Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

March 8, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

PATRIOT ACT....Am I being overly sensitive, or is this really not an appropriate graphic for CNN to use to illustrate their lead story tonight about the passage of the Patriot Act? The headline claims it's a "controversial" measure, but judging from the picture you'd have to be Tokyo Rose to oppose it. The only thing missing is a photograph of a bald eagle soaring majestically above Mount Rushmore.

Note to CNN: "Patriot Act" is just the name that Republicans gave to the bill when they introduced it. That doesn't mean it's actually an iconic symbol of patriotism.

I wonder what they'll use to illustrate their next story about the president's defense of the NSA's domestic spying program. Uncle Sam, his sleeves rolled up, listening intently to a telephone with Osama on the other end?

Kevin Drum 12:49 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (63)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Its passed by Dems and Republicans...using it before it was passed would be mean

Posted by: McA on March 8, 2006 at 12:53 AM | PERMALINK

My question is who was responsible for choosing that graphic and what are that person's political affiliations?

This kind of in-your-face propaganda didn't come out of a vacuum.

Posted by: joe on March 8, 2006 at 12:56 AM | PERMALINK

Whores. They're all whores.

Hey, come to think of it, maybe Jeff Gannon nee Guckert is doing their graphics now. He is quite the master of graphic photos, after all....

Posted by: Stefan on March 8, 2006 at 12:59 AM | PERMALINK

Hey, CNN is trying to catch Fox News in ratings by appealing to jingoism as Fox does. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I've heard. I hope nobody reading this blog actually watches CNN or Fox to get their "news" (i.e., propaganda)!

Posted by: Taobhan on March 8, 2006 at 1:01 AM | PERMALINK

All right, that CNN screen shot has me convinced -- we need a law against flag desecration. A good place to start would be a ban on dishonoring the flag by wrapping it around an odious piece of anti-American propaganda like CNN just did.

Posted by: Stefan on March 8, 2006 at 1:02 AM | PERMALINK

Democratic toadies and wimps are just as responsible for this denigration of civil liberties as the Republicans. In fact, Democrats deserve more condemnation. The Republicans haven't cared about civil liberties for decades; the Democrats were supposed to be protecting the people. Bottom line: they don't care about the people, only their phoney baloney jobs.

Posted by: James E. Powell on March 8, 2006 at 1:06 AM | PERMALINK

Kevin's naivette is charming.

Posted by: lib on March 8, 2006 at 1:18 AM | PERMALINK

Even the news from CNN seems to be more balanced than what is presented here.

Posted by: Meatss on March 8, 2006 at 1:19 AM | PERMALINK

What do you mean? You don't like the flag? News organizations can't use colorful graphics?

Posted by: Blitzer on March 8, 2006 at 1:43 AM | PERMALINK

Hell, the "Patriot" in Patriot Act isn't even the real word, just a nonsensical acronym nobody can remember, ginned up just to look, uh, patriotic when it so clearly is really faux patriotism for the sheep. Like McA.

Are you cowards proud of the wanton destruction to our country and the world resulting from your "patriotism"? Thought so.

Posted by: Jones on March 8, 2006 at 1:56 AM | PERMALINK

So, it's O.K. for CNN to depict DeLay as a troll/elf, but not the Patriot Act "patriotically"? Curious.

Be it here decreed

Any individual, partnership, or association, or corporation incorporated under a law of the United States, who bakes an apple pie, shall be punished by no more than 5 years in prison;

Mom shall be punished by no more than two years in prison, a $5000 fine, or both;

Any individual or individual acting as a representative, agent, officer, or employee of a partnership, association, or corporation incorporated under a law of the United States who intentionally or otherwise drives a stock car in a circular, oval, elliptic, or otherwise closed path, shall be punished by no more than $10000 per lap;

Any individual or individual acting as a representative, agent, officer, or employee of a partnership, association, or corporation incorporated under a law of the United States who participates in a game, match, bowl, playoff, competition, contest, match, meeting, round, set, or tournament of baseball be punishable by a fine of no more than $10000 per half-inning played.

