Previously spotted...
... when Jane Harman delivered Benghazi talking points on "Fox News Sunday" and began with: "This is a circus."
Actually, the text of the NYT editorial doesn't use the "circus" metaphor, but it does begin "The hottest competition in Washington this week is among House Republicans vying for a seat on the Benghazi kangaroo court...." and "kangaroo court" does sound sort of circus-like — some spectacle involving animals.
Why did the noble kangaroo get connected to the idea of an improperly constituted, unfair tribunal?
There is some debate over the origin of the term kangaroo court, but some sources suggest that it may have been popularized during the California Gold Rush of 1848, as a description of the hastily carried-out proceedings used to deal with the issue of claim jumping miners. Other sources claim that the term comes from the notion of justice proceeding "by leaps," like a kangaroo. Some[who?] have suggested that the phrase could refer to the pouch of a kangaroo, meaning the court is in someone's pocket.The question hich animal would make the worst judge is an interesting one. It's easy to quip that the human animal makes the worst judge. Only the human animal ever gets the idea of conducting anything even resembling a judicial procedure.
That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird.
("Up Before the Beak" from Punch's Almanack For 1882 ("beak" was slang for "judge."))
पोस्ट्स
६८ टिप्पण्या:
Pack animals like lions and wolves have ways of rendering collective judgments. The punishment is usually death.
If the squirrels take over...Althouse is a war criminal! Or a defamer at least!
So it's "water for elephants," eh? What an odd approach. People tend to stop and watch the show when there's a circus in town.
The Obama loyalists otherwise known as the mainstream media must think (know?) that some really bad stuff is going to come out of the investigation; otherwise, they wouldn't be trying so hard to discredit the investigation in advance.
"Both actions stem from the same impulse: a need to rouse the most fervent anti-Obama wing of the party and keep it angry enough to deliver its donations and votes to Republicans in the November elections."
No benefit of the doubt here from the New York Times. No possibility that real crimes were committed (in the case of the IRS) or a severe failure of leadership from two people in over their heads (Obama is MIA for the whole day, Hillary leaving an ambassador, her subordinate, in an untenable position for months).
No chance that Lois Lerner was taking cues from someone inside the White House to crack down on political opponents. No chance of institutional corruption at the IRS, one of the most legitimately feared agencies of the US government.
No chance the Libyan embassy was also a CIA black site. No chance that an illegal gun running operation was happening in Benghazi. No chance that our government was torturing al Qaeda operatives that were capture by friendly Libyan militias.
Nope, it's all just a fundraising scheme by those dumb Republicans. Bow before the New York Times nose for real news.
They picked the wrong "Face" and "Accent" to lead the "circus".
Dueling Banjos play when he speaks. He is one nasty looking southern red neck cracker.
He will be popular in ads both in the new confederacy and the rest of the country though.
As the committee gets close to the truth, watch the left go nuts. Especially as the election gets closer. The coverup is always worse then the crime and the Democrats are about to find this out.
Sam Ervin ran a pretty good circus, too.
Who is the Democratic Party's Howard Baker? Is there a statesman among them?
Also, that things hideous hair combined with his awful face and red neck accent and long dramatic comments will be great theater.
He likes to talk about "sodomites".
Also making an appearance: the idea that passing legislation from liberal Democrats' wish list is part of conservative Republicans' job description. ("They won’t pass a serious jobs bill, or raise the minimum wage, or reform immigration, but House Republicans think they can earn their pay for the rest of the year by exposing nonexistent malfeasance on the part of the Obama administration.") I've seen this one over and over again.
That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird.
But some birds are pretty smart. Magpies have passed the mirror test and African Grey Parrots can have a vocabulary of over 500 words! I bet that rivals some Federal judges and NYT journalists.
"They won’t pass a serious jobs bill, or raise the minimum wage, or reform immigration, but House Republicans think they can earn their pay for the rest of the year by exposing nonexistent malfeasance on the part of the Obama administration. "
No, they will earn their pay by NOT doing what the Times wants. Benghazi is dessert.
Kangaroos are just silly looking animals, and a kangaroo court is a term used for a farcical court. It's not more complicated than that.
Remember Sulivan's quip/slip about shooting the elephant?
