Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous fictional detective Sherlock Holmes may have been the prototype Vulcan because he used logic and reason to figure out problems and refused to let emotion sway his judgment. A columnist, who wished to emulate Sherlock’s thought process, can offer some facts as evidence and then indicate how those items would inevitably lead to the conclusion that McCain might not be an underdog candidate after all.
Liberals, who are fully convinced that George W. Bush (and his minions) stole both the 2000 and 2004 elections, seem to be fully compliant with the belief that the November election will be a blemish free example of Democracy in action. They then proclaim that the most likely people to become the Democratic nominee would be a member of a minority and would, if elected, provide a splendid example of how free elections work. Do they have any logical basis for concluding that there has been a St. Paul’s conversion moment for any (let alone many) staunch Conservatives and that they will stand idly by and let a Democrat get the chance to (in their estimation) abandon the war on terrorism and order a retreat from Iraq? They don’t even bother to consider the prospects that a new Democratic President might initiate the death of conservative talk radio and a return to the Fairness Doctrine, or try to repeal tax breaks for the wealthy.
Bloggers use site names such as Crooks and Liars (there’s a link in the Blogroll to the right—) and Evil GOP Bastards http://www.evilgopbastards.com/ [1] to chronicle the history of the Bush Administration, but when it comes time to assess the likelihood of a dishonest result in November, they (like de tar baby) say nothing. [Attempts to contact the management of both the aforementioned sites for a quote for this column were unsuccessful.] How could any reasonable person suspect the honorable gentlemen of the Karl Rove posse of anything other than adhering to the Marquis of Queensbury rules for electoral fisticuffs? Only poltroons worthy of Bill O’Reily’s strongest disapproval would think any voting results chicanery was possible let alone likely.
Listen to a variety of conservative talk radio shows and you will soon start to think that all Republican candidates (even ones under indictment) are far superior to any Democrat (even if there was one awaiting canonization by the Pope).
Conservative talk radio presents a constant torrent of Republican candidates who are automatically assumed to be worthy of the “if I but touch the tassel of his cloak” type adulation, while Democrats are regarded with the same level of awe and admiration accorded to patients in a lunatic asylum and/or assassins.
Conservatives respond to the possibility that another fraudulent election might be a logical expectation with a dismissive flick of the hand.
If a liberal hired an automobile mechanic who perpetrated a fraud on the customer twice in a row, how much sense would it make for that person to go back to the same unscrupulous swindler for a third time?
If a liberal went to a restaurant twice and both times was served a substandard meal, what logical basis would there be to validate a third visit to that establishment?
The Los Angeles Times print edition for Wednesday, February 27, 2008, carried the headline: “McCain has edge over Democrats.” Are they laying the groundwork for “upset victory” stories that will repudiate the expectations generated by extensive pre-election attention to polls and magical mystery analysis of the mood of the voters?
If the Republicans can manipulate election results (speculation alert!) and they are suddenly seized by a compulsion to abide by a mandate for the Democrats, they would have to face the embarrassing possibilities which would be concomitant with a request from the World Court (AKA Permanent Court of International Justice) in the Hague to turn over an ex-President for a war crimes trail.
A Republican winner in November would, of course, meet any such request from the World Court with a torrent of derisive sarcasm and disbelief. “Who knew that those World Court fellows would be pro-terrorist sympathizers?”
With the prospect of a War Crimes Trial as a motivating factor, would any Republican see the chance to “enhance” the election results before hand as anything other than a true patriot’s duty? If waterboarding isn’t torture, then adjusting electronic voting machines to disregard the votes of pro-terroist traitors isn’t vote tampering. Elementary, my dear Watson.
If McCain does win and if there have been relatively few news stories and/or columns indicating that a rigged election might be a likely expectation, then the mainstream media would have the green light for the usual “dog and pony show” level of complicity and immediately become obsessed with stories explaining why the upset had occurred. (Hello Ralph Nader!) Any objections to the results would be quickly dismissed. Bill O’Reilly would label the topic as originating from certified lunatics and not worthy of air time. The rest of the conservative talk show posse would make caustic remarks about sour grapes and a subject that only came up after the fact. “Isn’t it curious that the watch dogs in the world of journalism didn’t do any barking about that concern before the election?”
Sherlock’s fans know that the fact that there is no barking doesn’t mean that a crime isn’t being committed. The silence of the dogs can be a clue about what is happening. In the last forty years the Presidential election has been won by the Republican candidate seven out of ten times and the last two were believed by partisans to have been shams. How do you think Sherlock would bet on the results for the Presidential election to be held in November of this year? Wouldn’t he find it logical to bet on McCain?
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote: “Like all Holmes’s reasoning the thing seemed simplicity itself when it was once explained.”
Now, the disk jockey will play Pete Seeger’s Vietnam era song, “Waist Deep in the Big Muddy http://www.tvacres.com/music_songs_muddy.htm [2]” and we will duck out to go cast a provisional ballot, which will be thrown away uncounted. Have a “But the big fool said to push on” type week.
_______
About author
Bob Patterson has been a police beat reporter in Pennsylvania, Nevada, and California. He has been an editor in Santa Monica and currently is eking out a meager existence freelancing in the Los Angeles area. Contact Bob at worldslaziestjournalist@yahoo.com