-the Forget Liberty And Greatness (FLAG) Act

Posted by: MillionthMonkey on March 8, 2006 at 2:06 AM | PERMALINK

It is over the top, but 9-11 changed everything. (Yawn)

Posted by: bryrock on March 8, 2006 at 2:15 AM | PERMALINK

"Its passed by Dems and Republicans...using it before it was passed would be mean"

I wonder if McA would feel better about being an American if he mastered basic English-language skills. Clearly, he hats freadom.

Posted by: Kenji on March 8, 2006 at 4:53 AM | PERMALINK

Have to disagree with y'all on this (no surprise). I think the fact that it was a darkened, desaturated, greyscale image of the flag with crowded, monochrome, sans-serif text totally removes any "pro"-Act feeling the flag itself might give.

Furthermore, decrying something which passed 89-10 in the Senate and 280-138 in the House with "controversal" being the 1st word in the headline seems to support the thought that CNN wasn't exactly trying for the jingoist approach on this one.

Posted by: J.C. on March 8, 2006 at 5:07 AM | PERMALINK

I've always wondered how the act would have been fared if we called it the "U.S.A. Jingoism and Religous Paranoia Act".

That at least would be closer to accurate.

Posted by: Jim Ramsey on March 8, 2006 at 6:36 AM | PERMALINK

Kevin, you're right about the missing eagle, but there would have been one other thing missing, as well: in the background, John Ashcroft warbling "Let The Eagle Soar".

Posted by: Ed Tracey on March 8, 2006 at 7:25 AM | PERMALINK

judging from the picture you'd have to be Tokyo Rose to oppose it

You'd have to be Osama bin-Ladin to oppose it which is exactly what was intended when the name "Patriot Act" was chosen. It is a glaring example of doublespeak/doublethink. Now if they had just called it the "Birch Act" then that would have been appropriate.

Posted by: E. Nonee Moose on March 8, 2006 at 7:55 AM | PERMALINK

That was my first thought when I saw the lede on CNN's front page. I've come to despise CNN for their superficiality and pandering.

But as I looked at the image, the muted tones of the flag, instead of a bright red, white and blue, struck me as an equally opposing statement.

I don't know if that's what CNN intended but it spoke volumes.

Posted by: Wayne on March 8, 2006 at 8:02 AM | PERMALINK

Liberia's flag with the one star works better from a design point of view

But as far as starred flags go, Vietnam's definitely the one to beat. Strong colors. Simple. A very effective symbol.

North Korea's star banner not half bad, either.

Djibouti's is a bad use of color and Congo's and Togo's just don't do it for me. Panama's kind of interesting though.

Posted by: Not a stars and stripes fan on March 8, 2006 at 8:17 AM | PERMALINK

At this point, that seems like small potatoes to me but yes I think that kind of graphic is simply wrong for a "news" organization. But the cable nets stopped being "news" organizations a while ago.

Posted by: Some Guy on March 8, 2006 at 8:21 AM | PERMALINK

Uncle Sam, his sleeves rolled up, listening intently to a telephone with Osama on the other end?


That was pretty damn funny.

Posted by: Hubris on March 8, 2006 at 8:34 AM | PERMALINK

speaking of cnn. there is something very disturbing about wolf blitzer's campaign to sell the ports deal to the american public. he's been in dubai since the weekend but began his 3hr daily infomercial last week clearly as a counter to lou dobbs' nightly harangues. blitzer's negotiations remind me of the barbara walters' inserting herself into the middle east peace process when she got begin and sadat to talk.

Posted by: linda on March 8, 2006 at 8:35 AM | PERMALINK

Well, they couldn't use a soaring bald eagle because some 'patriot' might shoot their television. Out here there's always some idiot on trial for shooting a bald eagle. To them it represents the most hated of concepts- conservation.