Turns out he was only using a mild sedative in a blowgun.
You know it's bad when Titus doesn't even try to make his schtick humorous.
Titus said...
"Also, that things hideous hair combined with his awful face and red neck accent and long dramatic comments will be great theater."
Yessir, Titus, you sure do get to the heart of the substance of the matter. Yep. Deep political thinking, in keeping with your ilk's distaste for southerners.
'It wasn't political when the Administration lied less than 2 months before the 2012 election (when Obama said he had Al Quada on the run) about the cause, but it's political in 2014 6 months before the election?
OK?
Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty.
A four egg liberal omelette.
I believe Jane Harman and the NY Times writers are hair-ialists, and their stupid act is about to come crashing down.
Maybe you'd like to be tried by a crow:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/22/clever-crows-deomonstrate-innovative-use-tools/
The Democrats and the left are the clown party's and to clowns everything is a circus.
The cover-up was bad. The grossly negligent failure to provide security was bad. But what's really embarrassing is what Benghazi reveals about the covert involvement of the United States and Turkey in Syria's civil war.
I remember Hillary feigning surprise and befuddlement when Rand Paul raised the Syria/Turkey connection. Was she lying to Congress?
Titus: "He likes to talk about "sodomites"."
In terms of sheer quantity, I doubt that anyone talks about them more than you.
Of course, when it's mostly about avoiding real-world wars against gays, children, Christians etc by the lefts islamic pals, I can understand the strategy.
Do carry on li'l brave one.
That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird.
what about a wise old owl?
The Word Detective notes that the phrase originated in the American West, not Australia, and that it may have been used to suggest the alienness of the proceedings.
Pretty much what Skyler said.
I honestly don't understand this. Did anyone die during the Watergate break in? Yet that crime was deemed important enough for two rabid reporters to go after, followed by public hearings etc. Crimes were committed and people went to jail. Books were written, careers were made.
But on this, most reporters could care less. Four freaking people died! The NYT and its ilk treat this horrific incident as though it was just a minor fender bender.
How does the liberal media sleep at night?
"That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird."
Yes, much better to have a jury of Meade's favorite dogs, man's best friend in time of need.
But why pick on birds? They may be merciless but they're not dishonest -- quite straightforward, really. And many a defendant was quite happy to have his case come before Rosie Bird of sainted memory.
Titus said...
"Also, that things hideous hair combined with his awful face and red neck accent and long dramatic comments will be great theater."
I'm struck that in every case in history, when one side dehumanizes its opponents, bad things happen. Maybe you just thought you were being snarky and clever, eh sparky?
"Dueling Banjos play when he speaks. He is one nasty looking southern red neck cracker."
Titus's second coming out. No more merely vulgar, but benign, gay dog lover.
The denigration of Gowdy for his appearance and speech sounds ... dare I say it ... bigoted. Yes, bigotry. From bigots.
Ce n'est pas un cirque.
St George,
"Who is the Democratic Party's Howard Baker? Is there a statesman among them?"
Henry M. Jackson.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Oops....
I see Benghazi as Obama and Clinton's "300" moment. While they sat and debated, men died for them. It also marked the end of Obama's world influence, just as Thermopylae marked the end of Athen's lopsided influence in the league of Greek city states.
I also see it as the root of Obama's problem with Putin.....Putin does not believe Obaman has the balls to put it all on the line.
"That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird."
What about 12 law professors, good and true?
Pack animals like lions and wolves have ways of rendering collective judgments. The punishment is usually death.
Actually, no. The punishment is usually banishment from the pack. Very rarely do pack animals fight to the death. When death does occur it is almost always incidental to the fighting.
Titus said...
They picked the wrong "Face" and "Accent" to lead the "circus".
Dueling Banjos play when he speaks. He is one nasty looking southern red neck cracker.
He will be popular in ads both in the new confederacy and the rest of the country though.
Stick with being fabulous. When you wander into the political discourse you come off as being shrill. Like Hillary. You don't want to be mlike Hillary, do you?
Titus said...
They picked the wrong "Face" and "Accent" to lead the "circus".
Dueling Banjos play when he speaks. He is one nasty looking southern red neck cracker.
He will be popular in ads both in the new confederacy and the rest of the country though.
