Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Dems Evolve Into Vertebrates, Force Senate Into Closed-Door Session; Wackiness Ensues

Wow. Go Harry!

Reid said:

"I demand on behalf of the America people that we understand why these investigations aren't being conducted."

Well, it's about time.

Bill Frist responded by saying--and here I want to make it absolutely clear that I am in no way making this up--that:

"The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership."

Yes folks, the Senate has been hijacked by the Democrats. Who's taken control of the government in general and the Senate in particular? Why, the Democrats, silly.

Mr. Frist also added, in the spirit of bipartisanship, that:

"They [the Democrats] have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas."

So, you see, anyone who thinks we the people of the world's greatest Democracy should conduct an inquiry into how and why we were railroaded into an unnecessary, bloody, costly and possibly unjust war is hijacking the country, and is bereft of convictions, principles, and ideas.

I hope this is sufficiently clear.

We return you now to your regularly-scheduled demagoguery.

6 Comments:

Blogger Tom Van Dyke said...

"They [the Democrats] have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas."


Another Republican lie. Of course they do. Democrats have strong convictions that the principle of removing Saddam Hussein was a bad idea.

Now, anyway. Better too late than never.

5:31 AM  
Blogger Winston Smith said...

Well, let's make sure we don't err by omission: Democrats think it was a bad idea to remove Saddam *on the basis of fabricated intelligence data about non-existent WMDs*.

Democrats have, for all of my life, stood in favor of humanitarian interventions, and have always been admonished for it by Republicans. "We can't be the world's policeman," you'll recall, has been the Republican battle cry.

The *post hoc* human rights rationalizations for the war are...well, just that: *post hoc* rationalizations.

7:38 AM  
Blogger Tom Van Dyke said...

What about post hoc opposition?

6:17 PM  
Blogger Winston Smith said...

I agree, Tom. The Dems were foolish to trust Bush re: pre-war intelligence. But they did trust him, and now they are demanding to know why and how he mislead them. And the problem is...?

5:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Democrats have strong convictions that the principle of removing Saddam Hussein was a bad idea.

Republicans have strong convictions that more Americans need to die in Iraq.

See? Invidiously and purposely misconstruing your opponent's position is fun.

Note to tvd: You already know that shoehorning the principle of into your slander is sophistry, so don't bother going there.

Since we're using Latin in this thread: Ceteris paribus, removing Saddam Hussein was a great idea. Are all other things equal? Duh!

My Democratic objections to invading Iraq weren't objections to the principle of removing Saddam, they were practical objections that the effects would be worse than the benefits and that no honest case at all had been made to get him first and now. But then, I never trusted Duhbya at all, ever, no how.

6:47 PM  
Blogger Winston Smith said...

I gotta agree with LL here, Tom.

8:28 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home