You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Rachel Maddow making a case why other nations should join us re: Syria [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-05-13 03:20 AM
Original message
Rachel Maddow making a case why other nations should join us re: Syria
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Thu Sep-05-13 04:19 AM by No Elephants
Apparently, we have enough enemies--"some deserved, some undeserved-- as it is, so other countries should step up and give us cover.

Not her exact words, but the gist.

She mocked the nations who were not joining us and their reasons, supercilious mockery apparently being her one trick. "By the tone in my voice my smirk and my occasional hand gestures, you can tell I think I'm so much smarter than everyone and every nation I mock. And, trrrrust me, folks, when I say, I really am. Besides, the mocking tone breaks up my otherwise monotomous show.

BTW, I think I'm so smarter than all of my fans as well. You can tell that by how I break everything down into teeny tiny bits so that your teeny tiny brains have a better shot of assimilating what I am so painstakingly trying to brainwash you with. And, I'm right about how dense you are because you don't even get the degree to which I am talking down to you, or you would long ago have gotten justifiably insulted and stopped watching my show."

Apparently, the false dichotomy du jour is either bomb or do nothing and open the floodgates of chemical weapons forevermore. Guess which alternative she hopes America will choose?

God forbid anyone finds some way to deal with this other than bombing, eh?

Good lord. Whatever made any of us think she was a liberal?

So easy for neocons who register Democrat to seem liberal when the guy in the office committing war crimes is a Republican, I guess.

Some guest on MSNBC recently did make a good point: what if bombing doesn't send anyone any message? What if it does not dissuade anyone from using chemical weapons in the future? (Lord knows, we've never been dissuaded from using them in the past.) What if bombing only kills more Syrians? And makes us more enemies?

BTW, I still haven't heard what makes us think Assad did this, as opposed to anyone else.

In fact, I have heard Obama fudge it from time to time, as in "chemicals were used."

In elementary school, I was taught to disdain the passive voice because it hides responsiblity for the action being described. That, and it deadens everything. It's as though Ms. Schmidt had heard Obama while he was talking about the use of chemicals in Syria.

Once, I heard Obama say something like, "Chemicals were definitely used. No one is disputing that chemicals were used. And the evidence is strong that Assad was responsible."

Sounds to me like no doubt/fudging at all on the first point, but some doubt/fudging on the second.

As long as there is any doubt at all about who was responsible (Assad seeming least likely to me), shouldn't we hold off on bombing?

I mean, if we're wrong, the joke's on us, right? And, of course, the joke's on the by then dead Syrians.

I hate that kind of joke.

Maybe someone will bomb us, to send us a message that our President should go bombing people in other countries while there is any doubt at all about who the culprits are.

Or, while there is any possiblity at all of nonlethal action, say maybe NOT cancelling a meeting with Putin because of Snowden Putin's stand on gays? (After all, it's not really been that long since Rev. Warren, repeal of Clinton's DADT and Kennedy's decision on Clinton's DOMA, has it? Or your own D of J's court briefs on how homosexuality is like bestiality and incest, as you defended DADT and DOMA?)

Bet Americans, including Maddow, would not see bombing us because of what Obama did as a humanitarian response. And, we'd be damned right. Dead, but right. Dead right, as it were.

Refresh | +1 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC