Chris Dodd's Left School of Rhetoric
Like other leftists, Chris Dodd employs the rhetorical device of accusing your opponants of your worst behaviors:
'How many times can this administration and some of my colleagues here in this chamber claim that any debate, any dissent, or any action that departs even one iota from the President's policy is "un-patriotic?"Jingoism and facile claims about "supporting the troops," about "good vs. evil," and about "victory vs. defeat" can no longer be tolerated--in fact they should never have been tolerated.'
Should not have been tolerated? Who is attempting to silence any dissent or debate? Should not have been tolerated?
This is during a debate in which Dodd declared, "this resolution before us does not represent as forceful an approach to accomplishing that goal as I would propose." Dodd wants to cut off funding. This is supporting the troops? "Inverted logic," indeed. Dodd attempts to dress up surrender as were redeployment. He's a liar and so he accuses others of lying.
This is either because he can't tell the difference between victory and defeat, good and evil, or supporting the troops and withdrawing support, or he's a liar. I think he's not only a liar, he lying abouy who is lying and what they're lying about.
Not content to advocate bad policy, he wants to be a despicable person too.
Pages
▼
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Ingraham filled with Hate
Laura Ingraham is just filled with hate. She is now constantly remarking on how she has to turn off press conferences or speeched by the President on the immigration issue. This has progressed from pulling out her hair, and other references of her frustration. I don't know what she hates. Its probabaly the President's policy. But this kind of talk reflects someone eaten up with hate.
She has delued herself into thinking that no sensible person in their right mind holds an alternative view, and that the American people are united in opposition to the President's policy.
I wonder what kind of economic theory she has, because a Smithian approach of free flows of capital and labor is not any part of it.
Indeed this is more evidence of the three part division of American political ideology. This anti-Smithian economics clearly puts her out of the ranks of liberals and puts her into a conservative economic theory in which a patriarchial state looks out for its workers and protects them from evils like competition and its dire consequences like wages set by free and open markets.
Laura Ingraham is just filled with hate. She is now constantly remarking on how she has to turn off press conferences or speeched by the President on the immigration issue. This has progressed from pulling out her hair, and other references of her frustration. I don't know what she hates. Its probabaly the President's policy. But this kind of talk reflects someone eaten up with hate.
She has delued herself into thinking that no sensible person in their right mind holds an alternative view, and that the American people are united in opposition to the President's policy.
I wonder what kind of economic theory she has, because a Smithian approach of free flows of capital and labor is not any part of it.
Indeed this is more evidence of the three part division of American political ideology. This anti-Smithian economics clearly puts her out of the ranks of liberals and puts her into a conservative economic theory in which a patriarchial state looks out for its workers and protects them from evils like competition and its dire consequences like wages set by free and open markets.