Stick with being fabulous. When you wander into the political discourse you come off as being shrill. Like Hillary. You don't want to be mlike Hillary, do you?
The pouch and jumping explanations aren't' too persuasive. I think the answer is simpler--it sounds funny and rolls off the tongue. Nobody needs "kangaroo court" explained to them. First time you heard it, you knew what it meant.
As for Team Obama, including it's many media properties, I find in nearly all discussions with liberals, I want to ask, "do you care? Seriously, on any level, do you give a damn?"
Could be almost any subject--Global Warming, IRS, Benghazi, whatever. Does your average liberal care whether the accusations are true? Do they care what really went on? Does there ever come a point where the quest for truth is worth it even if it harms the Democratic Party?
I try not to ask it because it seems ad hominem, but sometimes the character of the person really is the issue.
<>
Uhmmmmmm. You're the one pushing a meme here. Victimizing yourself for pushing a conspiracy theory for political ends.
It is funny how they have no shame. The talking point comes out of the White House and the entire mainstream big media, sand Fox and a few conservative papers, repeat it in nearly identical language.
The talking point, as Althouse pointed out after Jane Harmon's bizarre unprompted reference to UFOs and Vince Foster is "only crazy people care about this". They know there is no defending it. They probably also know there are worse revelations to come. So, the answer is to just dismiss the entire thing as "crazy" and hope no one pays attention.
Notice also how every Democratic scandal is covered as some partisan issue only Republicans care about while every Republicans scandal is covered as a potential abuse of trust that needs to be investigated. There is just nothing left to say about places like the NYT other than they are utterly useless for any purpose sans lying to protect Democrats and attack Republicans. At this point, there is literally nothing the Democrats or Obama could do, no matter how horrible, that the NYT and the rest of the major media wouldn't lie to help cover up.
How do you have a Republic without an independent media?
That said, I would not like to be tried by a bird.
If I was on trial for murder, I'd go with crows.
If it was indecent exposure, I'd go with a jaybird.
A minor civil dispute? Sparrows.
This 14th #BENGHAZI hearing will produce a pony!
Clearly, ponies must be in the running for worst animal judge.
I think some people are now aiming for a pure democracy guided by the right people and ideals, which happens to be themselves.
Some are ideologues, but others backed into it. Better to give some of these good reasons and some space.
... a need to rouse the most fervent anti-Obama wing of the party.
There's a pro-Obama wing of the Republicans? I don't think so.
The 14th #JOHNDOE investigation will produce a talking pony!
Obviously, it can be determined that political considerations never affect NYT reporting. In May 2004, the New York Times Public Editor, Daniel Okrent apologized for errors in the Times reporting associated with Bush's War:
In his column, Okrent wrote that the paper should have acted sooner, and needs to make up for the untruths in some of its stories on weapons of destruction by investigating how it was fooled. He made other critical comments, but by and large his criticism was restrained, and probably will not satisfy critics of the Times' editors' note, which ran [earlier].
He also did not fault the paper for not naming any guilty parties, particularly the reporter, Judith Miller, who wrote or co-wrote four of the six disputed stories that the paper studied. Okrent argued that the "failure was institutional, not individual," and indicated that editors bore much of the blame themselves.
Okrent strongly criticized the paper's "coddling" of sources, its "hunger for scoops" and reporters tailoring stories so they have a better shot at making page one.
The original talking points were Democrats putting the best possible spin on the tragedy. That's permissible politics. This investigation is Republicans playing politics with a tragedy. That's impermissible.....Politics and humor are reversed when it comes to tragedy. You're allowed to play politics for the first week, but it's distasteful after that. I hope his clears up any confusion on the matter.......I don't blame the Administration for trying to spin the story. That's their job, but the media's unblinking acceptance of their spin is maddening. I don't know if this story is Watergate, but it's definitely more significant than Valerie Plame.
And miniature-horse court is truly corrupt.
The trials are all for show.
Deep political thinking, in keeping with your ilk's distaste for southerners.
Maybe southern semen is too salty?
Thermopylae marked the end of Athen's lopsided influence in the league of Greek city states.
huh? you need to read up on Greek history. It was the use of the navy to further athens' own ends rather than continue war with the Persians that led to the breakup of the Delian League and the Peloponessian War.
