Murtha Says: Democracy Bad. It's getting in the Way of Ending th War

[Alcon]

Even if he was opposing some level of democracy, isn't that kind of inherent in Iraq?  It's not like we can go in there, say "function democratically now!" and they'll be all copacetic.

And, yes, what does this headline have to do with the article?

[Alcon]

And, yes, what does this headline have to do with the article?

Basically, Murtha is saying the 2008 elections are interfering with any plan to retreat from Iraq because Republicans and Democrats do not want to risk losing their seats.  Ergo, democracy, or the democratic process, is interfering with what he wants.

We could either assume he's:

1. Complaining about a side effect of the democratic system that he doesn't like.

2. Suggesting we end democracy because it's inconvenient.

It's subject to interpretation, but I'm going to go with door number one, here.

[Alcon]

I think it's always odd when someone defends posting a political synapse misfire with "if (poster's party) did it, the (opposite party)s would be all over it!"

If that bugs you, why do the same thing?  An eye for an eye only annoys those of us who don't go around poking people's eyes out.

[Alcon]

It doesn't really count as satire if reasonable people can't tell that it's satire.

[Alcon]

It doesn't really count as satire if reasonable people can't tell that it's satire.

Plenty of reasonable people freak out when GOP Senator A says that what the Democrats are doing with politics is undermining the war effort.  Reasonable people aren't always as reasonable as the ought to be.

You're using the same ridiculous logic again.  "It's OK to do it, even though it's bad, if other people do it."  It does nothing but take away your own high ground.  Why bother?

[Alcon]

Do you not understand, like I said, that I know I am being ridiculous by saying what I said?  If I were being hypocritical, then arguements about the moral highground would make sense.  They don't apply here, because I am not being blindly hypocritical.  I am making a point about how assinine most of those arguements are by flipping the situation around.

I understand that.  I was just trying to explain that it just looks like the same old ridiculous arguments to everyone else.  Unless it's obvious that it's satire, when someone posts something like this about a politician or cause they don't like, it's very hard to guess.  So you can hardly blame people for reacting this way...