You can't make this stuff up. AOL is now FEATURING a New York Times stories abut "hushed" worries among Obama people that he may be assassinated--no specific threats, just "worries". This obviously comes directly from the Obama campaign, and the story serves no function beyond political propaganda (certainly not "news"--maybe people in the Hilllary Clinton campaign worry about her too). This is a strange meaning of "husted" by the wary--spreading the worries all over the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media. Could this ENCOURAGE a NUT out there? It just shows what politicians will do to advance their political fortunes, and what the New York Times will print as "news".
Another NON-STORY from the New York Times (which specializes in them, as AOL specializes in featuring them). It is no accident that the New York Times was the WINNER of my coveted "Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate" award this week (Saturday's bog entry)
Lest you forget, Robert F. Kennedy was killed by a lone nut (Sirthan Sirhan). JFK was killed by a lone nut. Ditto Martin Luther King. Ronald Reagan was SHOT by a lone nut (I don't remember an New York Times stories afterward about "worries" he would be targeted again, although I won't gurantee there were none). Gerald Ford was the target of an assassination attempt. In other words, EVERY President and Presidential candidate is a potential target of a nut. Obama is no different, and probably LESS hated thatn--say--Hillary Clinton.
President Bush was a HATED man in 2004 (by left wing nuts), and since. I have not seen the New York Times talking about "worries" about him. There was a MOVIE virtually urging the assassiination of President Bush, and left wing blogs have carried post after post wising him dead (along with AOL comments to that effect).
The point is: WHAT makes this "news"? We need to protect ALL Presidents and Presidential candidates as best we can. Further, ALL such people live with the knowledge that a LONE NUT out there might assassinate thme, despite all precaustions.What makes Obama "special", besides the New York Times agenda?
I think he New York Times combining a "hate America" agenda (see how SICK we are that the GOOD people like Obama, King, and RFK are at risk; we don't worry much about people like President Bush) with a pro-Obama agenda, hoping forsympathy for Obama's hoped for status standing in the shoes of Martin Luther King and RFK).