Patterico's Pontifications

6/17/2005

Dafydd: The Mad Conyers Tea Party

Filed under: Politics,Terrorism,War — Dafydd @ 4:34 pm



Ginning Up a Coup?

Michael Medved yakked on today’s show about the Democrats’ make-believe mock-impeachment party, and Captain Ed is all over it. They both took the line that this was cute and childish, like a little girl’s tea party for her dolls and teddy bears; but I think it drives deeper than that and is far more disturbing. I think it’s worth really thinking — and worrying — about.

First, the background. The article in the Washington Post was penned (rather, keyed, I presume) by Dana Milbank, usually not thought of as a member of the VRWC. Here is the core:

Democrats Play House To Rally Against the War
By Dana Milbank
The Washington Post
Friday, June 17, 2005; Page A06

In the Capitol basement yesterday, long-suffering House Democrats took a trip to the land of make-believe.

They pretended a small conference room was the Judiciary Committee hearing room, draping white linens over folding tables to make them look like witness tables and bringing in cardboard name tags and extra flags to make the whole thing look official.

Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) banged a large wooden gavel and got the other lawmakers to call him “Mr. Chairman.” He liked that so much that he started calling himself “the chairman” and spouted other chairmanly phrases, such as “unanimous consent” and “without objection so ordered.” The dress-up game looked realistic enough on C-SPAN, so two dozen more Democrats came downstairs to play along.

The session was a mock impeachment inquiry over the Iraq war. As luck would have it, all four of the witnesses agreed that President Bush lied to the nation and was guilty of high crimes — and that a British memo on “fixed” intelligence that surfaced last month was the smoking gun equivalent to the Watergate tapes.

Now I agree with Captain Ed; it is laughable. But one laughs nervously while edging away, like when a guy steps into the elevator with you having an agitated argument with an invisible buddy.

At first you think, oh he must be on a cell phone; but he’s not holding anything to his ear, and you don’t see a wire… so maybe he has Bluetooth, and the earpiece is just on the side you can’t see. As you ride up several floors, you look carefully — nope, sorry, nothing. And that’s when the sudden icy hand clenches your bowels, as you realize you’re trapped in an elevator with a real, bona-fide psychotic who is getting more and more enraged at his non-existent disputant.

We read on; see if this next bit doesn’t lower the room temperature a bit more:

The session took an awkward turn when witness Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, declared that the United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration “neocons” so “the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world.” He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

“Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation,” McGovern said. “The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic.”

Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who prompted the question by wondering whether the true war motive was Iraq’s threat to Israel, thanked McGovern for his “candid answer.”

Incidentally, for those who don’t remember, Rep. Moran — mentioned above urging the witness to find a reason to blame the war on the Jews — lost his leadership post in the House after he, himself, blamed the Iraq war on the Jews:

If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq we would not be doing this. The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going and I think they should.

Will somebody please tell me why, whenever testosterone flows and talk turns ugly and vicious, that somebody is always sure to point his finger at the Jews? No, nevermind; I already know why. Dennis Prager and Rabbi Joseph Telushkin already explored this creepy, ubiquitous tendency in their thought-provoking book Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism.

But perhaps you begin to see that this isn’t just an innocent little girl’s tea party; it resembles rather the Mad Hatter’s tea party from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland — crossed with the trial of the Knave of Hearts at the end of the book:

`Let the jury consider their verdict,’ the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

`No, no!’ said the Queen. `Sentence first–verdict afterwards.’

`Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. `The idea of having the sentence first!’

`Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.

`I won’t!’ said Alice.

`Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

We now have an allegedly respected senior Democratic congressman (elected 1964), ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus, “chairing” a fantasy-impeachment hearing over the Iraq war, calling “witnesses,” making “rulings,” sitting quietly while a Jew-blaming representative urges a Jew-blaming “witness” to blame the Iraq war on the Jews… and then, the fake trial is broadcast on C-SPAN, whence it is used to incite the inmates at Democratic headquarters to wallow in an orgy of anti-Semitic conspiracy mongering:

At Democratic headquarters, where an overflow crowd watched the hearing on television, activists handed out documents repeating two accusations — that an Israeli company had warning of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that there was an “insider trading scam” on 9/11 — that previously has been used to suggest Israel was behind the attacks. [emphasis added – DaH]

If you combine this with Sen. Dick Durbin’s diatribe the other day comparing American servicemen to Nazi SS prison guards, the guards in Stalin’s gulags, and the Khmer Rouge; with demands by Democrats (and the occasional useful Republican idiot) that we abandon our Iraqi allies to Zarqawi and al-Qaeda; with Amnesty International’s invective that Camp X-Ray is “the gulag of our times;” with the new strategy among Democrats simply to deny that Bush was ever elected — even while they themselves increasingly use electoral fraud as a standard tool of politics; then you have the portrait of a party consciously and eagerly divorcing itself from objective reality — and turning more and more to illegal and extra-democratic means of retaining power… much as the Canadian Liberals under Paul Martin are doing up north.

Are we seeing the Democrats here attempting to lay the groundwork for a bona-fide coup d’état?

19 Responses to “Dafydd: The Mad Conyers Tea Party”

  1. One problem with the coup d’état theory; they almost always require military force to pull them off successfully, and the Democrats have next to no support from our armed forces (and we can only assume any existing support dropped more after Durbin’s comments).

    Granted, in the fantasy word they inhabit, they might be unhinged enough to think they can pull it off.

    I hope they realize that middle American outguns them, should it come to that. Deer rifles are hell at 400 yards.

    Confederate Yankee (135380)

  2. As the great philosoper SnagglePuss put it: not funny ha ha; funny sheesh!

    The whole episode reads like a revenge fantasy told to a court-ordered shrink.

    ras (f9de13)

  3. Don’t forget that they call themselves the “reality based community” while being batshit crazy.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  4. The deer rifles at 400 yards won’t be needed. The military would be more likely to forcefully sequester the Republicans, treat the Democrats like terrorists from Falujah, and then release the Republicans so they can gaze upon the remains. It’d be so quick, the public would have no input.

    A realistic outcome is a virtual blood-bath in the next election. Every time “Little Dick” Durbin, “Howling Howard” Dean, “Kooky” Conyers, “Moron” Moran, and their ilk speak up, it hands fodder to the Republicans. The American public tends not to vote for traitors, once they are shown as such. Just ask not-President “Hanoi” John.

    Ranten.N.Raven (95d91d)

  5. In a way, I hope they do start a coup.

    Then we can finally have them shot.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  6. I think they’re preparing the ground for a run at impeachment–in fact, young lawyer John Bonifaz a “witness” has opened up an impeachment website.

    Sitting behind the chairman was Tom Hayden, the old radical from the 60s, and in attendance was Joe Wilson and a host of leftist activists. What a cabal. It was outrageous and dangerous and Maxine Waters knew it. She had the glazed look of an orgiast when the whole shameful thing was over. Look out: she digs it.

    Patricia (133563)

  7. I read Cap’n Ed’s post as mockery and didn’t feel that he was amused at all.

    That said, I found this little exercise to be very frightening. it had all the trappings of a “government in exile”. Establishing their own committees, passing their own laws, etc. And despite Dana Milbank’s temporary slip off the reservation, the MSM will jump all over that. Ever since the Congress went Republican and then the 2000 presidential election made it a sweep, the MSM has refused to accept that the Republicans are in charge. Nearly every report on “what’s happening in Washington” has a reporter sticking a microphone under the nose of a Democrat. Are we very far from the Democrats passing “alternate laws” in their “alternate government” with the MSM supporting them because they represent the “Americans that count”.
    Now granted, the Supreme Court would never support such laws, but the Supreme Court has no enforcement capability and I agree that the support of the military is needed to have a coup.

    That is why I cringe every time I hear people who aren’t in the far left of the political spectrum even consider voting for Hillary Clinton. We forget that as “Co-President” she had the Marine Honor Guard at the White House removed to places where she wouldn’t see them. Since their very sight disgusted her. Bill said he hated the Military. Hillary showed it.

    I have no doubt that Commander in Chief Hillary would immediately embark on a mission to remove senior military officers to be replaced with those loyal to her. And those that argue it couldn’t/wouldn’t happen just remember the Tailhook Scandal (Scam). Where a number of Senior Navy Officers were forced into retirement for allowing “naughtiness” to occur on their watch. With a Marxist (and that’s what she is) President, do you doubt that phoney Abu Ghraib and Gitmo “scandals” couldn’t/wouldn’t be used to turn the Military upside down and install officers more in tune with her concept of the “people’s revolution”?

    Lew Clark (40229b)

  8. Get back on the meds.

    Unless you’re still pissed about Janet Reno torching the Branch Davidians at Waco and having the white supremacists shot at Ruby Ridge.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  9. I think they’re preparing the ground for a run at impeachment.

    The Democrats would prefer President K.B.R. Haliburton?

    Dafydd

    Dafydd (df2f54)

  10. I don’t think they’ve thought that far ahead, Dafydd. 🙂

    Patricia (133563)

  11. Is anybody interested in the truth on this blog?
    WTC 7 Demolition 09/11/2001

    bg (4c951d)

  12. If only the downing street people had given dubya a blowjob, then we could spend money investigating it.

    actus (3be069)

  13. Get back on the meds.

    Unless you’re still pissed about Janet Reno torching the Branch Davidians at Waco and having the white supremacists shot at Ruby Ridge.

    Janet Reno was Bush I’s AG, too?

    Xrlq (158f18)

  14. The idiocy all blurs together after a while.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  15. Just earlier today, I was thinking about U.S. Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC); it is refreshing to witness the change-of-heart that he has experienced. I think that there are more conservatives and Republicans in the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate who are questioning the Iraq war, and who are doubting that it was the right decision; many conservative commentators and others are currently thinking along those lines, as I’ve pointed out before… Though for elected officials (especiallly those who wish to be re-elected, and who want higher positions within government), it is much, much more difficult to take a bold position like this, opposed to the White House of your same party.

    Conservative leaders such as U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), U.S. Rep. John Duncan, Jr. (R-TN), U.S. Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC), and U.S. Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) are taking conservative, ‘republican’ positions with regard to foreign policy – positions that President Bush himself has emphasized in the past, and which a growing number of conservatives and Republicans and once again remebering as the best way to manage our country’s foreign and domestic affairs. The American Conservative Union has been expressing similar sentiments. Socialism is a very bad thing, whether is it practiced within our borders, or elsewhere… It is unconstitutional, and violates the principles of republican liberty upon which our great nation was founded. Hopefully, the Bush administration will return to the conservative foreign policy upon which it came to office.

    Aakash (86aa66)

  16. Janet Reno was Bush I’s AG, too?

    JR was everybody’s AG!

    Dafydd

    Dafydd (df2f54)

  17. Ron Paul is not, and has never been, a conservative.

    Dude’s a libertarian.

    Angry Clam (f05866)

  18. Looneytarian is more like it.

    Xrlq (30fa84)

  19. He is a “right libertarian,” also known as a conservative/libertarian, or libertarian-minded conservative.

    One conservative told me that he viewed Rep. Paul as the “most conservative” member of Congress… He was speaking with respect to the issue of strict constitutionalism – the belief in adhering to the letter of the law, and not supporting any governmental action that is inconsistent with the “strict constructionist” view of the U.S. Constitution.

    Congressman Paul is a constitutionalist conservative and a pro-liberty republican. He is the exemplar (on most issues) of what members of what our federal legislators are supposed to be doing.

    Aakash (3dfa43)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0731 secs.