Come one. Come all. Ambassador Stevens on a stick in center ring. Just as soon as we clear the remains of Gaddafi on a stick.
Correction: Due to unannounced actions. Gaddafi on a stick and Ambassador Stevens on a stick will be presented following the viewing of a short video.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=parliament%20of%20fowls&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FParlement_of_Foules&ei=3S9tU7HRJcWD8gXLt4HAAQ&usg=AFQjCNF2NkDL3zVJlkb8uIcajzIFqn6Mdg&sig2=lh6aq4xcIzPl9dG8ohcgaw
One good thing about all this sudden talk about #BENGHAZI is it keeps ObamaCare out of the news cycles.
I'm pretty sure Thermopylae marked the beginning of Athens' Golden Age and empire, not the end. Otherwise that whole Peloponnesian War thing was kind of pointless.
Its not either/or GM. More of a "compounded sucky incompetence" thing.
Sorry, RecChief. I see you already made the Thermopylae point before I did.
Peggy Noonan says "Benghazi is not Iran-Contra."
How does she know?
Hillary! and the State Dept's reaction would indicate that whatever it was, they thought it was something like Iran-Contra.
"One good thing about all this sudden talk about #BENGHAZI is it keeps ObamaCare out of the news cycles."
That doesn't say much for the President's signature "accomplishment", does it?
@BDNY said "The cover-up was bad. The grossly negligent failure to provide security was bad. But what's really embarrassing is what Benghazi reveals about the covert involvement of the United States and Turkey in Syria's civil war.
I remember Hillary feigning surprise and befuddlement when Rand Paul raised the Syria/Turkey connection. Was she lying to Congress?"
Precisely. We were arming the Syrian "rebels." And recall too, that Obama told Letterman on 9/18/2012 that the US did NOT have a "military presence in Libya." Yes, he really did. (I guess if it's the State Department, it's "not ... relations with that woman!").
And @MichaelK, yes, their "UFO! Circus!" cries will get louder the closer Gowdy gets to the truth. But "Don't think about an elephant!" rarely works.
That doesn't say much for the President's signature "accomplishment", does it?
I think it does. Republicans don't want to talk about ObamaCare anymore.
"Republicans don't want to talk about ObamaCare anymore."
In your dreams.
Garage Mahal wrote -
"Republicans don't want to talk about ObamaCare anymore."
Yes, Garage routinely leaves at halftime because the teams left the field.
Garage never sees the end of a play or musical because the curtain came down at intermission.
if you ever wondered who the idiot is at the symphony who claps between movements, it's Garage.
Heaven help him if he ever attended a tennis match. His head would explode when the players changed sides.
Actually, the Democrats up for re-election this cycle would probably rather burn Hillary as a witch than defend ObamaCare.
So Garage may be on to something.
Republicans don't want to talk about ObamaCare anymore.
If true (which it isn't, really) it is because the GOP have already won that argument. The voters rightly blame Obama and Congressional Democrats for the AHCS debacle because both share the blame.
The Benghazi scandal is a hydra, with most of the heads necked in the White House, the State Department, corrupt media outlets, and not in the Congress.
The Republican's aim is to sow doubt in the minds of fence-sitting voters who may or may not jump for HRC in 2016, to further erode Obama's unsavory reputation for honesty and competence, and to further degrade public confidence in certain unsavory news organizations which have been in a hand-in-glove relationship with the Democratic Party to the point of functioning much more like an official propaganda organ than an independent press.
I'm looking forward to watching Garage's meltdowns over the coming years.
There apparently were about 40 other US "officials" in Benghazi on the night of the firefight.
Not one of these have shown up on a talk show or with an interview in Rolling Stone or the National Enquirer.
Republicans don't want to talk about ObamaCare anymore.
They don't really have to, do they? I mean despite overwhelming effort by the Lefties in Congress and their minions in the MSM to plead the cause of Obamacare it is no more popular now than it was when it was rammed down the throats of the American people. THAT particular boat left the dock in the beginning and has never sailed back.
About Benghazi: The abandonment of those that ended up dead is unforgivable. As far as anyone can tell from facts already revealed and testimony already given under oath there was not even a 'smidgen' of effort to rescue them. You NEVER abandon your people, EVER.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा