I dunno. Some people seem a bit worked up about the Armenian genocide resolution. Even some conservatives. (Read that in the philosophers' sense: "There exists at least one x such that x is a conservative and x is worked up over the Armenian genocide resolution.") By "worked up" I mean "in favor."
I don't claim to know a thing about it. Never heard of the Turkish genocide against the Armenians until this past year. But I'm a pessimist. People are evil. I'll buy it. That it happened, that is. But the sudden appearance of a resolution about it just now on the congressional roster is hardly a result of the fact that Nancy Pelosi woke up one morning and was seized with the abstract lust to tell the truth at all costs.
So. Suppose you are a conservative congressman, and you think this thing really happened. Suppose moreover that you think there are people who deny it or downplay it in a fairly annoying fashion, and that it is therefore a controversial truth. You are the sort of person who hates not to speak controversial truths boldly just because of consequences, and you don't like the feeling of being muzzled by the fact that we have an unpleasant ally who has an unpleasant desire to bury this unpleasant truth about the past. You worry that you are a cowardly skunk and a tool of the administration if you oppose the resolution. On the other hand, you know quite well that not all truths need to be told at all times, that there are prudential reasons against this resolution, and that its introduction is a cynical political ploy by people who are hardly your friends on other issues, so you don't want to be their tool, either. What do you do?
Well, isn't it great that you came here to read my blog, because I've got an idea. Did somebody say "controversial truths, denied by many"? Did somebody say "murder of innocent people that people want to cover up"? In Veggie Tales terms, have we got a show for you! Introduce a replacement resolution, or an amendment, so that the resolution condemns not only the Armenian genocide but also the murder of the unborn by abortion in the United States since Roe v. Wade and the dehydration murder of Terri Schiavo. Be sure to include the word "murder." I can think of lots of other additions to offend the Democrats if that isn't enough, but that'll do for starters. And conservatives, even the sort who get worked up about the Armenian genocide, ought to be all in favor of such an idea.
Right?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Love it!
Cool. If it has Zippy's approval, it's gotta be good. Offensive enough for anyone! But in the best of senses.
I need to go re-read my copy of "The Prince" authored by McGrewchiavelli. :-)
The nice thing about it though is that, though a dig at the Democrats and likely to annoy them, it does IMO allow my hypothetical conservative Congressman to keep his integrity. And I think it forces conservatives who for whatever reason are riled up about it (it appears to me that this may be a particular type of Chronicles paleoconservative) to come out strong on the life issues and to demonstrate that their fierce foreign policy isolationism and hatred of the war in Iraq have not come to consume all their minds. In other words, to distance themselves from their weirdo anti-war leftist allies.
It is definitely the kind of pork-barrell I can get behind.
Your mistaken and like Ron Paul stated, it wasn't the country that caused 9/11, it was those thugs!
I think it is even being stated as to Guilianni being the target, no one will know.
Like Ron Paul says if those pilots would have been allowed to have guns on the plane that could have not of happened...
If we weren't policeing the world, that may not have happened.
Ron Paul is right on target!
Go Ron Paul!
Cathy Romine
Alabama
Post a Comment