With A Face Like This, Who Needs A Mask?
According to the AmSpec prowler, the Democrats' pre-post-election finger-pointing is already underway, and most of the fingers are pointing at DNC Chairman Howard Dean:
Well, that answers that question. Rather than working to strengthen his party, Dr. Demented is actually feathering his own nest, and perhaps building it into a platform from which to try again for the presidency in 2008. How very....Clintonian of him.
What isn't Clintonian is Dean's continuing, congential verbal diarrhea (via CQ):
Anybody who has read my maunderings knows that I consider "divisiveness" to be the ultimate strawdog of political rhetoric. There's no way that a politician, by definition, can't be "divisive" - ANY politician - because by definition not everybody is going to agree with every decision or every vote that said politician makes. How much more so a president - ANY president - since there will always be a minimum of 40% of the electorate who didn't support him/her? Thus, to call a politican, or a party, "divisive" is a functional verbal nullity. It's like condemning them for breathing. It is decrying a ubiquitous inevitability. It's rhetorical five-knuckle-shuffling.
But we have to remember that Howard Dean is not...um...a rational human being. Therefore he's not using the term "divisive" in a rational, straightfoward sense, but in irrationally partisan terms. That is to say, he redefines "divisive" to mean "anything Democrats disagree with," as though it's the sworn obligation of the Bush Administration and the Republican Party to pursue the Democrat Party platform to the very last, termite-infested plank in order to be "unifiers."
Point this out to Dean, of course, challenge him to be a "uniter, not a divider" by giving up his party's Bushophobia and going along with the GOP agenda in the interests of "biapartisanship," and you become part of the "divisiveness" problem. Because, as I observed at the dawn of the Clinton dark age, liberals do not understand how opposition to them and their rancid, detestable nostrums can even exist, and so that opposition is by definition morally illegitimate and should not be allowed. Because what America cannot withstand is "divisiveness," even though our system of government is specifically designed to encourage it and has been characterized by it for a full twenty-three decades.
At any rate, Chairman How was a busy man yesterday. Not only was his roaring hypocrisy on display - he compared the hapless Florida GOP senate candidate Katherine Harris to Josef Stalin - but also called visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki an anti-Semite for refusing to condemn Hezbollah's attack on Israel.
A perhaps conceivable criticism on its face, though al-Maliki's reticence has a lot more to do with the Iranian-administered vice in which his government finds itself increasingly squeezed, the product of our failure to deal with Iran and, among other things, its blatant subversion of Iraqi democracy, something which it is unlikely the "cut & run" DNC chairman would support. What quickly discredits it is his party's corrupt, pacifist, blindly pro-UN foreign policy stance that mindlessly parrots the "international community"'s insane and, frankly, anti-Semitic mantra that terrorist attacks against Jews don't qualify as "violence," but Israeli acts of self-defense to protect their civilian population do, and therefore the only "violence" that needs to be stopped is that directed at Hezbollah. A stance put on display yet again last week when "ranking Democratic Congressmen including John Dingell, John Conyers, Nick Rahall, Pete Stark, and Neal Abercrombie voted against House Resolution 921 condemning Hezbollah's attacks against Israel."
Why does Dr. Demented ever try to be dishonest? He's not good at it. He thinks "nuance" is a brand of French cologne. That's what makes him so emblematic of the party he titularly leads - a party characterized by anti-Semitism, crypto-treason, and a proclivity for political violence.
Is it any wonder that our enemies are urging the American people to "vote Democratic"? They certainly notice the similarities between the DisLoyal Opposition and themselves, even if King Scream does not. And that's one thing that We, the People, need to have in common with al-Jazeera, lest we take their ill-intended advice.
The tussle between Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) chairman, Rahm "Twinkle Toes" Emanuel and Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean continues. The two have been warring for months over Dean's refusal to seed national party money to the DCCC for Congressional races it has identified.
Emanuel has pointed out that Republicans routinely fund their House and Senate organizations, while Dean instead has been doling money out to state party organizations.
