Over at Daily Kos . . .

The lefty fringe behaves as expected. From the open thread on the London attacks:

I'm waiting for Bush's Iraq spin.

by AnthonySF on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:14:51 PDT

* * *

I'm waiting for Bush's Iran spin.

by doink on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:31:42 PDT

* * *

Bush said . . . For Americans to be on guard going to work this morning or something to that effect in the articles I am reading. You might know he would try to get Americans to be afraid. He invokes Fear instead of making us feel safer.

I am sure he figures this tragedy will scare Americas and help his support of War.

by wishingwell on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:46:47 PDT

* * *

I'm sure we wouldn't have been "on guard" had our blessed f'ing President not told us so. You know, I'm just a simpleton who can only do things my daddy tells me.

And it's not our job to be on guard, it's his, and he's been asleep at the wheel before. His job is to protect us, not scare the shit out of us further (terrorist attacks do that already).

Take your sunshine and stick it up your ass.

by iowasteele on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 09:07:19 PDT

* * *

oh, yes, lather up with fear

No need to actually guard the transit systems, ports, coastlines, nuclear plants.

Just froth at the mouth and pack up for Tehran!

The wilful and PATHOLOGICAL neglect/incompetence of this administration is stunning.

They demand our support because of the danger they aided and abetted.

Oh yeah, and you are far more likely to be killed in your SUV than to be killed by a terrorist.

by texan in exile on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 09:15:37 PDT

* * *

Is Tony Blair's Regime Over?

. . . Tony Blair put all of his anti-terrorist
"eggs" in George Walker Bush's scheme to keep terrorists occupied in Iraq, to supposedly help deflect terrorist attacks elsewhere.

The war on terror being conducted by Tony Blair and George Walker Bush is an abject failure.

by wdrath on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:14:57 PDT

* * *

do you think

blair might use this event as a rallying point for the rest of his term? by all accounts this is horrible and reflects poorly on blair, but so did 9/11 for Bush, and we know how that turned out.

i know there was a lot of speculation he would step down next year or in 2007 and let Brown take over. But maybe he can spin this like Bush used/s 9/11, and stay around for as long he likes?

by bearever on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:24:59 PDT

* * *

Nah

I think all the people of the world are sophisticated to that kind of trickery now, having witnessed it in action in such spectacular fashion over here.

[long excerpt cut--JVL]

Our history informs our subconscious that shit could always be a great deal worse. I believe that's the fundamental difference between America and Britain. The British national psyche has a much longer history of experience and so we lack an overall willingness to follow behind one person who claims to know a path through the dark forest. We don't need that one person; we are all confident we can find our way out again, like we did last time.

We have been there, done that, know what I mean? Londoners and Brits in general are just not that impressed by things that go on these days. They're not as ready to do the sheeple thing.

This is why I, as a Brit, am imploring people to keep the spotlight on important stories here in America and not let London have all of everyone's attention. Please. :)

by Loquatrix on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 08:45:12 PDT

* * *
Blair and Bush have made the U.K. and the U.S.

LESS safe.

When are we going to adopt this talking point?

What has Bush done to make us safer? Our entire military is in Iraq. If Bush chose to direct even a fraction of the billions that went into Iraq to our subways, ports, chemical plants, etc., we might be safer.

Don't let Bush exploit this - don't let him do this again. And if it happens in the U.S., will Democrats roll over again?

by diana04 on Thu Jul 7th, 2005 at 09:17:31 PDT

It goes on and on and on.