This release yesterday (which I just saw again as I was cleaning house) really disappointed me. Excerpt:
Graham Opposes Democrat Efforts Put Federal Judges and Courts in Charge
of Military Decisions
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham
(R-South Carolina) said he will fight efforts by leading Democrat Senators to
give terror suspects expanded access to federal courts.
Not so much the substance of it — although that’s certainly something worth arguing about — as the "Democrat Efforts" and "Democrat Senators" garbage.
There’s no such thing as a "Democrat senator." It’s grammatically impossible. This is the sort of thing that your cheesier variety of GOP partisan does — refusing to use the adjective "Democratic" to refer to the opposition.
It should certainly be beneath Lindsey Graham — and his staff.
Related Posts
Don’t pay much attention to it…I am sure it is a slip up. Lindsey usually hires graduates of SC public schools…
What’s with the new photo? Trying to look like Gandalf without a beard and with a cold?
What’s with the new photo? Trying to look like Gandalf without a longbeard and with a cold?
I’d bet $100 that using the wrong name of the Democratic Party was NOT a mistake and was done, as is typical of Rethuglicans, to tweak the Dems.
It’s so widespread among the developmentally stunted Rethuglicans that Bush even made a joke of this juvenile tactic when he he addressed a meeting of Democrats recently.
Graham has been above this level of disrespect previously so I wonder whether he actually saw the press release before it was sent out.
And, yes, I’m deliberately dissing the GOP by in this post– just as some young twerp in Graham’s office thought it was cute to dis the Dems. And, just as Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) does here.
Brad,
I think this is a sign that Sen. Graham is now officially in re-election mode and is concerned that a candidate to his right on the political spectrum will run against him in the Republican primary.
Its a terrific use of hackneyed political rhetoric to signal to the base of the GOP that he has received the message that he has strayed too far off the reservation.
He’s starting to try to make his way back.
Give it six months and we can compare it to what’ll be coming out of the Reverend Sen. Jackson’s firm, Sunrise. Then we’ll be able to see what Sen. Clinton’s getting for her money. I’m betting that the grammar will be just as bad.
RTH, I’m going to call Weiner’s office and ask them to remind him that whenever he talks about the Republican Minority Leader, he needs to remember that when two vowels go out walking, the first one does the talking.
Brad, you’re coming around a bit. Lindsey is, always has been, a GOP partisan. He just uses different tactics. I once had hope for him but the weight of the evidence shows his true colors.
To the extent that I have anything to do with it, Lindsey Graham is history ~ under NO circumstances will I cast another vote for him. On the other hand, I support the use of the term “democrat” when describing the party of the left. Despicable people like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha (and Ready to Hurl) would love to have their party described in common usage as the “democratic” party, with all of the warm, fuzzy, red white and blue emotion that this word contains, but the truth is that it is not an accurate descriptor of these people. The people IN the party are democrats, with all of the anti-freedom, tax and spend big government baggage that connotes, and together they make up the Democrat Party. Common RTH, embrace it! Be proud of it. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, John Murtha and Harry Reid are your guys! LLearn, live it, love it. Ed
Oops, I meant c’mon RTH. Ed
ed, the use of the perjoritive “democrat” party is fine be me on this blog, but when the president in the SOU address or a United States Senator uses it it’s just plain bad manners.
Explain why you won’t vote for Lindsey ever again. Seems like he’s very efficient at pushing the disasterous conservative agenda through congress. The anti-constitution judges, torture and the stay-the-course catastrophe of a war all are flourishing under Lindsey Graham’s tenure. What more could a neo-con ask for?
Bud, I don’t even know what a Neo-con is…but I was conservative long before being conservative was cool. I don’t see the conservative agenda doing as well as you say at present, but to the extent that it has done well, snake-in-the-grass Lindsey Graham has had nothing to do with it. I detest this man because he is not what he portrayed that he was during his first senate campaign, and the people (like me) who voted for him to be their conservative representative in the Senate got took. The good news for me is that this country is slowly and inexorably becoming more conservative, perturbations like last November notwithstanding. The Democrat Party may win a few skirmishes and battles going forward, but in the long run the war will be ours if present trends continue. Ultimately, this will be an outstanding thing for the country, IF we can get true conservatives in office who will “stick with the stuff.” Lindsey Graham is antithesis of the sort of person I’m talking about. Ed
Ed, again we see the idea that conservatism can never fail; the only reason conservative policies result in falure is because those policies aren’t truly conservative. But the end result is that it seems to be impossible to implement successful conservative policies. Does it really matter why? Either conservative polices fail because they were wrong, or they fail because they weren’t adhered to with sufficiently rigid orthodoxy. The end result is failure. Wouldn’t it be better to implement liberal policies, which seem to be much easier to implement for the benefit of the public.
