**
To give my local newspaper the benefit of the doubt, when I first looked at the cartoon, I thought it was very nice. Both the donkey and the elephant with their heads bowed in grief and remembrance. Maybe they saw it the same way.
elucidator:
All you’ve cited is typical election-time one-upsmanship.
**
Cite? The U.S. Senate is a relatively genteel and dignified body, particularly when it is in session. Believe it or not, people can disagree - even disagree completely - with somebody on their political agenda, yet admire them for their intellligence, passion, sincerity, and their desire to help their constituents and larger society.
It’s hypocrisy to mourn the death of a colleague you disagreed with politically? And the death of his wife, child and other innocent people?
**
Yeah. And his point was Republicans taking glee in the death of all the aforementioned people. Because it helps their evil aims.
I have a point, too. It’s the title of this thread. Feel free to re-read.
Well, I’d rather “fuck off” than embrace the slime that the Good old Party has cozied up to in its quest for supremacy. Wellstone isn’t even in the ground, and already Newt’s spreading lies about his rumored successor ? Sometimes you Pubbies just give me the Willies (slick or otherwise).
If you think the sentiment portrayed is that rare amongst republicans, just take a look at a few of the Wellstone threads in GD IMHO, the pit. Which party is it that encouraged the use of terms like “Freedom hater” ? What makes you think that the GOP as a whole should be held above reproach for the predictable consequences of it’s own tactics ?
No, that was the point you took. As I said, it could have been better done, And you really can’t drag in “all the aforementioned people” unless there was more than one grave in the cartoon. Which, of course, there was not.
And, yes, just as you say, the Senate has a tradition of relative gentility, they don’t generally do thier own backstabbing, they have aides for that sort of thing. OK, there are 49 genteel and polite Republicans who are above that sort of thing. Well, whoop-de-fucka-doo. How about the rest of them?
And, just as I noted, which you are also free to re-read, many (not all, many) Republicans had not the slightest qualm about smearing Wellstone, nor any compunctions about bending the rules to the breaking point to oust him from office. Until he was dead. Did you hear any Republican’s rushing to the press to defend Wellstone against the aforementioned? Please advise if you have such a cite.
Again, just as I have noted, such hypocrisy as this is entirely human, it is not indicative of any particularly loathesome quality exclusive to Republicans. Its rather like the grief when your thoroughly unpleasant uncle passes on and leaves you a bundle: griefstricken as you may be, you’ll get over it.
So the Republicans knew or should have known in advance that Wellstone was going to die, and not campaigned against him?
You are accusing Republicans of being either complicit in his death, or psychic. Which sounds, frankly, a little paranoid.
Weren’t you the one starting a thread about the serious problem of election fraud, and why it needed to be fixed so as not to invalidate the elections? Why are your concerns valid, and those of the Right automatically false and hypocritical?
For someone who claims such a deep commitment to the truth, you seem awfully ready to publish lies about your opponents. Which would you prefer to supply, a cite, or a withdrawal?
Also false. Wellstone was the one who began his Senate career by publicly declaiming how much he despised Jesse Helms.
Helms’ response was to befriend him, and to issue a message of sympathy upon learning of his death. They worked together on the Foreign Relations committee.
No one is “praising principles they despised”. All the responses I have heard from the Right side of the aisle run along the lines of “I may have disagreed with him, but he seemed to be fighting for things he believed in”. See for yourself.
You seem to suffer from the same failing that a lot of liberals have - the inability to distinguish between a political opponent, and an enemy. Wellstone began his career suffering from the same flaw. To his credit, he outgrew it.
Huh? Where in the hell did you get this little gem? Time to check the label on your medication. Is it 2 every 4 hours, and maybe not 4 every 2 hours? Because, not to put to fine a point on it, this has nothing whatever to do with anything I have said so far. Or, to put it another way, what the heck are you talking about?
Meanwhile, back in outer space… What possible connection can there be between election problems and Wellstone’s death? The truth is out there. Way, way out there. Are you registered to vote in Area 51?
Happy to oblige. Joe Conasons article has the best surmise on the whole mishigas, but if you google “Americans for Job Security” + Wellstone you can get just oodles and gobs of cites. http://www.salon.com/politics/conason/2002/10/24/bush/, titled the most ridiculous, shameless lie this campaign season. Tough competetion, that.
Now, here, you finally got something. Poorly worded on my part, obviously the Pubbies would rather nail thier collective pecker to a tree than be caught dead praising Wellstone’s principles.
If only we would learn from those paragons of civil discourse, like Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich and thier ilk. Wouldn’t that be swell, huh, Scooter? Democrats sending around lists of adjectives for thier opponents like “pathetic”, “corrupt”, etc. Yeah, your guys are at the very forefront of the movement. Sure thing. You betcha!
Thanks, and a tip of the hat to Philo. Anybody misses it its Joe Conason, at Salon.com. I tried to find something on the previous “Socialists being bused to MN to vote for Wellstone” fooforah, best is this from the local Strib: http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3370493.html
Drudge took the story down toot sweet, but not before Rush, the Orca of the Airwaves, spread it far and wee.
And, Philo, I’d hate to miss your link, but it didn’t work. Help?
And Ted Rall? I do not understand Mr. Rall at all. His artwork looks like he attended the Bizzaro World School of Cartooning. But I guess its only fair, we get him, they get Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, whats-his-face, the local guy, Oliver North, and others… Balance, you know.
Maybe I did get it ok, but am so used to seeing that “No, you can’t” page, I thought it was the genuine article. At any rate, pretty good. If he had taken more time, he could have made it shorter. Thanks for the chuckle!