Posted by: serial catowner on March 8, 2006 at 8:42 AM | PERMALINK

I like Kevin's idea for the NSA wiretaps; a Norman Rockefeller like painting of that would be awesome!

Posted by: Frank J. on March 8, 2006 at 8:45 AM | PERMALINK

You know, Kevin, that's not a bad idea...why don't you contact MoveOn about a ad campaign depicting a really sleazy Uncle Sam with a phone listening to some young girl on the phone...you know..Here's the Patriot Act at work! The left has been utterly, completely uncreative. You'd think it was the right that had the creative side. One more proof of our castration.

Posted by: christine on March 8, 2006 at 9:13 AM | PERMALINK

I long for the days when you could not tell who
the person delivering your news voted for.
The days when reporting was real reporting not
just spin on what someone else reported.
No station should have the right to wave the
Red , White and Blue to push a agenda. Fox is
twice as bad at this than CNN. But it should
be off limets. If the Patriot Act is American.
America has lost its way. Thank Republicans for
that.

Posted by: Honey P on March 8, 2006 at 9:17 AM | PERMALINK

Hell, the "Patriot" in Patriot Act isn't even the real word, just a nonsensical acronym nobody can remember

Actually the full acronym is "USA PATRIOT Act":

Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act

We ought always to refer to it in writing
as "USA PATRIOT Act," with "USA PATRIOT" in
all-caps, as a subtle reminder of what an
intelligence-insulting crock its title is.

I wonder what genius thought it up.

Posted by: Swift Loris on March 8, 2006 at 9:17 AM | PERMALINK

We ought always to refer to it in writing
as "USA PATRIOT Act," with "USA PATRIOT" in
all-caps, as a subtle reminder of what an
intelligence-insulting crock its title is.

I wonder what genius thought it up.
Posted by: Swift Loris

Same guys who gave us "Healty Forests" for a bill to destroy same and "Clear Skies" for a bill to empower pollutors...

Paging Mr Orwell....

Posted by: CFShep on March 8, 2006 at 9:27 AM | PERMALINK

Democratic toadies and wimps are just as responsible for this denigration of civil liberties as the Republicans. In fact, Democrats deserve more condemnation. The Republicans haven't cared about civil liberties for decades; the Democrats were supposed to be protecting the people. Bottom line: they don't care about the people, only their phoney baloney jobs.
Posted by: James E. Powell

I didn't think anybody on this site would bring this up. Thank you.

Drum finally veers toward even mentioning the renewal of the "Patriot" Act, and does he discuss the overwhelming majority (3 out of 4) of Dem Senators who voted for it? No no no. It's much more instructive to deconstruct the graphics of a CNN piece. What horseshit.

Posted by: sglover on March 8, 2006 at 9:30 AM | PERMALINK

there is something very disturbing about wolf blitzer's campaign to sell the ports deal to the american public.

Strange how the mind works. You wrote this, but I read this:

there is something very disturbing about wolf blitzer

Posted by: E. Henry Thripshaw on March 8, 2006 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK

Furthermore, decrying something which passed 89-10 in the Senate and 280-138 in the House with "controversal" being the 1st word in the headline seems to support the thought that CNN wasn't exactly trying for the jingoist approach on this one.
Posted by: J.C. on March 8, 2006 at 5:07 AM | PERMALINK

Well, it WAS controversial, until the Democrats caved in like the gutless wet noodles they are.

Posted by: E. Henry Thripshaw on March 8, 2006 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

I work as a graphic artist at a small television station and I have to disagree with Kevin on this one. It is incredibly hard to find imagery to illustrate general subjects. Instead of everyone piling on CNN's final choice, why don't you spend a few minutes trying to think of a serious alternative graphic? If the story's scope is beyongd the push to get the bill renewed then a picture of the capilal dome would not be right. Pictures of George W. and The White House wouldn't work either if those subjects aren't part of the associated story. I think the Graphic artist made a good choice using a flag with shifted/distorted colors.

