May 21, 2009

The Biannual Full Moon

Hatched by Dafydd

Brave Sir Ron Leaps to the Lady's Defense

Today, in a vote so shocking my jaw dropped at least an angstrom, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX, 90%) -- the J. Neil Schulman of the House of Representatives -- thrust out a beligerant lower lip and cast his lot... not to create a "bipartisan congressional panel" to investigate Squeaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's (D-Haight-Ashbury, 100%) bearing of false witness against the CIA:

House Democrats on Thursday defeated a Republican push to investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's assertion that the CIA misled her in 2002 about whether waterboarding had been used against terrorism suspects.

Republicans Ron Paul of Texas and Walter Jones of North Carolina joined Democrats in voting 252-172 to block the measure, which would have created a bipartisan congressional panel. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, sponsored the resolution.

Paul doesn't want to investigate whether the ultraliberal Democratic Speaker is a liar; he doesn't even want to know. Evidently, he has bigger birds to fry.

So what was the reason enunciated by Democrats for not probing the Squeaker, the argument that persuaded Ron Paul (and "Walter Jones," if that is his real name)? Oh, it was quite compelling:

"This is partisan politics and an attempt by the Republicans to distract from the real issue of creating jobs and making progress on health care, energy and education," said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami....

[T]he Republican-drafted proposal was a partisan jab meant to distract from the question of whether the Bush administration tortured war prisoners, [House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD, 95%] said. Hoyer called the resolution another example of Republicans engaging in "politics of personal destruction."

Wow, that comes perilously close to persuading me to Pelosi's and Paul's side. Who can argue with that?

So the charge that Pelosi lied about what the CIA told her simply hangs out there, uninvestigated, hence unprovable. And the libertarian representative is just fine with that; doesn't want to contribute to any "partisan jab" that might "distract" from the urgent business of transforming America into a Eurosocialist welfare state. But wait, there is going to be an investigation after all:

[Hoyer] told reporters in a separate Capitol Hill news conference that he supports creation of a panel to investigate the nation's interrogation policy. What the CIA told Congress and when could be part of that, he said.

Say... what do you want to bet that the agenda of that investigation will be carefully controlled by the majority, so that the only party "in the dock" will be the CIA during George W. Bush's administration? (And how much should we wager that Ron Paul votes in favor of that one?)

I have long believed that "libertarians" -- especially Libertarians, members of the Libertarian Party -- are like werewolves: Every even-numbered November, they turn into hairy, howling, snarling Democrats, demonstrating their commitment to the values of Ludwig von Mises, Friederich Hayek, and Robert A. Heinlein by supporting the major American political party that is closest to Socialism.

The support isn't always blatant; some vote for cranks like Ron Paul, others for nonentities like Babar. But at least some self-described libertarians, such as Christopher Buckley, actually go the whole Chaney (Lon) and vote for leftist Democratic candidates such as Barack H. Obama himself. (Colin Powell is a whole 'nother case; I'm convinced that he was voting more for BO's skin color than his politics... though I'm sure some personal animosity against President Bush enters into the equation as well.)

But at least, thank God, the libertarians have enough principle not to vote for America's greatest enemy: the neocons!

A libertarian may talk a good liberty argument; but every election day, he becomes a wereliberal, spreading the leftist contagion by his own rabid saliva. All the while insisting that he's not really a liberal; he just plays one in the voting booth.

Now you know why, despite my libertarian sympathies, I'm very, very reluctant to call myself one of them. I have a lot of disagreements with the GOP, some of them quite significant; but at least I know the difference between a conservative and a liberal fascist: The one can sometimes irritate me; the other would gag me, loot me, and lock me away in Gitmo, if he only could.

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, May 21, 2009, at the time of 6:35 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing:


The following hissed in response by: nk

Money. Everybody is talking about Murtha but noR lauP is up there, too, for the pork he delivers to his district. And Botox Babe Granny McRictus controls the trough.

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 22, 2009 4:46 AM

The following hissed in response by: Chris Balsz

Nancy Pelosi accused members of the CIA of a crime: lying to Congress. If CIA witnesses to the witchhunt investigation don't jibe with Pelosi's rantings, a jury may infer the discrepancy is due to the witnesses' deliberate misleading falsehoods, and intentional obstruction of justice (a la Scooter Libby). Expect Hoyer to issue blanket immunity, or call off his hearing.

The above hissed in response by: Chris Balsz [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 22, 2009 8:06 AM

The following hissed in response by: snochasr

Perhaps it is because libertarians are like democrats in believing they are absolutely right in their beliefs and will not vote for anyone only 80% in agreement. The difference is that Democrats assume every Democrat is in 100% agreement, and Libertarians believe every Republican is shaky on principle.

The above hissed in response by: snochasr [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 22, 2009 8:53 AM

The following hissed in response by: Jhn'1

It is my understanding that there are 3 subdivisions within the libertarian belief structure.
Early on the difference was "L" vs. "l" with one being basically leftist Democrat plus lip service to limited government and restrained taxes. The other branch has since split with the new branch in support some degree of military use in defense of this country without insisting that the battles have to be on US soil.
I don't begin to know how to differentiate the 3 otherwise.

The above hissed in response by: Jhn'1 [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 22, 2009 7:49 PM

The following hissed in response by: nk

The Libertarian belief structure is very straightforward: "Do you like a good pot party with hookers?"

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 22, 2009 8:33 PM

The following hissed in response by: RayM

If the minority GOP really wants to pursue an investigation, then they need to attack from a different flank. Instead of taking on the "Squeaker" of the House head on, they need to take on the CIA and compel them to prove they did not lie to Congress.

The above hissed in response by: RayM [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 24, 2009 5:15 PM

Post a comment

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!)

Remember me unto the end of days?

© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved