the administration hasn't gone on a media offensive to promote the surge and explain the consequences of failure. Do you think Happy Days wants to hear?

We're all Happy Days now, or at least Happy Days is ascendant, and any argument that we're not in happy days is just the boy crying wolf. There is no argument that can penetrate this happiness so there is no argument. To repeat and repeat some argument contrary to this happiness is just to set into the mind like iron the recognition that the man speaking is a buffoon. This would be Bush, this would be the administration. To speak now is to be mocked, to speak now is to be dismissed. Nothing can speak now, only action. Things have to happen on the ground.

It should be noted though, that the second tier voice is still heard. There are just too many, the MSM can't mock each one. So from each second tier voice there is an argument that is heard by some, and this is the base that will maintain the sane. But for the Administration...? Once mocked, once defeated, all that's left is power.

.................
Note: A far better tactic than the one suggested by Hugh. Hugh wants serious argument. If serious argument would work, if Americans would listen to serious argument, the Democrats never would have gained control of congress. There's never been more obviously a less serious party, but unfortunately, also a not serious electorate, at least by about half. But if not serious, the half that voted Democrat is not necessarily corrupt. And possibly they don't like mean people, and anyway, in public debate, if one person can be pointed out to be mean, that person loses the "moral high ground". --Pelosi said this, in explanation of the timing to get troops to Iraq for the surge:

"The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way that we won't cut off the resources," Pelosi, head of the Democratic-led House, told ABC's Good Morning America. "That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way."

Which means Bush is thinking: Start getting them killed as soon as possible because then the Democrats won't cut off funding because they won't dare; to which White House spokeswoman Dana Perino responded:

"Those particular comments were poisonous. Speaker Pelosi was arguing in essence that the president is putting young men and women in harm's way for tactical political reasons," [The President] "is sending the troops to Iraq quickly because he wants to win."

Not as strong as it might have been. "Poisonous, poisonous, poisonous" would have been better. The point is that there are arguments that are true. If Americans no longer want to hear that Iraq is a serious matter, it might at least penetrate their consciousness that the one party that has been using this war for pure "tactical political reasons" is the Democrat party. It wouldn't hurt to point that out. This would be attacking their motives, which is probably now exactly where the attack should be made. It's an argument that might cut ice because it's true. And I don't believe it would turn things ugly, I think it would even things out. The Democrats are effective through constant repetition of charges not true, or overblown. I think the administration could be effective just by deciding to point out that some Democrats are not noble. Bush can't do it, Cheney can't do it, Condi can't do it. Just about anybody else can. If that's the qoute of the day the press has to go with it. Spread it around.

Note second.

I remember when Clean Gene did well in New Hampshire and just before Wisconsin LBJ announced he wouldn't run again. Then Bobby jumped in. Obama has been doing very well against Hillary. Obama is Nobody but he's Not Hillary. I see Richardson is now giving the race some thought, and Richardson is Somebody. Thank you Gene, than you Obama.
(12:36 AM)