Posted by: Ph47f3 on March 8, 2006 at 9:52 AM | PERMALINK

Ph47f3,

Then why use USA before Patriot Act?
The USA Taft-Hartley Bill?
The USA Immigration Bill?
The USA Transportation Bill?

Little too much, "USA, USA, USA" chanting

Posted by: thethirdPaul on March 8, 2006 at 10:00 AM | PERMALINK

No doubt Kevin would prefer a skull and crossbones to be used as the picture.

Posted by: Mike on March 8, 2006 at 10:16 AM | PERMALINK

Cheney, go fuck yourself

Posted by: cleek on March 8, 2006 at 10:17 AM | PERMALINK

Today Iran threatens us ominously because we are interfering with their national desie to have weapons of mass destruction. I hereby propose the "Cook Doctrine" regarding any future use of a WMD or conventional weapons on the scale of the 9/11 attacks against the U.S.A.

Firstly, in deciding which peoples of the world to punish, it is not necessary for the U.S.A. to conduct a scholarly investigation to prove that a nation conspired with or sponsored the terrorists, or was merely sympathetic to them, or anything of the kind. All we have to know is that the government of a nation failed to send condolences, expressions of official regret and horror at such actions, and failed to offer to send emergency aid.

Further, if credible, verifiable news reports verify that within the unsympathetic (to the U.S.A. as a victim) nation there are substantial numbers of people celebrating our tragedy, dancing in the streets, burning American flags and Uncle Sam mannekins and so forth, firing their guns in the air and generally whooping it up and joyfully celebrating the deaths of innocent Americans, then that nation shall be at risk of shock and awe retaliation perhaps to be followed by an invasion and makeover of all its social and political institutions.

That is the promise of the Cook Doctrine. Also, any American citizen who is in contact with persons in a nation suspected of terrorist sympathies will be subject to eavesdropping and mail opening. All citizens of the terrorist nation whom my administration suspects of plotting or conspiring to injure the lives of Americans will, when captured, be treated not as criminal suspects with civil rights, but as Prisoners of War, to be held without trial until the end of hostilities.

All such prisoners may be subject to interrogation using the newest lie detection devices, including functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and the administration of drugs to block short term memory formation. Such memory blockers make it hard for those being interrogated to tell spontaneous little lies to cover some detail of their story, because the next day when questioned again over the same material they can't remember their little lie and will generate a new one that may differ in significant detail.

In general, the Cook Doctrine shall make it clear to absolutely everyone: if you are thinking of sponsoring a spectacular attack to bring sorrow to the United States of America, don't do it.

Posted by: Michael L. Cook on March 8, 2006 at 10:27 AM | PERMALINK

Blitzer has been outdoing itself lately bending over for the Dubai folks. He went to Dubai specifically to file a lot of stirring video of our heroic comrades in arms in the global war against terror.

I don't know if it's a conscious counterbalance to Lou and Joe or if it's another example of Wolf's personal Republican politics coming out again. He hides it really badly.

Posted by: Jim J on March 8, 2006 at 10:33 AM | PERMALINK

Joe, The same people who produced this graphic also created the Mission Accomplished Banner. They are currently printing "Nobody Panic!" and "All is Well!" (remember the homecoming parade in Animal House?)placards to be distributed to the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in subsequent months.

Posted by: aftertheflood on March 8, 2006 at 10:34 AM | PERMALINK

I hereby propose the "Cook Doctrine" regarding any future use of a WMD or conventional weapons on the scale of the 9/11 attacks against the U.S.A.

I didn't see anything in there about making sure not to be candy-asses and actually win the war you fight.

Posted by: Jim J on March 8, 2006 at 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

Funny how when actual news runs contrary to the liberal worldview (DeLay and Cuellar winning), we get posts complaining about the American flag being displayed.