The rift again took the spotlight last week, when the DNC announced that it was shipping what insiders say was a total of about $3 million to Democrat parties in Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Insiders say that Dean has budgeted between $12 million and $15 million for the state program. It was the state funding plan that helped Dean win the chairmanship 18 months ago. [emphasis added]
Well, that answers that question. Rather than working to strengthen his party, Dr. Demented is actually feathering his own nest, and perhaps building it into a platform from which to try again for the presidency in 2008. How very....Clintonian of him.
What isn't Clintonian is Dean's continuing, congential verbal diarrhea (via CQ):
Down with divisiveness [!!!] was the message Wednesday delivered by Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean as he told a group of Florida business leaders that Republican policies of deceit and finger-pointing are tearing American apart.
The Republican agenda "is flag-burning and same-sex marriage and God knows what else," Dean said. "We need real change in this country. We're in trouble."
Anybody who has read my maunderings knows that I consider "divisiveness" to be the ultimate strawdog of political rhetoric. There's no way that a politician, by definition, can't be "divisive" - ANY politician - because by definition not everybody is going to agree with every decision or every vote that said politician makes. How much more so a president - ANY president - since there will always be a minimum of 40% of the electorate who didn't support him/her? Thus, to call a politican, or a party, "divisive" is a functional verbal nullity. It's like condemning them for breathing. It is decrying a ubiquitous inevitability. It's rhetorical five-knuckle-shuffling.
But we have to remember that Howard Dean is not...um...a rational human being. Therefore he's not using the term "divisive" in a rational, straightfoward sense, but in irrationally partisan terms. That is to say, he redefines "divisive" to mean "anything Democrats disagree with," as though it's the sworn obligation of the Bush Administration and the Republican Party to pursue the Democrat Party platform to the very last, termite-infested plank in order to be "unifiers."
Point this out to Dean, of course, challenge him to be a "uniter, not a divider" by giving up his party's Bushophobia and going along with the GOP agenda in the interests of "biapartisanship," and you become part of the "divisiveness" problem. Because, as I observed at the dawn of the Clinton dark age, liberals do not understand how opposition to them and their rancid, detestable nostrums can even exist, and so that opposition is by definition morally illegitimate and should not be allowed. Because what America cannot withstand is "divisiveness," even though our system of government is specifically designed to encourage it and has been characterized by it for a full twenty-three decades.
At any rate, Chairman How was a busy man yesterday. Not only was his roaring hypocrisy on display - he compared the hapless Florida GOP senate candidate Katherine Harris to Josef Stalin - but also called visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki an anti-Semite for refusing to condemn Hezbollah's attack on Israel.
A perhaps conceivable criticism on its face, though al-Maliki's reticence has a lot more to do with the Iranian-administered vice in which his government finds itself increasingly squeezed, the product of our failure to deal with Iran and, among other things, its blatant subversion of Iraqi democracy, something which it is unlikely the "cut & run" DNC chairman would support. What quickly discredits it is his party's corrupt, pacifist, blindly pro-UN foreign policy stance that mindlessly parrots the "international community"'s insane and, frankly, anti-Semitic mantra that terrorist attacks against Jews don't qualify as "violence," but Israeli acts of self-defense to protect their civilian population do, and therefore the only "violence" that needs to be stopped is that directed at Hezbollah. A stance put on display yet again last week when "ranking Democratic Congressmen including John Dingell, John Conyers, Nick Rahall, Pete Stark, and Neal Abercrombie voted against House Resolution 921 condemning Hezbollah's attacks against Israel."
Why does Dr. Demented ever try to be dishonest? He's not good at it. He thinks "nuance" is a brand of French cologne. That's what makes him so emblematic of the party he titularly leads - a party characterized by anti-Semitism, crypto-treason, and a proclivity for political violence.
Is it any wonder that our enemies are urging the American people to "vote Democratic"? They certainly notice the similarities between the DisLoyal Opposition and themselves, even if King Scream does not. And that's one thing that We, the People, need to have in common with al-Jazeera, lest we take their ill-intended advice.
posted by JASmius at 11:57 AM
<<< Home