Did The Democrats Who Voted for the Moveon Bill Actually Fucking READ it?

[leftchick]

because if they did they are more craven than even I imagined. Move-On ATTACKED US Troops??? What The Fuck.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/the-senate-votes-on-trope_b_65159.html

MoveOn.org published their "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" ad last week, pointing out deceptions by the general that would result in keeping the troops in Iraq, keeping them in danger of maiming or death. The general's deception, MoveOn indirectly pointed out, would result in harm to the troops, and so Petraeus' deception amounted to a betrayal of his own men, as well as a betrayal of the trust of the American people. Paul Begala, a moderate Democrat recently expressed his agreement with MoveOn. MoveOn did not say anything against the troops. On the contrary, MoveOn expressed concern for the safety of the troops.

<snip>

Now the scene moves to the US Senate. Senator John Cornyn of Texas has introduced a bill saying the following:

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Forces-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.

It goes on to condemn MoveOn as the source of the "attacks." Now how did "and all the members of the United States Armed Forces" get in there? By metonymy! A metonymy used not by MoveOn, but by Senator Cornyn himself! The bill is actually condemning the people who wrote and introduced it, Cornyn and Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

This is indeed a red-letter day for the Senate. All linguists, English teachers, communications experts, and students of language nationwide should hereafter celebrate September 20 as Metonymy Day. Indeed, I recommend that some member of the Senate introduce that declaration into an amendment to some bill or other.

[Bluebear]

1. Why are you bashing Democratic Senators on DU?

:sarcasm:

[liberal N proud]

4. Because if you bash bu$h or his cronies you will get reprimanded by the Senate

:sarcasm:

[tom_paine]

7. Fucking eh!

[Sequoia]

13. Well, I haven't seen you in awhile tom_paine!

He's my favorite founding father and I posted a sticker of him back during the fund drive.

[tom_paine]

25. Mine, too. That bastard just couldn;t keep his mouth shut when he saw injustice.

That's what got him in trouble with the Jacobins of France. He wouldn't give them a free pass just because they were ostensibly fighting oppression.

No, the original Tom Paine said that wrong was wrong and it didn't matter.

He was jailed, I believe in the Bastille, for a year.

Have you ever read his hotheaded letter to Washington when he was released by the French? People say it and his insistence on writing the Age of Reason killed any chances of him belonging to the pantheon of Founding Fathers.

Guy couldn't just shut up and do what was strategically necessary to ensure his place in history, when all he had to do was connive and swallow some principles.

It always amuses me when Busheviks say how much they love Paine. Like most of the Founding Fathers, Paine's writings practically SCREAM the antithesis of BushPutinism, although due to the compartmenatlized minds and cognitive dissonance of the Preprogrammed Bushie Droid, I have no doubt they could read the entire thing with one iota of thought nor question that Paine was one of them, on their side.

Like the insanity that Hitler was a Liberal, it can easily be taken up by a weak-mind without a single thought or quesdtion (or reading of reams and reams of history, including Hitler's own words).

[Sequoia]

26. Yes, at one point he was hated and now everyone wants him

as their icon. I heard about the letter and yes, his Age of Reason was even scary to me when I first read having been raised as a somewhat fundlementalist Babtist type (no movies or dancing allowed!).

[tom_paine]

27. And I'll bet there was no Kevin Bacon to save you

Probably had to save yourself...from the BushCristians, who as we all know, are actually worshipping the cruel ideals of Satan.

I am happy for you. You could have just as easily lived your life in Bushie ignorance.

[Sequoia]

29. Yes, I know what you mean.

Some of my siblings were really against me when I said back in 2003 that there were no weapons in Iraq. One of them send religous kid videos to my kid and I told her I would have nothing to do with her brand of Bible thumping southern babtist crap. A few years ago we had a guest at our house who was in a rock band and he saw some printed out works I had of Thomas Paine and he got all upset and told my husband these were anti-American, and if they were found we could get into trouble. I wonder how a person could be so stupid.

[saracat]

2. What about the section where they condemn the Kerry swiftboaters and the attacks against Cleland? Or

doesn't that part count?

[TahitiNut]

23. Where's that? I saw no such reference. Show me.

I posted the text of the amendment below. Show me. Please.

[saracat]

24. It is in the Democratic Amendment.Its defeat was the "real" travesty.

CNN.COM

"The Democrats on Thursday failed to pass their resolution. It included a condemnation of the "unwarranted personal attack" on Petraeus, but also condemned "personal attacks" that happened in 2002 against then-Democratic Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia and attacks in 2004 against Sen. John Kerry. The vote was 51-46, but 60 votes were needed to proceed.

