What the Heck was I Thinking!?

You ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Lawyers rev up for post-election court battles - baltimoresun.com

Just about anyone reading the liberal media and opinion writers could predict this would happen. After 2000 and 2004, and after all the voter fraud and voting machine failure articles in the press, you could easily see why a "500 person volunteer legal protection team" is being geared up by the Democrats.

If it weren’t my front yard, I’d probably enjoy the circus that’s coming to town. As it is, I just dread the trash and manure that will be left behind after all the performances are done. 

The 21st century’s quisling, or perhaps we should call him "Helmand David? David Loyn allegedly of BBC reports on his experience as an embed with the Taleban. "BBC NEWS | Have Your Say | David Loyn answers your questions on the Taleban.

This guy has gone Patty Hearst on the news industry and nobody at BBC has noticed! His non-answer to the first (key) question should be a clear indicator to all readers where his loytalties lie:

Q: In the UK, the Taleban are depicted as a harsh oppressive regime which ruled by fear. You associate closely with them. What are your feelings about them? Raymond Mcalpine, Gravesend, UK

I am not sure about the word ‘associate’, which seems to imply approval, but if it means that I have spent a fair amount of time with them, then yes that is true, both in the late 90s and since. As far as their regime was concerned, it is worth remembering that it was popular in many parts of the country - particularly the Pashtun rural areas in the south, although deeply resented in the north, the west and urban areas everywhere. It was popular because it was seen as not corrupt, and brought law and order so it was possible for Afghans to travel safely around the country in ways that have not been possible before or since. Their new leadership do admit that some mistakes were made in terms of the harshness of their rule, but they have not changed their profoundly conservative religious austerity, nor their desire to impose severe restrictions on women.

This puff piece makes these guys sound like the party that lost the election. "Their new leadership do admit that some mistakes were made in terms of the harshness of their rule,…"  doesn’t quite present the case very accurately. Some mistakes - perhaps like those of killing large numbers of people, oppressing the women and children of the country into a servitude that would equate to slavery under any other regime, religious intolerance (not the destruction of the buddhas, the stoning or murder of Christians!). But at least they made sure the trains ran on time - oh, wait, they don’t want Crusader things in their country.

(h/t Dr. Sanity) 

Dr. Sanity has a great post about pre-election efforts to manipulate public opinion, HOW TO MAKE SURE YOU WIN AN ELECTION EVEN IF YOU LOSE. The analysis is great, only overlooking one other motive for the incessant blathering on about Democrat victory before any votes are cast - election fatigue. I wonder how many of the fever swamp Left believe that if you say something often enough, regardless of the evidence demonstrating the falsity of the statement, eventually people will quit arguing with you out of sheer fatigue and frustration. Their argument isn’t more right because it is more persistent, or because people have quit arguing with them about it.

Dr. Sanity adds a particularly comment about the fact-less basis for the Left’s beliefs: 

But never have I seen such a crazed and coordinated effort to make sure a particular political side wins the election, even if they lose. Because, all that will matter is their allegations of fraud. Truth will be ablsolutely irrelevant. History will be absolutely irrelevant. The left’s documented election fraud in elections gone by will be conveniently forgotten, never to be mentioned–either this week before the midterms;

It’s a post worth reading in its entirety.