I can see where this is going.

This is why so few people vote. Boredom.

I linked from House of Lords passes No Illegal Left Behind bill. I'll leave a longer comment on your previous post in a few minutes.

Deacon Paul posted back that you don't defend the program itself in your email...

should've sent him a link you your posts. ;)

Me? I think it's an atrocious program, one that the Republicans passed in part because they have lost touch with the base. Now, that particular conversation is a two way street... it's not just the fault of the legislator that he isn't hearing the Republican Base; the Republican Base must stand up and be heard.

They cannot do this by boycotting the Republican Party or its leadership.

...and this is the crux of our problem: Whenever the Party does something we don't like, we are prone to look at fixing it ourselves instead of looking to our Government to fix it for us.

This is an understandable impulse, even a predictable one for a 'Small Government Conservative', but it means that as a political party, the Republicans are going to have a tough time keeping the pulse of the base. Instead of running off in a Huff, we Republicans need to turn to our Party to fix the problems.

Only if they hear from us can they even KNOW what we want, much less have a chance to do it.

That's what this site needs - more of the greatly under appreciated phiilosopher Foghorn Leghorn.

"If he don't stop talkin' so much he'll get his tongue sunburned!"

Normally I'm against boredom, but when you opponent is refusing to use a particular word that accurately describes what they're doing you have to throw that word in their face over and over again.

"We're not crashing the car, we're driving the car directly toward that brick wall. That's not 'crashing', that's 'driving'".

We can cacklesnort all we want to about "Foghorn Leghorn" (I still think Sen Byrd should have that title), but calling a spade a spade, repeatedly, is sometimes needed to get the point across, especially when the the other side has tried to obfuscate the terms of the argument by altering the meaning of the words. Is not what is being proposed an amnesty? By most common usage and diction, it is. Then why the issue with that word? We need to be careful when we do not respond to the content but instead we respond to the presentation.

Since folks here appear to be fond of Lewis Carroll, here are some of his words that seem to apply to those who will not call this what it is, an amnesty program:

'When *I* use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

(Why does Humpty as portrayed above bring to my mind Sen McCain, or is that just me?)

And that is where I have problems with this sort of thing. "Master" is what some folks seem to be after; not "who is right", not "what is best for the nation". Just "Which is to be master".

Usually we see a lot of analysis and thoughtful argumentation on many libertarian, center-right and conservative blogs (here, the corner, powerline, hugh hewitt, etc even Rush Limmbaugh in a few lucid non-self-promotional moments). If, in place of that, we instead to resort to personal invective and emotional pandering, then we may as well just rename this "Dafyyd Kos", and go completely over to the dark side.

Based on what I have read as a lurker, I believe the center-right, libertarian and conservative blogs are far better than that.

I think we would do well to remember Reagan's old 11th commandment in some circumstances.

And in the spirit of the literary mentions, here is a very bad "poem" that came to my mind. I promise to try not to let it happen again.

My Apologies to Lewis Carrol:

The Conservatonundrum

We can be Humpty playing with words,
- each-other backstabing.
While the Republican Congress continues
- their mimsy outgrabing.
Until vorpal voters take their heads --
- snicker-snack!
Then the liberals and the Democrats
- will come galumphing back.

(shrug) Our choice.

Nightsapper:

Is not what is being proposed an amnesty? By most common usage and diction, it is.

I have repeatedly cited dictionaries and Black's Law Dictionary. You are simply misinformed.

Words are my business; not just on the blog, but for many years. You cannot change the meaning of a word by fiat.

"Amnesty" means (and always has meant) a general pardon with no punishment. It cannot be twisted to mean admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment.

Dafydd

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)