Calling the Kettle Black
October 29, 2006
Democrats cannot be trusted to control Congress because they do not know how to win the war in Iraq.
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
in the dirt since history began
-
"We have no words to waste on you. When you reach out your vaunted strong hands for our palaces and purpled ease, we will show you what strength is. In roar of shell and shrapnel and in whine of machine-guns will our answer be couched. We will grind you revolutionists down under our heel, and we shall walk upon your faces. The world is ours, we are its lords, and ours it shall remain. As for the host of labor, it has been in the dirt since history began, and I read history aright. And in the dirt it shall remain so long as I and mine and those that come after us have the power. There is the word. It is the king of words—Power. Not God, not Mammon, but Power. Pour it over your tongue till it tingles with it. Power."
MAIL:
stumplane "at" gmail "dot" com -
Recent Comments
Montag on Grid Not Goal – Part 1:… Montag on Grid Not Goal – Part 1:… abonilo1 on Grid Not Goal – Part 1:… lambert strether on Grid Not Goal – Part 1:… Montag on Grid Not Goal – Part 1:… 
Who Is IOZ?- I Blame the Patriarchy
- BLKDGRD
- The Crow’s Eye
- eye of the storm
- ladypoverty
- False Dichotomy
- Once Upon A Time…
- Stop Me Before I Vote Again
- Dennis Perrin
- Guys From Area 51
- Fafblog!
Theoretically Dems do not know how to win the war in Iraq, but;
it has already been proven that Repubs do not know how to win the war in Iraq.
There are so many words in the original sentence with extremely flexible meaning: Democrats, trust, control, because, win, war. I’d say that the statement borders on the totally meaningless. Is there a clearly delineated war? What, for that matter, is “Iraq”? (Who drew the borders? Is it a “nation-state”?) How is “control” of Congress linked, specifically [and causally, in the above statement], with the war in Iraq? (I.e. doesn’t Congress do more than wage war?) Who, exactly, is doing the trusting here? (The paraphrase (nearly a direct quote) was as I’m sure is clear culled from a couple of Bush’s recent speeches, in Indiana and California.)
I should have known it was a trick question.
My comment works as a Dem response to such criticism, though. Equally meaningless, ergo equally potentially “true.” Calling the Pot Black, if you will.