I expected more from Drum, I've never considered him to be a knee-jerk lefty hack. I hope he rewards that confidence with a post about Cuellar winning, and how this clearly shows that being associated with Bush isn't election poison. Take all the polls you want, elections are the only poll that matters and once again America has shown it rejects liberalism.


Posted by: Tom on March 8, 2006 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK
Note to CNN: "Patriot Act" is just the name that Republicans gave to the bill when they introduced it.

No, "Patriot Act" would been to subtle for them, the jingoistic tag is actually, almost exactly as CNN rendered it, the "USA PATRIOT Act" (properly with USA PATRIOT in all caps, because its an acronym.)

Posted by: cmdicely on March 8, 2006 at 10:43 AM | PERMALINK

Today the USA threatens us ominously because we are interfering with their national desie to exclusively have weapons of mass destruction. I hereby propose the "Ahmed Doctrine" regarding any future use of a WMD or conventional weapons on the scale of the 2003 attack against the Middle East.

Firstly, in deciding which peoples of the world to punish, it is not necessary for us Middle Easterners to conduct a scholarly investigation to prove that a nation conspired with or sponsored the terrorists, or was merely sympathetic to them, or anything of the kind. All we have to know is that the government of a nation failed to send condolences, expressions of official regret and horror at such actions, and failed to offer to send emergency aid.

Further, if credible, verifiable news reports verify that within the unsympathetic (to Middle Eastern nationals as victims) nation there are substantial numbers of people celebrating our tragedy, saying kill all the ragheads on blogs, whooping it up and joyfully calling for our forcible conversion to Christianity, then that nation shall be at risk of shock and awe retaliation on the order of 9-11, to be followed by it bedwetters' makeover of all its social and political institutions.

That is the promise of the Ahmed Doctrine. Also, any Middle Eastern citizen who is in contact with persons in a nation suspected of Imperialist sympathies will be subject to kidnapping. All citizens of the terrorist nation whom my administration suspects of plotting or conspiring to injure the lives of Middle Easterners will, when captured, be treated not as criminal suspects with civil rights, but as Prisoners of War, to be held without trial until the end of hostilities.

All such prisoners may be subject to interrogation using some of the oldest lie detection devices. Such encouragement makes it hard for those being interrogated to tell spontaneous little lies to cover some detail of their story, because the next day when questioned again over the same material they can't remember their little lie and will generate a new one that may differ in significant detail.

In general, the Ahmed Doctrine shall make it clear to absolutely everyone: if you are thinking of sponsoring a spectacular attack to bring sorrow to the Middle East, don't do it

Posted by: Ahmed on March 8, 2006 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK

I didn't see anything in there about making sure not to be candy-asses and actually win the war you fight.

Or actually fight in the war you want to win.

Posted by: Stefan on March 8, 2006 at 10:46 AM | PERMALINK

"Cooked Doctrine"

Does any intelligence come out of the Discovery Institute? - They are an insult to Seattle.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on March 8, 2006 at 10:48 AM | PERMALINK

Swift Loris,

Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act

Wow, that is incredible. And here I was thinking the acronym to know to win the Million dollars was "Totalitarian Hierarchy for the Removal of Undesirables and the Subjugation of Humanity," the nemesis of the "United Network for Control and Law Enforcement."

Posted by: Tripp on March 8, 2006 at 10:54 AM | PERMALINK

Today the United States threatens us ominously because we are interfering with their national desire to be the only ones who've ever used weapons of mass destruction to commit mass murder against an Asian nation. I hereby propose the "Kim Doctrine" regarding any future use of a WMD or conventional weapons against North Korea.

Firstly, in deciding which peoples of the world to punish, it is not necessary for North Korea to conduct a scholarly investigation to prove that a nation conspired with or sponsored the terrorists, or was merely sympathetic to them, or anything of the kind. All we have to know is that the government of a nation failed to send condolences, expressions of official regret and horror at such actions, and failed to offer to send emergency aid.

Further, if credible, verifiable news reports verify that within the unsympathetic (to North Korea as a victim) nation there are substantial numbers of people celebrating our tragedy, dancing in the streets, burning North Korean flags and Dear Leader mannequins and so forth, firing their guns in the air and generally whooping it up and joyfully celebrating the deaths of innocent Koreans, then that nation shall be at risk of nuclear shock and awe retaliation perhaps to be followed by an invasion and makeover of all its social and political institutions.

That is the promise of the Kim Doctrine. Also, any North Korean citizen who is in contact with persons in a nation suspected of terrorist sympathies will be subject to eavesdropping and mail opening. All citizens of the terrorist nation whom my Dear Leader suspects of plotting or conspiring to injure the lives of Koreans will, when captured, be treated not as criminal suspects with civil rights, but as Prisoners of War, to be held without trial until the end of hostilities.

All such prisoners may be subject to interrogation using the classic North Korean brainwashing techniques. Such techniques make it hard for those being interrogated to tell spontaneous little lies to cover some detail of their story, because the brainwashing will have broken their will and given us complete control of their personality.

In general, the Kim Doctrine shall make it clear to absolutely everyone: if you are thinking of sponsoring a spectacular attack to bring sorrow to the People's Republic of Korea, don't do it.

Posted by: Kim on March 8, 2006 at 10:57 AM | PERMALINK

Well, it WAS controversial, until the Democrats caved in like the gutless wet noodles they are.
Posted by: E. Henry Thripshaw

CONtrived perhaps...CONtorted?

Posted by: CFShep on March 8, 2006 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK

Michael L. Cook is so cute! Can't you just see him up on his hind legs, chest puffed out, barking as loud as his little Chihuahua lungs will let him to scare that big scary dog away, trying not to let on that's he's shaking like a leaf because he's terrified out of his wits.....really, it's as credible as when he marches his Chihuahua self up to the big Dobermann bitch and ensures her in his sexiest growl that he'll be gentle...

Ah, false, empty blog bravado...the cheapest bravado there is....

Posted by: Stefan on March 8, 2006 at 11:02 AM | PERMALINK

Yeah, Stefan, he is Soooo tough that he refuses to wear any of his cowboy gear in the Seattle area because of "Brokeback". Why they might follow him into the Discovery Institute and infect the joint.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on March 8, 2006 at 11:06 AM | PERMALINK

Today Suzi Metcalf threatens me ominously because I am interfering with her desire to take my place as the most popular and prettiest girl in Ronald Reagan Middle School. I hereby propose the "Caitlyn Doctrine" regarding any future use of gossip or other unconventional weapons against me, Caitlyn Gelber.

Firstly, in deciding which peoples of this school to punish, it is not necessary for Caitlyn to conduct a scholarly investigation to prove that a anyone conspired with or sponsored the forces opposed to Caitlyn, or was merely sympathetic to them, or anything of the kind. All I have to know is that any other kids failed to send condolences, expressions of official regret and horror at such actions, and failed to offer to send emergency aid to me.

Further, if credible, verifiable news reports verify that within the unsympathetic (to Caitlyn as a victim) group there are substantial numbers of people celebrating my tragedy, dancing in the streets, erasing my picture from their cellphones, burning Caitlyn mannequins and so forth, firing their big mouths off, sending mean text messages and posting nasty messages on Myspace and generally whooping it up and joyfully celebrating a social setback for me, then those bitches shall be at risk of nuclear shock and awe retaliation perhaps to be followed by a nasty story about what I saw when I walked in on them and saw what they were doing together in the showers after lacrosse practice that I will spread to everyone in this school, thereby destroying their social life.

That is the promise of the Caitlyn Doctrine. Also, any Ronald Reagan Middle Schooler who is in contact with persons in a clique suspected of Suzi Metcalf sympathies will be subject to eavesdropping and mail opening and hacking into their email and IM accounts. All members of the clique whom I suspect of plotting or conspiring to injure me will, when confronted, be treated not as criminal suspects with civil rights, but as skanks and hos, to be socially ostracized until the end of hostilities.