I mean, look at Nancy Pelosi’s district. They seem to be doing OK, don’t they?
Mary,
U can say the same thing about the policies of the left.
And u can also pick out conservative cong districts to prove that point as well.
Is it to much for a conserative to actually want his conservative representative to be, well, conservative?
Chris
Liberal policies don’t benefit the general public Mary. They simply confiscate the assets of productive people and redistribute them to unproductive people who have bought the liberal lie that they cannot make it without government help. Liberal policies depend upon people feeling victimized, or helpless, or cheated so that they can live with themselves after taking the government handouts that people like you love to give them. If liberal policies are so damned effective, why do we still have so many poor people after your side has been trying to eliminate poverty since the LBJ era, and even before? Trillions of hard-earned dollars have been poured down this rathole, and liberal politicians today are still working on tax increases to “fight” poverty. Name one area, just one that has been made more efficient or effective after your beloeved big government has taken over? Prescription drugs? HAH! This turkey is the biggest boondoggle in history, we STILL don’t know how much we’ll actually end up paying for it…and it was agreed to by a so-called conservative president because he saw the political realities and wanted to avoid a liberal steamroller 3 years ago. Public education? Puh LEEZ! It’s a horror show, and Ted Kennedy is the one who “crafted” the latest iteration of this abomination. No my friend, conservatism is right. It works every time it’s truly tried. Welfare to work, worked. Tax cuts worked. Anytime it’s done, civilian contracting of government services works. Our problem has not been our principles, it has been our unprincipled people. But, they are still better than your people. Ed
Sorry, ed, the Democratic Party gets to choose it’s own name despite your school yard name-calling.
BTW, naming Dem leaders may be some sort of slam dunk indictment in your Bizarro World but it’s pretty ineffective as a debate technique. OTOH, I could name quite a few Rethuglicans whose names are household synonyms for scum– even if they haven’t had to exchange their names for prisoner numbers, yet.
If you’re looking for anti-democratic, big gubmint, tax ‘n spend types maybe your ought to start with the titular head of the Rethuglican Party, George W. Bush.
The most “successful” rightwing administrations in my lifetime– St. Ronnie and Dubya– have simply turned to federal creditors (like the “Red Chinese”) to pay off their monied investors and leave the rest of the taxpayers holding the bag. Dubya and Dead-Eye Dick continue their assault on the U.S. Constitution. Cheney has even declared his office as a fourth branch of the government.
Like Communism, modern conservatism is a movement in search of people who can live up to its “standards.” Mary is correct.
Public education? Puh LEEZ! It’s a horror show, and Ted Kennedy is the one who “crafted” the latest iteration of this abomination. – Ed
Since the early 70s the landscape of education has changed dramatically. The end of segregation and special needs legislation has made public education incredibly more inclusive (thanks to our NATIONAL GOVERNMENT). The curriculum has expanded as well. For example, high school students now take higher level math courses like calculus and probability and statistics.
I’d be interested in some of your “horror show” evidence. Our high schools are often compared to those in other countries. No other country looks after their special needs students like we do. Many track their students into vocational and other special interest schools. Our high schools are comprehensive. Are you comparing these apples and oranges? What evidence do you have or is this simple demogoguery?
Regarding No Child Left Behind, Ed are you really suggesting this was a democratic initiative? LOL, it was the only noteworthy effort of W before 9-11 – back when he was still considered a conservative brethren.
“No my friend, conservatism is right. It works every time it’s truly tried.”
But Ed, that’s the problem I keep pointing out, that you can’t find a conservative who will admit that conservativsm has ever been “truly tried”. Every time conservatism fails, it’s never because the polcies aren’t right, it’s because they haven’t been “truly tried”. Isn’t that just a dodge? I mean, look at South Carolina. It’s one of the most conservative states in the United States. The whole government is dominated by conservatives. But South Carolinians can’t even suport themselves; they receive $1.38 in federal handouts and services for every $1.00 they pay in federal taxes. And even then, South Carolina has high rates of infant mortality, illiteracy, poverty, child and spouse abuse, teen pregnancy, out of wedlock births, divorce, highway deaths, alcoholism, smoking, obesity, and almost every other statistic pointing to human degradation and misery than do liberal states.
By contrast, look at Nancy Pelosi’s district, one of the most liberal districts in one of the most liberal states. A wealthy, well educated population, whose stable marriages, responsible behavior, industry, and initiative that allow them to earn earn enough to pay both their share of federal taxes and an additional portion that can be dedicated to making up the shortfall caused by the greater needs and lower contributions of the conservative population of South Carolina.
And Ed, we’re willing to contiue to pay the extra taxes necessary because you and your fellow conservatives can’t support yourselves. But can I please ask that you quit saying that conservatism calls for self-reliance, while liberals depend on handouts and government help. It is the taxes of liberals who allow you to receive $1.38 in federal services and handouts for every $1.00 you “pay” in taxes. How about a little gratitude?
Ed writes:
No my friend, conservatism is right. It works every time it’s truly tried.
That’s taken straight out of Rush Limbaugh’s collection of phony talking points. Fact is liberal states perform so much better. Further, the even more liberal people of liberal western Europe live far longer and healthier than the conservatives in southern America. The disasterous Iraq quagmire is a great example of conservative policy at it’s worst. Welfare has been branded as a failure. Sure there have been some problems. But that goes with any big program, including the military. Yet welfare has served to help many millions of people get by who otherwise would have been ripped asunder by the imperfections of the market. Eventually most become productive citizens that help move the country forward.
The current conservative health care system is nothing but a total catastrophe. Debt and an increasing disparity between rich and poor is the result of conservative policy. It has now been tried for 6 years, unchecked, and has created nothing but more poverty, higher death rates from accidents, suicide and homicide.
The best way to move the country forward is to abandon the failures of the past 6 years of conservative rule and elect more liberals to congress. Otherwise we’ll continue to see ever greater income disparity, higher death rates and a decline in the overall welfare of the American people.
Chris admitted to basing his stance on SC education on a 5 minute talk he had with Karen Floyd.
Disparaging our schools sounds good to a minority of you demagogues Chris, but your pettiness regarding this issue reflects a lack of thoughtful analysis on issues in general.
Randy, Randy, Randy,
Where in the world did u get that last little thought? 5 minutes with Karen Floyd?
My opinion of educations comes from 2 successful careers, business ownership, property ownership, charity work, running organizations on 3 continents, and many friends INSIDE the educational systems of this country and others, and a whole lotta life in-between that stuff.
You, dear Randy, my little energetic worker bee, should be more careful with your facts, and that is, after all, what I hope you are imparting to your students.
You and I just see the world differently. I am ok with that.
Chris
Chris,
In the business world you apparently learned to back track on previous claims. You stated how you “spent time” with Floyd; raved about her outlook; then admitted it was more like a “5 minute” conversation.
I do remember your great inductive powers of having claimed to have interviewed a handful of teenagers and using them as representative of ALL teenagers from our public schools.
You laundry list of “stuff” is what Dickens had in mind, “A smattering of everything, and a knowledge of nothing.”
Chris,
In the business world you apparently learned to back track on previous claims. You stated how you “spent time” with Floyd; raved about her outlook; then admitted it was more like a “5 minute” conversation.
I do remember your great inductive powers of having claimed to have interviewed a handful of teenagers and using them as representative of ALL teenagers from our public schools.
You laundry list of “stuff” is what Dickens had in mind, “A smattering of everything, and a knowledge of nothing.” This is solid qualification for the ivory tower, which is indeed a different view from mine.
Randy,
Either your memory is faulty or you intentionally misrepresent what I have said.
My life is based on setting goals, achieving the goals, revaluating the goals and methods used, then moving on. I must have success in order to be content. I am sorry you feel 25 years building a business represents “a smattering” of anything…that just says more about you than about me.
Government is usually ineffective because there is no drive for success; management is removed from the end user, and the resulting disconnects results in a middling functionality tolerable to those without higher aspirations of success.
Randy, our world view is different. I am ok with that.
Chris
chris, you have a fundamental misconception. The only government that will run with the efficiency of a small business is a dictatorship. The Founders actually– gasp– designed our government to be inefficient.
Notice that I say “small business.” Many large businesses are quite inefficient. They are simply able to obscure that fact through a variety of tactics– including corporate welfare from the government.
I will gladly choose life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness under a government of “middling functionality” versus life under an authoritarian regime.
You’re welcome to find a finely tuned governmental system under a modern-day Mussolini. I’m sure the trains running on time will gratify you immensely.
Just don’t try to impose that concept in this country.
The New Deal Democrats already assumed that role when they aped the socialist programs of Mussolini and Hitler.
Chris, once again you back track. You offered up a laundry list of “stuff” you have experienced, including your years as some sort of businessman as justification for your opinion on education. That “smattering” hardly qualifies you to be the expert on education which you amusingly claim.
A successful businessman surely would understand the limitations of his knowledge. I’m also sure a successful businessman would form conclusions on more than a 5 minute chat. We have a different view on meaningful analysis and I’m ok with that until you recklessly disparage SC education in broad and overly simplistic fashion.
How long did chat with the Secretary of Education and the other candidates before forming your opinion?
What makes you routinely dismiss the opinions of every businessman, doctor, scientist, engineer and other more educated person who disagrees with your opinions?