Pete Hoekstra is a Traitor
Under the political rules in play during the last administration, Republican Congressman Pete Hoekstra of Michigan would have had to resign by now, he would have been called a traitor by any number of administration officials, and the hotheads over at Free Republic and Little Green Footballs would have put out contracts for his death by hanging.
Why? Well, this is what Hoekstra said yesterday on Fox News (the irony continues):
Asked by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace if it is fair to blame the Obama administration for the attacks, the Michigan Republican replied “”Yeah, I think it really is.”
Interesting. Hoekstra is the Republican equivalent of a Barney Frank, someone the other side thinks is a clown but who has real influence and power in his caucus. So here you have this powerful clown politicizing terrorism and our national security now, when it would have been a crime against the state if Barney Frank had blamed the Bush Administration for the equivalent Richard Reid shoebomb attack 48 hours later.
A little side note by the way, since we are now talking about blame: this Nigerian flame crotch got his VISA to enter the United States from …… guess who……. the wonderous America loving terrorist hating Bush Administration.
Yeah, I really hate Republicans.
[Update for the sarcasm or subtlety impaired: I am not called Pete Hoekstra a traitor. I am saying Pete Hoekstra would have called himself a traitor if this were 2002 rather than 2009.]
Truely we are cursed to live in an age when politicians are in constant search of lower and stupider ground.What I would not give to be on one of these shows and have the opportunity to ridicule these clowns as they so richly deserve.
Ummm…Barney Frank is actually smart. Hoekstra not so much.
True. I was trying to think of an equivalent Democrat, and only his name popped up.
LOL Delaware Dem. Don’t hold back, m’kay. I don’t think that Hoekstra is a traitor, a buffoon, a clown, or a political punchline. But a traitor — no.
This post is a prime example of looking at the world in black and white. We’ve been seeing this black and white thinking with visitors like donviti, jason330 and anonone. Politics is much more than that, its several shades of grey.
Nemski, I think you missed my point. My point was that of course Hoekstra is not a traitor, and neither is any Democrat who disagreed with Bush but were called a traitor anyway. I was trying to subtlely point out that hyprocrisy, but I guess it was too subtle.
Too subtle or not enough consumption of coffee on my part? We will never know.
LOL. I updated the post just so that we are clear.
dd. Y flks n th Lft spnt ght yrs blmng Grg W. Bsh fr vr trrrst ttck frm / n. Wh shldnt Hkstr blm th spwn f Knyn Mslm wh crrntl ccps th Wht Hs cnt b bthrd t stp hs vctn fr ths slm-nsprd ncdnt?
Dissent really bothers you folks, doesn’t it.
You are an idiot, observer. If dissent bothered us, why would I highlight Hoekstra’s remarks? I would ignore them. No, hypocrisy bothers me.
Racism bothers us, Observer. If you were an observer, you’d be able to observe that.
Hey, A1, lookie there, we still agree on something. Cheers.
There is more that we agree on than not, DD! Even in the heat of our rhetorical battles, I remember that.
Where was the racism?
I picked up on this Hoekstra interview too. I thought since the Republicans are now espousing shared responsibility they might want to embrace my longstanding attempts to blame the legitimate gun owners for the gun violence in America.