All such persons may be subject to interrogation using the classic Caitlyn "mean girl" techniques. Such techniques make it hard for those being interrogated to tell spontaneous little lies to cover some detail of their story, because I can tell when those bitches are lying to me.

In general, the Caitlyn Doctrine shall make it clear to absolutely everyone: if you are thinking of sponsoring a spectacular attack to bring sorrow to Caitlyn Gelber, don't do it.


Posted by: Stefan on March 8, 2006 at 11:21 AM | PERMALINK

I hope he rewards that confidence with a post about Cuellar winning, and how this clearly shows that being associated with Bush isn't election poison.

If memory serves me right, Texas has open primaries, which means the conclusion you draw isn't necessarily supported by the facts. Besides, there are a couple of Republicans from the 2005 elections who might disagree with you.

Actually, what I read in election patterns is that opposition to Bush isn't the election poison Republicans like to imagine it is.

Posted by: Gregory on March 8, 2006 at 11:26 AM | PERMALINK

Stephen Colbert is talking to his lawyers. Looks a bit close to "Patriosity" (copyright)

Posted by: Steve Paradis on March 8, 2006 at 11:48 AM | PERMALINK

as it has been said many times in the present and back to ancient times . you will destroy your nation and your
way of life by your own hand. name one nation that has not traveled this road or is not on that journey now .

Posted by: OBSERVER on March 8, 2006 at 12:01 PM | PERMALINK

Are we done with the "... Doctrine" comments? The schtick was only marginally amusing the first time, and it doesn't get better with repitition.

Posted by: sglover on March 8, 2006 at 12:46 PM | PERMALINK

Burn all the flags. Just burn them. All of them.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on March 8, 2006 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Patriot "Act" is the way to put it.

Posted by: cld on March 8, 2006 at 1:23 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin: always call it the USA PATRIOT Act, or rub in its acronymhood and call it the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act.

Posted by: acting patriot on March 8, 2006 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINK

Burn all the flags. Just burn them. All of them.
Posted by: SecularAnimist on March 8, 2006 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, I always thought it would be a great idea to honor our freedom and values by burning an American Flag on the fourth of July. Burn a flag, and celebrate the fact that you CAN. (while you still can).

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on March 8, 2006 at 4:00 PM | PERMALINK

I wonder what they'll use to illustrate their next story about the president's defense of the NSA's domestic spying program. Uncle Sam, his sleeves rolled up, listening intently to a telephone with Osama on the other end?

They'll probably go full-on Cox and Forkum and draw Jimmy Carter, Saddam Hussein, and Satan yelling in his other ear.

Posted by: scarshapedstar on March 8, 2006 at 4:17 PM | PERMALINK

Who knows if "Tokyo Rose" would have opposed the big-flag-graphic USA PATRIOT act? If she did, that wouldn't make her guilty of anything . . . which, BTW, is exactly the case with the falsely convicted Iva Toguri.

Posted by: keith on March 8, 2006 at 7:21 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, I snorted when the "Cook Doctrine" was posted as I thouyght it a pretty good parody of the "Bush Doctrine". Who knew ?

Posted by: opit on March 8, 2006 at 11:30 PM | PERMALINK
蚊帐 mosquito net 蚊帐用品,旅游蚊帐,防虫蚊帐,儿童蚊帐,广东蚊帐厂 蚊帐 mosquito net a factory that produce mosquito net 蚊帐厂 蚊帐 蚊帐 蚊帐 蚊帐 蚊帐 蚊帐 针织厂 knitting Posted by: 蚊帐 on March 9, 2006 at 8:17 AM | PERMALINK

The Republicans haven't cared about civil liberties for decades; the Democrats were supposed to be protecting the people.

Posted by: Joshp on March 9, 2006 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly