Fishy Polls Cast Their Lines Beyond Bush

“This Just In — Scientists at the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service are reporting that the unprecedented increase in fatal shark attacks up and down both coasts of the nation has now reached the alarming rate of over 500 deaths per day — a horrific and blood-soaked pace which continues to climb unabated! But, first – A new USA Today/Gallup Poll suggests that the President’s approval ratings have hit an all-time low!”

Relax. The fish tale was just that – for the most part. Unfortunately, the portrayal of television news anchors allowing their idealism to taint professional perspective, and, subsequently, the triaging of broadcast content, is far from fiction.

Y’all know them. Know how they earn a livin’

Those of you who haven’t been locked in the hold of a trawler have likely perceived a conspicuous escalation in Presidential polls of late. Truth be told, the frequency of these surveys has remained relatively stable over the past six years. The incidence of the reporting of their results by the Mainstream Media, however – well, that’s an entirely different matter. Not astonishingly, the President’s poll numbers appear to be inversely proportional to the degree of coverage they receive.

Not like going down to the pond and chasing bluegills and tommycocks

No, what we are dealing with is Carcharhinies Liontuos - The Cock’n’Bull Shark – a perfect propaganda engine – an evenhandedness-eating-machine, masquerading as a news gatherer. It’s really a miracle of tolerated partiality.

Let’s take a close look at one group’s proclivities toward Presidential favor reporting since the height of George W. Bush’s popularity.

Searches of ABC News transcripts for broadcasts containing the words, ”President” and/or “Bush”, appearing in the same sentence as “Approval Rating” during a few milestone 6 month periods produce rather fishy results:

• Between 9/21/2001 and 3/21/2002, the 6 months immediately following 9/11, favorable ratings for the President spiked to 90% and eventually reached a more realistic, yet quite respectable, level of 79%. While their actions are most attributable to post-traumatic stress syndrome, the media begrudgingly speaks of “Record High Approval Ratings.” Indeed, the top figure during this period represented the highest approval rating recorded for any president by the Gallup Organization, which, according to PollingReport.Com, provider of all Gallup polling data herein, “began asking the question when Franklin D. Roosevelt was in the White House.” 28 Hits.

• Between 7/21/2002 and 1/21/2003, the President’s ratings drop below 70%, then below 60%, but remain well above par (69% – 59%). With not much to feed on, we find: 16 Hits

• Between 10/18/2003 and 04/18/2004, as the President’s positives approach par (56% – 52%) for the first time since the September attacks, we find little change in media feeding habits: 17 Hits

Very first light … sharks come cruisin’ by

• Between 05/02/2004 and 11/02/2004, Bush’s favorability falls below par, yet, essentially, remains within the margin of error from par throughout the period (49%-48%). The agitated predators smell an opportunity and begin to stake their territory: 24 Strikes

• Between 3/28/2005 and 9/28/2005 which represented a decline from 48% to 45%, with dips as low as 40%, many appear to be dejected by the resolve of their prey and the lack of surfaced viscera. Some move on to hunt new waters — most don’t: 16 Strikes

… despite all your poundin’ and your hollerin’ those sharks come in …

• Between 10/13/05 and 4/13/06 the stalking is back on as we move into a midterm election year and ratings plummet below the 40% margin for the first time in the President’s two terms. Positives hover between 39% and 36%. Media speaks of “record low approval” and “Nixonian level disapproval.” The waters are thick with the smell and taste of political blood. The actual frenzy commences: 78 Attacks

And the thing about a shark is he’s got lifeless eyes. Black eyes. Like a doll’s eyes

As the ratios deteriorate and the attacks swell, a new phenomenon begins to develop. The aquatic carnivores disport a newfound confidence — a certain rapture, if you will — which manifests itself in apparent euphoric delusion.

… ‘till he bites ya, and those black eyes roll over white

While providing commentary of the President’s 2006 State of the Union Address (when 7 under par) with fellow ABC anchors Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, talking head Elizabeth Vargas said (emphasis mine):

“…. several journalists also met with the Democratic Congressional leadership, they were remarkable in their â [sic] their anger, frankly with the President. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at one point saying this is a President who does one thing and says another. We don’t trust what he has to say.”

This pay-scale upgrade stood unquestioned by her associate “newsmen.”

This shark — swallow you whole!

Not to be outdone, Mr. Stephanopoulos, on the May 7, 2006 edition of his This Week show (with the President an astounding 19 under par), elevated the House Minority Leader to House Speaker on not one, but two occasions. During his interview of former House Majority Leader Tom Delay, he says (emphasis mine):

“Speaker – perhaps Speaker Pelosi, certainly not the speaker right now, Democratic leader Pelosi said the Democratic agenda is gonna be four parts, and I want to show it.”

This was no promoting accident!

In the very next segment of the same show, this exchange occurred between the former Clinton senior policy advisor and the current chairman of the Democratic National Committee (again, emphasis mine):

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
“That was not one of the top four pieces of legislation that Speaker - excuse me, I don’t know why I have that stuck in my head.”
HOWARD DEAN
“I’m glad you do. I like the sound of that, George.”
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
“I’m sure you do, but that’s not the case. Just the Democratic leader.”

Were there really two “slips” during the same broadcast? Sure – and Bill Clinton didn’t have sex with “that woman.” George appeared to be so confident of his November finish line forecast that he just couldn’t contain his delight! Now, is this impetuous certitude bona fide foresight; is this just a self-indulgent exercise in wish-fulfillment, or is there something more sinister at play here?

No shakin’, no tenderizin’, down you go!

Well, as you may have heard by now, the numbers are certainly on their side!

Heck, the Conservatives have cried foul at a number of careless executive near-misses (can you say Harriet Myers?) and have expressed an agonizing sense of desertion on the issue of Illegal Immigration. Both Conservative and Libertarian representatives have voiced their frustration with such unbefitting agenda as the 2002 steel tariffs; huge boosts in spending and massive new entitlement programs – epitomized by the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, and have echoed a widespread sentiment that the President has abandoned many of their core values.

To further incite the man-eaters, there have been cross-party cries of discountenance with the lack of lucid border and port security strategies, on top of the apparent absence of any coherent Middle East schema, particularly as regards the conflagration in Iraq.

Add to this the Sharks devouring whatever bump he may have celebrated from the left for those programs which infuriate the right. by suggesting to liberals that they’re so entitled to so much more, and it’s a wonder that the President’s positives remain above legal drinking age.

You’ll recall that Bush attained his lease to the White House in 2000 with 47.87% and renewed it in 2004 with 50.75% of the popular vote. Well, recent numbers suggest that 20% of registered voters have since jumped ship.

For that you get the House, the Senate, the whole damn thing

But, as suggested by the recent actions of these sneaky fish, this isn’t really about Bush. This isn’t about the open election of 2008, where they’ll be neither an incumbent nor a Veep seeking a promotion. What’s more, while 2 ½ years is a political eternity, potential Republican Presidential candidates (most notably McCain, which may or may not give comfort to Conservatives) continue to poll ahead of Democrats (especially Hillary). No, those big, toothy grins they flash are anticipating the flesh they’ll taste in the approaching election season.

And, while a 5/15/06 Washington Post / ABC News Poll affords Democrats a 52/40 advantage if a hypothetical House election where “held today,” and a 56/33 upper hand in whom people claim to want to see put in control of Congress in November, the most confounding numbers came from the question regarding which party people trust to do a better job handling the “U.S campaign against terrorism” which – get this - also favored the Dems and by an astounding 46/41! Democrats? National Security? To sanitize a William Hurt line from his extraordinary performance in the film, A History of Violence, “How do you screw that up?”

Of course, this “fall from base” is unlikely to spawn legions of dissidents pulling the trigger for opposition candidates come November, especially when reflecting upon the alternative leaders enjoying preordination from the press. Besides, the absurd aforementioned terrorism stat certainly suggests that audiences are responding through their anger rather than their intellect – which is much easier remedied.

They’re gonna need a bigger vote ….

But, keep in mind – The Dems, freshly invigorated with the buoyancy amassed by the actions and predictions of the aligned sharks, will undoubtedly swim that extra mile to get out their vote. Meanwhile, the still ravenous and encircling fish of prey will continue to spout rays of incumbent hopelessness through incessant public opinion proclamations, calculatedly fueling the fire of voter abstention.

Essentially, the decision to stay home to watch American Idol, that particular Tuesday evening, by even a small percentage of the disconsolate, would prove equally disastrous to the nation as would Republican duplicity. Accordingly, if there were ever justification to engage the generally distasteful ploy designated as “negative” campaigning, the Republicans have surely found it. And what finer or more justifiable targets could you possibly ask for than the Dem leaders – The mutually despicable and incompetent Pelosi and Reid?

Are you listening, Ken Mellman? Poster children the likes of these are rarely delivered directly into the hands of their opponents. Picture if you will: Smug and smiling Pelosi and Reid handing a gavel to Michigan Congressman John Conyers, who would head up the House Judiciary Committee should the Democrats retake the house. How does the promise of enduring years of ridiculous impeachment proceedings, while sworn enemies of this nation are defended in American courts by the ACLU sound as a motivator of the multitudes?

Surely, even the most disenchanted conservatives and moderate “independents”, accountable for the bulk of the Republicans’ dismal approbation, dread the cataclysmic national security consequences and forewarned abuse of subpoena power portended by a Democratic majority in both or either houses. They must appreciate the implications of the “tongue slips” of Vargas and Stephanopoulos proving prescient, or of the mere specter of a third Clinton term.

… Or the ocean turns red while they rip you to pieces

How can these truly nightmarish phantasms fail to mobilize the crestfallen, come battle day, to turn out in droves and defend our homeland with accurately targeted votes? How can patriots, annoyed or otherwise, sit idle while the sharks have their way and Republican attendance in November is, indeed, anemic, moving the Politically-Correct-yet-Otherwise-Incorrect Democrats nearer to their goal of regaining command and control of our destiny? How can they ignore the history and consequences of liberal appeasement, or fail to envision its outcome when applied to the battles at hand and yet to come?

You go in the voting booth, or you go in the water — Sharks in the water – our sharks.

The answer is, optimistically, that they can’t and won’t. They can’t because deep-down they know that such conciliatory liberal blunders would surely place us all at the mercy of an even fouler breed of creature – Gagazotes Zacharias – The Guardus Great White Shark. They won’t because the fact that these maniacal killers understand no mercy and have pledged our ultimate obliteration will not evade their radar.

And, ultimately, they won’t because our disillusioned, yet otherwise tendentious brethren, simply will not abide their own complicity in triggering the countdown to the day when we are all cast upon that hostile sea. A day evoked by their imprudent sloth, which may very well end with an unimaginable tally of their fellow Americans clenched within the jaws of our lunatic jihadist or especially unbalanced messianic end-times enemies, futilely thrashing and kicking for our betrayed lives; defiantly screaming the salty Farewell and Adieu shanty, gurgling its final evocative words as we brutally drown in the bloody vortex of our defectors’ making — “And so nevermore shall we see you again.”

Note: All opinion statistics derived from Gallup or USA Today/Gallup Polls unless otherwise indicated.

Marc Sheppard is a business owner, software developer and writer residing on New York’s Long Island. He is a regular contributor to The New Media Journal, Opinion Editorials and Men’s News Daily. His articles and commentary have also appeared in The American Thinker and other Conservative and Libertarian websites. He welcomes your Feedback

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 31st, 2006 at 7:53 am and is filed under Vox Populi. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. | 231 views | Trackback | Print this page |

Marc Sheppard is a technology consultant, software engineer, writer, and political and systems analyst. He is a regular contributor to American Thinker, The New Media Journal, Opinion Editorials and Men’s News Daily. | More from Marc Sheppard