Cloning Rasputin
Check this quote.
Talking in the third person about oneself comes across as stilted or just plain weird. Wouldn't you love some senator or representative to ask, "Well, Ms Goodling, do you mean to say you don't know what your intentions were? Is there a knowledgeable person Ms Goodling is acquainted with whom we could ask?"
Strange things are happening. Monica's lawyers are making noise over DOJ's investigation of their client for her partisan hiring practices, saying it reeks of "retribution and intimidation." Duh! How about her calling McNulty a liar for implicating her? It's the typical conservative sense of entitlement, "You can't do to me what I'll do to you!"
It's all so silly and shallow. If it wasn't for the ruthlessly sacrificed lives and liberties these unpatriotic freedom-haters who have once again hijacked the GOP have taken it would be funny. In fifty years I hope people can look back and mock and laugh at the atmosphere created in this country. Where fact is assailed as inaccurate and unpatriotic. Where courage is belittled and called cowardice by the very cowards the brave are standing up to. Where cowardice and unrestrained greed are worshipped as patriotic and lofty goals.
It really sucks. Watching your country become the bad guys. Meanwhile the democrats we elected to stand up to the evil being carried out in our name have rolled over for Bush, giving him yet another blank check to support torture, illegal imprisonment, mercenaries (blackwater, halliburton, becktel...), unrestrained domestic spying, etc. So, the representatives we put in place to change the downward spiral of America have no more courage than the bunch who got us here. Do you suppose any of them got their bellies scratched when they rolled over for dubya? I don't think so. Same lapdogs, different names.
"I don't believe I intended to commit a crime," Goodling, a lawyer, answered.Can you believe this? The silly twit is nearly talking about herself in the third person. Does she think she is channelling Gonzo? How can you not know your own intent? Discussing yourself in a third person sounding style should not insulate you. If I stated in court that Ms Goodling intended to break the law a valid objection would be made for drawing a conclusion or hearsay. But talking in the third person should not distance you from yourself, and I'm sick of the folks at hearings letting these statements go unchallenged. If I was asked if I intended to break the speed limit and told the magistrate, "I don't believe I intended to commit a crime," what do you think would happen?
Talking in the third person about oneself comes across as stilted or just plain weird. Wouldn't you love some senator or representative to ask, "Well, Ms Goodling, do you mean to say you don't know what your intentions were? Is there a knowledgeable person Ms Goodling is acquainted with whom we could ask?"
Strange things are happening. Monica's lawyers are making noise over DOJ's investigation of their client for her partisan hiring practices, saying it reeks of "retribution and intimidation." Duh! How about her calling McNulty a liar for implicating her? It's the typical conservative sense of entitlement, "You can't do to me what I'll do to you!"
It's all so silly and shallow. If it wasn't for the ruthlessly sacrificed lives and liberties these unpatriotic freedom-haters who have once again hijacked the GOP have taken it would be funny. In fifty years I hope people can look back and mock and laugh at the atmosphere created in this country. Where fact is assailed as inaccurate and unpatriotic. Where courage is belittled and called cowardice by the very cowards the brave are standing up to. Where cowardice and unrestrained greed are worshipped as patriotic and lofty goals.
It really sucks. Watching your country become the bad guys. Meanwhile the democrats we elected to stand up to the evil being carried out in our name have rolled over for Bush, giving him yet another blank check to support torture, illegal imprisonment, mercenaries (blackwater, halliburton, becktel...), unrestrained domestic spying, etc. So, the representatives we put in place to change the downward spiral of America have no more courage than the bunch who got us here. Do you suppose any of them got their bellies scratched when they rolled over for dubya? I don't think so. Same lapdogs, different names.
3 Comments:
A) Not to give them too much cover, but there aren't enough Democrats in the Senate to overrule Bush anyhow.
B) That said, I think that the reason that the Democrats are kowtowing to the father fucker is because they know damn well (definitely the ones on the Intelligence committees know) that they played a hand in letting this all happen in the first place. They played along for political advantage and like McCain now, they're feeling the heat for that decision.
C) Speaking of McCain, another verbal tic that has me very annoyed is the habit he picked up from Rumsfeld: Ask a question of yourself - one that you'd rather answer other than the one a reporter just asked - and then answer yourself. It's a further sign of dementia and rampant ego centric behaviour.
I've thought about that. I believe we should have made him exercise the veto. w is already making noises about adopting some slightly more reasonable policies. Not that I think he is doing so sincerely or willingly. His bluff should have been called regardless the ability to override a veto. The one time when making a statement really matters the dems fold like DeLay was still calling the shots.
McCain't and Gullible-Annie have nothing to offer the country but more fear. Sadly that may be enough, because bush, inc. have done everything possible to encourage more terrorist acts against America.
I did write to my senators and and congressman asking them to not support this acquiescence.
It's very likely that bin Laden or some other entity will launch an attack shortly before the next election. It plays in their hands to have a fear monger lead the country. Recall that bin Laden came out of hiding 4 days before the last presidential election with a video tape recording. He was playing Bush's card for him. Why would he do that? Because Bush's policies are great for bin Laden's recruiting efforts.
Ron Paul has made a similar argument during the Republican "debates" and has been lambasted for it. Paul is a libertarian. He's nutty on many fronts, but he's right on this one. The fact that the other candidates won't even listen to him shows the lie in the "big tent" propaganda that the Republican party has been spreading for years.
Post a Comment
<< Home