Is there a word like Godwinizing for when someone drags 9/11 into an argument?

You know what I mean. Have we come up with a word/phrase for when an argument is going along smoothly and someone comes along and says “Ah, but it’s all different after 9/11”.

No fingers pointed, of course, just curious.

The word is “knuckledragging moron.”

Hee hee. Thanks, it’s a start, but how about the argument itself?

I thought it was either “Limbaughed” or “O’Reillyed”

There used to be, but 9/11 changed everything.


We could call it “O’Reilly’s Law,” after, of course, Bill O’Reilly.
or “Rumsfeld’s Law?”

In the vein of Godwin’s Law it could read something like,
“as a social or political discussion grows longer, the probability of someone saying ‘of course, it’s all different since 9/11’ approaches one.”

Well, I’d prefer to see Rumsfeld’s Law as any case where “As you know, you have to [do X] with the [Y] you have, not the [Y] you want.”

After noodling this over, perhaps we could succintly say “And then he 9/11ed the whole debate.”


Rumsfield’s Law sounds good, but “he Rumsfielded the whole debate” sounds klunky. “O’Reilly’ed the debate” sounds better but I think “9/11’ed the debate” sounds best so far.

“crashed the debate into two tall buildings”?

Rove’s Law: 9/11 explains everything, wins every argument, and lets you do whatever you want. Those who disagree don’t understand terrorism.

I like “guillianied” (if I spelled the former mayor’s name correctly), but Rove’s law is better.

I always just say, ‘‘played the 911 card.’’

I figured if it’s possible to play the race card, it should be possible to play the 911 card.

On Preview: Oooh! Oooh! Rove’s Law! Win!

Damn. I like “Rove’s Law,” too–but it’s been used for something else:

(from here)

But then, that’s just a blog. Not the Dope.

I like Giulianizing.

I’m going with Bushwhacked.

“I think we should have a national health care system.”
“Well, you know 9/11 should be our biggest priority.”
“Stop bushwhacking the issue.”

This gets my vote.

Knock knock.

Who’s there?


9/11 Who?


So would 9/11 be the first day of the Giulian calendar?

And is Anaamika’s reference to “Rumsfield” an example of Gaudere’s Law in action? I realize that the original text of said law is that “Any post made to point out a spelling or grammar error will invariably contain a spelling or grammar error.” Although Anaamika’s intent was not to correct anyone’s spelling, Gaudere’s Law was formulated and named back in 2000. About a year later, everything changed.

Shouldn’t it be named after whomever formulates the law, or recognizes the pattern, rather than whomever is guilty of it the most?

Thus: Anaamikaification