The Democrats' amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California."

[spanone]

3. read? these are busy people....how many read the patriot act??

i share your disgust

[uppityperson]

5. I hope not. If they did, it is worse."and all the members of the United States Armed Forces" indeed.

[Trisket-Bisket]

6. Not B.O.

He was absent.

[Robbien]

8. This is so fucking sad

A really telling day on how destructive "moderates" are to the Democratic party.

[leftchick]

9. we need a third party

and a fourth and a fifth like most democracies have. One party SUCKS! May as well be a dictatorship!

[saracat]

10. Odd how you don't care about the Webb Bill but are concerned about the Coryn amedment

and you don't even notice that is wasn't just about the Petaus add but incluided the Swiftboaters and the anti Cleland ads in it condemnation.But you don't give a damn about that do you? Or about giving the troops time off? Moveon is way more important!

[leftchick]

11. all lot of assumptions there

odd isn't it?

[saracat]

15. Not at all considering the assumptions others jump to!

And continue to jump to as I see!

[Bluebear]

12. Oh, will the anti-Cleland ad make the 6:00 news? Or will it be a "moveon censured" headline?

[saracat]

14. So we should be like MSM? The anti -Cleland ad is far more important to

some than anything Moveon does, and I say that as a Moveon member!

[B Calm]

16. I thought that originally it was the military who gave the General his nickname

of General Betray Us..

[leftchick]

19. indeed it was

but the rw media, rw congress and with the help of complicit democrats that fact is lost.

[TahitiNut]

17. Here's the text of the amendment they voted for.

SEC. 1070. SENSE OF SENATE ON GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS.

(a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:

(1) The Senate unanimously confirmed General David H. Petraeus as Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, by a vote of 81-0 on January 26, 2007.

(2) General Petraeus graduated first in his class at the United States Army Command and General Staff College.

(3) General Petraeus earned Masters of Public Administration and Doctoral degrees in international relations from Princeton University.

(4) General Petraeus has served multiple combat tours in Iraq, including command of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) during combat operations throughout the first year of Operation Iraqi Freedom, which tours included both major combat operations and subsequent stability and support operations.

(5) General Petraeus supervised the development and crafting of the United States Army and Marine Corps counterinsurgency manual based in large measure on his combat experience in Iraq, scholarly study, and other professional experiences.

(6) General Petraeus has taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

(7) During his 35-year career, General Petraeus has amassed a distinguished and unvarnished record of military service to the United States as recognized by his receipt of a Defense Distinguished Service Medal, two Distinguished Service Medals, two Defense Superior Service Medals, four Legions of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal for valor, the State Department Superior Honor Award, the NATO Meritorious Service Medal, and other awards and medals.

(8) A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the liberal activist group, Moveon.org, impugns the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.

(b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate--

(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.

:grr:

[leftchick]

18. yeah it is pretty fucked up

:grr: :mad: :banghead: argh: :puke:

I am sick of the defense of this BS as well.

:argh:

[HuffleClaw]

20. metonymy ?

i just learned a new word! ok, i learned how to say it. 'meh-tim-oh-knee'! i've still no clue what the hell it means.

[leftchick]

21. repukes do it all of the time

along with the M$M and democrats fall into line like idiots.

me·ton·y·my (mə-tŏn'ə-mē) pronunciation
n., pl. -mies.

A figure of speech in which one word or phrase is substituted for another with which it is closely associated, as in the use of Washington for the United States government or of the sword for military power.

http://www.answers.com/topic/metonymy?cat=health

Lakoff explains its use in the bill here. perhaps this technique is too difficult for democrats to comprehend?

<snip>

Here's an example of how metonymy works. It is a mental operation. If you say, "The US invasion toppled Saddam Hussein," you mean it toppled the government of Saddam Hussein. The Leader stands for the Institution he or she leads. In a frame containing both a leader of a government and the government, the Leader can stand for the Government.

This metonymy works for generals as well. A general in uniform reporting to Congress can be seen simply as himself. But if you use the Leader-for-Institution metonymy, you can see the general as standing for the entire armed forces. Thus, an attack on the general can be seen, if you use the metonymy, as an attack on the entire military. The use of the metonymy isn't automatic in this case. People can use it or not. If not, an attack on the general is just an attack on the general.

The Republicans' own use of this metonymy is coming up in the Senate today. It is in a Republican bill to censure the use of the metonymy -- by the Republicans themselves!

[HuffleClaw]

28. thanks !

i see what you mean.

[gatorboy]

22. Was there ever a Murtha Bill for the way he was treated?