Why not answer the 9/11 propaganda PR with this?

[buycitgo]

If, as the 'administration' claims, 9/11 is THE redefining moment in modern American history, and that creature redefined himSELF through his leadership, his shepherding of a wounded nation through perilous times, WHY ON EARTH is he not the MOST anxious person in the world to know exactly WHY IT HAPPENED?

WHY is he running as fast as he can away from the investigation into how it could happen?

A few of the 9/11 victims have mentioned this obvious fact, but shouldn't it be THE centerpiece of any arguments the dems mount against such cynical use of this tragic moment for crass political gain?

all they have to do when confronted with the likes of Giuliani and others when they try to justify such base tactics is to ask them to explain that, if he's such a wise and bold ruler:

WHY he refuses, like Clinton and Gore, to give more than an hour's time to the commission, or WHY he doesn't direct Condi Rice to testify again, or WHY he continues to stonewall on the PDBs, for just three examples of his intransigence.

there's plenty more along these lines, but the dems, so far, aren't capitalizing as they could.

so far I've only seen the likes of Ed Rendell, who actually praised the creature's leadership last night, and Frank Lautenberg, who was barely coherent in his mild criticism today. Where is the constant outrage that's currently being expressed by individual family members?

just another example of the spineless Achordate Party at work....sigh

[sadiesworld]

1. Achordate? Explain.

Not being snippy, just a new word for me. BTW, I agree with your sentiments.

[arcane1]

3. biologically speaking

it refers to creatures with no backbone

[LiberalFighter]

4. If you enter the word that you want defined and the word definition..

into Google for instance an appropriate dictionary will be listed.

Achordata:
Referring to animal forms below the Chordata that do not develop a notochord or chorda.

[sadiesworld]

5. Thanks to you both. Did well in science classes but it was loooong ago.

(very apt, too)

[buycitgo]

8. no sweat.....been trying to rename the party for awhile

least til they evolve a bit of back

[LiberalFighter]

2. Good idea!!

[whirlygigspin]

6. Here here

If John Forbes Kerry doesn't help the Dem leadership find some spine, then they will deserve to loose.

When WILL they learn?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[buycitgo]

7. so how come the dems aren't pushing this hard today?

is it because they're stupid?

or achordata?

only ones I've seen so far (I know this is relatively new stuff, but the pugs immediately POUNCE like febrile, starving rabinoids whenever they get the chance) responding in this manner (and whence the idea springs) is from the berieved family members, who are SO much more on top of this entire nightmare than the dems, who find it hard to raise a much of a voice in support of those poor people, not to mention the 911 commission

can you imagine Gore NOT having been impeached over 911 by now?

huh?

[maggrwaggr]

9. the GOP has slipped Paxil into their coffee

or something.

The Dumbocratic party, a la Washington insiders, are the most worthless bunch of pansy-ass wastes I think I've ever seen in my 42 years.

If they can't capitalize on the BLUNDERS and obvious CRIMES of Bushco, they should get in some other line of work.

They've been handed a fucking royal flush and they're thinking about folding.

They are MORONS.

Oh wait. Kerry's one of them.

DOH!

[newdealer]

10. $$$

The Dems have to be more carefully with the money they have, and I think the people who are appropriately outraged-- the firefighters Union and the relatives of those who lost someone in the attack will keep the issue in the spotlight and keep it as a populist criticism--which I think will be more effective. I heard David Brooks say that it was appropriate for Bush to use it because, just as John Kerry uses his Vietnam experience as defining and developing his character, 9/11 was Bush's defining event of his presidency.
He failed to mention that the Kerry's character was developed by keeping his crew alive in a war and risking his own life, whereas Bush failed do ensure the safety of the people lost in 9/11, and is trying to capitalize on the loss of others under his watch.

But then again, I heard Bill Reilly say that Walter Cronkite is an extreme "leftist" for suggesting that Bush's foreign policy was partially responsible for the attack on 9/11.

What planet am I living on?