What a Bunch of Victims
It's impossible to understand how anyone could imagine liberals could assume leadership in the war on terror. All they are, it sometimes seems, are a bunch of self-proclaimed victims, whining about "unfairness."
Take the newest example -- trying to pressure advertisers who work with the Fox News Channel. Why? Because they believe that Fox leans right, even though every other major news network leans left. And a supposedly right-leaning news channel . . . that just isn't fair.
What's more, Charles Schumer is now whining that Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito duped Senate Democrats -- and every Democrat who voted for the war claims to have been tricked by the Bush Administration (from this perspective, of course, Saddam Hussein is positively blameless).
Why should anyone trust these weak sisters to run the country and deal with America's adversaries, some of whom -- gasp! -- might be even tougher adversaries than President Bush, congressional Republicans, and two Supreme Court justices?
Take the newest example -- trying to pressure advertisers who work with the Fox News Channel. Why? Because they believe that Fox leans right, even though every other major news network leans left. And a supposedly right-leaning news channel . . . that just isn't fair.
What's more, Charles Schumer is now whining that Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito duped Senate Democrats -- and every Democrat who voted for the war claims to have been tricked by the Bush Administration (from this perspective, of course, Saddam Hussein is positively blameless).
Why should anyone trust these weak sisters to run the country and deal with America's adversaries, some of whom -- gasp! -- might be even tougher adversaries than President Bush, congressional Republicans, and two Supreme Court justices?
posted by LadybugUSA at 9:19 AM
6 Comments:
FDR and HST were Dems who with their faults and policy mistakes at least knew who the overseas enemy was.
And JFK as well, Stackja. If he were alive today he'd be a conservative Republican
Actually the whole anti-Fox thing has exploded at the moment because O'Reilly claimed that Dailykos were, essentially, terrorist supporters.
Dailykos have responded by the only means they known how - through reasoned argument showing how dangerous O'Reilly is to America (and why should advertisers pay him?)
Ma'am, where do you get these ideas? You complain that some Democrats are trying to convince advertisers not to use Fox. Is this tactic not used by right-wingers as well? When Democrats use it, they're "whiners", but when Republicans use it, they're "patriots"?
You characterize Mr. Shumer's statement as "whining". What's the difference between "whining" and "accusing"? What's the difference between Mr. Shumer's whining and your own whining?
You suggest that Democrats believe that Mr. Hussein is absolutely blameless. Would you mind backing that statement up with some evidence?
You dismiss the Democrats as "weak sisters". But if the entirety of your political commentary is mere mudslinging like this, then surely you can have no objection to my calling the Republicans "bloodthirsty blockheads". In truth, I don't believe that to be true; my point is that mud can be slung in both directions. In the end, mudslinging accomplishes nothing.
For some (?) reason a quote from the Bard cones to mind:
"Like a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"
CN, as my kids would say Take a Chill Pill and enjoy the discourse
That Schumer and the rest can be so easily duped simply adds to the evidence of their incompetence to serve. They should all step down.
Post a Comment
<< Home