stofsky and St. Urho, it’s perfectly reasonable to question a report that doesn’t name its sources, particularly when it comes from a journal with a POV. OTOH it isn’t reasonable to automatically reject it out of hand.
First of all,l the motto comes from Mark Twain’s celebrated remark, "Because nobody’s life, liberty or property is safe while Congress is in session.’’ (On preview, I see elucidator beat me to this.)
Cheney and Bush and Ashcroft had as part of their political program repeatedly stated words to the effect that Wellstone and people who agreed with him were traitors. Of course they were unwelcome at his memorial service. It is embarrassing that they would have wanted to go.
As Izzy points out, you must have not been watching New York politics very closely for the past several years.
Nita Lowey has represented lower Westchester County plus parts of the Bronx and Queens since 1988. She’s a heavy hitter in the House; she sits on the all-important Appropriations Committee. Since she’s from Westchester, she would have been capable of delivering a key battleground in New York politics – the New York suburbs (NYC tends Democratic, upstate tends Republican, and the 'burbs decide who wins).
I wonder, as an upstater, if you had heard of a Brooklyn/Queens congressman named Chuck Schumer for very long before his run against then-Senator Al D’Amato in 1988?
As Izzy points out, you must have not been watching New York politics very closely for the past several years.
Nita Lowey has represented lower Westchester County plus parts of the Bronx and Queens since 1988. She’s a heavy hitter in the House; she sits on the all-important Appropriations Committee. Since she’s from Westchester, she would have been capable of delivering a key battleground in New York politics – the New York suburbs (NYC tends Democratic, upstate tends Republican, and the 'burbs decide who wins).
I wonder, as an upstater, if you had heard of a Brooklyn/Queens congressman named Chuck Schumer for very long before his run against then-Senator Al D’Amato in 1998?
Yep, thought I could fix that date before the post went through. Today’s lesson, boys and girls: you will always spot an error in your post after you hit the submit button…
I have to agree with Ace, here. Come on Spartacus, you never heard any of the “outraged” rebublicans denouncing liberals who dared to disagree with W in this “time of war.” (which has yet to be declared btw)
Diogenes, Ace: Criticism of a politician’s position on defense issues is not tantamount calling him a traitor. While I have heard plenty of such criticisms from the Bush administration directed at certain Democrats, I have yet to hear the Bush administration suggest that any such Democrats were traitors. Indeed, the worst I’ve heard coming from the Bushies is the suggestion that dissenting Democrats aren’t taking defense issues seriously enough, and are placing other priorities ahead of defense concerns. That may or may not be a valid criticism, but it is not an accusation of treason.
How very lawyerly of you, Dewey Are we to presume that unless the word “traitor” is specificly included, the Pubbies are to be presumed entirely innocent? Balderdash, sir! Tommyrot!
You and I and That Other Guy know full well that politics involves the arts of implication and innuendo. When a politician wraps himself in redwhiteandblue bunting and speaks of an insufficient committment to national security, the subtext is glaringly clear. Just as Trent Lott’s innuendos about the Baghdad Three leave little room for misunderstanding. Just as campaign ads prominently featuring Osama and Saddam in juxtaposition to the Democratic candidate do not specificly say “traitor”, the distinction is academic.
Good for the Wellstone family!! they denied that devious bastard Cheney a good deal of personal satisfaction.
My late father once told me that many of the people who attend funerals do so to make sure the right S.O.B. is in that box.
There were attendees at Dad’s rosary and funeral that I should have forcefully told they were unwelcome, but I thought it was impolite to do so. Other attendees were appalled that these people had the nerve to show up(Indeed, one of my Dad’s closest friends came very close to a physical confrontation with one of the “verifiers”.)
I, myself, am going to be cremated. Only close family and the undertaker will know if this S.O.B. really was in that box.
My final revenge!!!
Scylla: First of all, few things require a cite in the pit. This ain’t one of them.
Secondly: You can’t both insult and ask for a cite, I mean, unless as in your case, you’re a incredibly pompous asshole, in which case, no doubt, you feel unconstrained by either rules or civility.
Sure it is Acehole. Any time somebody talks out their ass and makes something up, a request for a cite is appropriate. When they fail to come up it it shows that their full of it.
“You and I and That Other Guy know full well that politics involves the arts of implication and innuendo.”
This is why the Demmies can take the fact that the Republicans are proposing a $10B increase in some program (while they are proposing an $11B increase), and accuse the Republicans of cutting funding.
All about the implications, of course…the Demmies don’t like being criticised for opposing what the Republicans are proposing, so their response is: “Waaaahhh…they’re calling us traitors!!!” I guess the proper response from the Republicans should have been: “Gollee gee whiz, we’re sorry…we didn’t mean to hurt you. We’ll never do it again, and just to show you we’re sincere, we’re going to do everything your way.”
As far as I know, the ONLY people using the word traitor are the Demmies themselves, in order to cast unfair aspersions against the Republicans. Show me a cite, any cite, where a Republican member of this Administration is calling any Democrat a traitor and I will lead the charge against that moron.
But you can’t, can you? You’d rather argue from innuendo…
Did you actually just use “balderdash” and “tommyrot,” or am I just experiencing some kind of fucked-up Anglophone time-warp hallucination? 19th century British high society called, and it wants its slang back… :wally**
This is staggeringly stupid. By extension, any criticism of a politicians’ defense position can be called an accusation of treason because any such criticism indicates the politician is insufficiently concerned with matters of defense (because, implicitly, if he did care, he would obviously agree with the critic). That is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Listen, Sparky, why don’t you provide a criticism from the Bush administration and we’ll decontruct it for any signs of an “implication and innuendo” of treason. Until then, you’re just talking out of your ass.