October Surprise Turnover

If you didn't think the New York Times was going to cut loose with an anti-Bush nastigram only days before the election then you don't know much about vicious modern politics. They tried, but they missed - for a very strange reason.

You're supposed to harrumph over the fact that documents were made available by the government, over the Internet, to the public at large which could have helped Iran build nuclear weapons. On cue: And these Republicans claim they're the party of national security?

But wait for the kicker. The documents themselves are evidence that Iraq was only a year away from acquiring nuclear weapons in 2003, and furthermore, Mr. Hussein had plenty of ties to terrorist organizations. (Read that twice, if necessary.) It requires an amazing amount of cognitive dissonance to keep harrumphing over the administrations lack of discretion in making these documents publicly available while simultaneously nursing our rage at Bush for a trumped up case for war when the contents of the documents are evidence of the very real threat that was gathering prior to the war.

Perhaps nobody at the Times thought we'd notice?

Don't worry - there's still plenty of room to be miffed about the way Iraq is progressing these days, regardless of how we got there, and we may see it in the polls on Tuesday. Although it still isn't clear what the voters will have voted for in the event congress goes to the Dems - but we'll find out soon enough! And sooner or later, after these folks have finished attacking each other, we're going to need leadership and a consistent, strong response to the dangers in our world - instead of nasty politics.

Tags: October Surprise, New York Times, Iraq, Attack Journalism