Spitting in the Well

Paul Krugman's piece today in the New York Times was filled with laughable distortions of the truth; but it is the more sinister purpose behind it that needs to be examined. I'll link to some sites that do a more thorough fisking of it below; here's a quick sample of his work - first, a simple lie:

Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida's ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore.

Truth: Actually, both consortiums found the opposite. From USA TODAY:

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

But Paul ignore these troublesome facts, and insinuates a conspiracy of silence has deluded us poor Americans:

But few Americans have heard these facts....
....the whitewash of what happened in Florida in 2000...

{Only the most talked about story for months, Paul - where were you? Under a rock on Mars with your fingers in your ears?}

Then it's a racial issue:

But both reports show that votes were suppressed by long lines at polling places...and that these lines occurred disproportionately in areas likely to vote Democratic.

So according to the Paul Krugman and the New York Times (implicated because their fact-checkers allowed this to pass), the 200o election was stolen, whitewashed by a media conspiracy which allowed voter suppression in Ohio during the 2004 election to pass unnoticed; thus allowing the Republicans to steal yet another election. And we, meaning the media, "the people", and the Democrats, must stop the Republicans from striking at our democracy again.

What is the purpose of this obvious nonsense? The JerseyNut has a theory, all right...

The Democratic party has been reeling since 2000. They may whine about stolen elections until the cows come home, but it was the American people whom increased the Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, as well as within the Governer's houses across the nation. The Democratic party, full of intellectual conceit, cannot, cannot fathom that their ideas are being rejected by "the people", since, after all, it is a bengin liberal leadership that is best for them.

So there must be other reasons, opine the Democrats:
-Bush stole the election
-A religious cult of uneducated Americans are attempting to take over the country
- The media is covering for Bush; and/or too many damned people are believing what they see on FOX instead of in the Times!

By venting their impotent, childish fury this way, they are, purposely, spitting in the well of American democracy. By attempting to portray the current Administration as illicit, to convince blacks and poor Americans that their voices are being intentionally squelched, by intentionally feeding them factually incorrect information (see above!), the Democrats and the media are poisioning the political atmosphere. They are creating an undercurrent of rage that they hope to ride to election victory in 2008, but win or lose, the carnage will be great. Media outlets will be free, as the Times apparently is, to create any facts that fit their editorial desires, rendering facts meaningless in a discussion. Any election outcome can be labeled as a fraud, if "long lines" become evidence of racial voter supression. And discourse is no longer the give and take of ideas, but it becomes simply belittling the intelligence, birthplace, or religion of the other party's supporters. Hate, rather than disgareement, becomes the currancy of the politcal realm...

The bulk of America is disgusted by the left-wing's hijacking of the Democratic party by the like of Howard Dean and MoveOn, and will have no quarter with this type of devastating slash-and burn technique of electioneering.

But does the Times, Krugman, and Democrats like Howard Dean and Maxine Waters even realize the damage their demogouging can do to the body politic? Or are they so deluded they believe this is a winning technique?

All this, while they actively campaign for the defeat of America forces in Iraq (calling it a "withdrawal").

How can a political party whom so actively despoils the country it claims to represent ever expect to regain power?

Maybe they can't.
And maybe they know it.
So they Spit in the Well.


Krugman here: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/19/opinion/19krugman.html
Three different links to studies by media outlets (including one endorsed by the Times!) refuting Krugman's claim can be found here: http://brain-terminal.com/posts/2005/08/19/krugman
Instapundit links to a few good fiskings of Krugman's trash here: http://instapundit.com/archives/025003.php