...that last Budget Vote for example.
@corbe You have to remember that,
long before the current Congress and administration, it was as George F. Will once isolated (in 1978):
Today's conservative has reached into his heart of hearts, prayed hard, and decided it was high time that the government cut his neighbour's
benefits.Remember, too, that President Tweety isn't the first (actual or alleged) Republican president about whom his sycophancy sought to dismiss his skeptics as suffering from a derangement syndrome. Nor the first president, period. Derangement syndromes were first diagnosed by Democrats regarding even the more temperate, reasoned, and logical critics of Droopy-Drawers Clinton. They were next diagnosed by Republicans regarding even the more temperate, reasoned, and logical critics of President Lips II. (Even when it came to Republicans who objected to the metastatic spending when Lips II had a whole Republican Congress, both houses, to work with---and they made drunken sailors resemble misers; or, to those who objected reasonably when Lips II was damn fool enough to sign McCain-Feingold
even though he knew and admitted publicly months earlier that it violated the First Amendment.) They were
next diagnosed by Democrats regarding (stop me if you've heard this before) even the more temperate, reasoned, and logical critics of His Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, COD, RIP, LSMFT, Would-Have-Been-Life President of the Republic Formerly Known as the United States.
It is a too-well-entrenched syndrome (if you'll pardon the expression) for those to whom a particular president is a temporal deity to dismiss
any critique of said deity as evidence that the critic in question---whether a well-circulated, well-paid commentator, or a mere denizen of a politically inclined online forum---cannot possibly be a reasoning critic but must surely be afflicted with a derangement syndrome. And they are often blissfully unaware that there just might be those to whom their very fealty to said temporal deity might be just as easily dismissable as a derangement syndrome, even if the reasoning critics of their idol are usually too (I hate to use an obscenity in public) polite and temperate to call it such. The
merest demurral from their deity's pronouncements or acts, on whatever grounds, is jumped as if according to a script as fresh evidence that the demurrer can
only be afflicted with derangement syndrome.
Once upon a time, a certain magazine pronounced in its opening statement that liberals spoke often about hearing other points of view but were shocked to discover that there
were other points of view. Contemporarily, the disciples of their temporal presidential deities speak a little (if at all) about hearing other points of view but become different shades of maniacal upon discovering that there
are other points of view. And that's
without reminding anyone still capable of rubbing together two brain cells that, as regards the incumbent temporal presidential deity, President Tweety going in was the kind of man a) they would have denounced post haste if he'd run as a Democrat; and, b) who made Droopy-Drawers Clinton resemble a monk. (Now, I wonder: If he'd been a Democratic president, what would they have thought about the fact that only
once during his inaugural address did he use the word "freedom," the same as His Excellency [though Obama did use the word "liberty" twice], and once less than Droopy-Drawers, as compared to 27 times the word turned up in President Lips II's inaugural address, four times in his father's, eight times in Ronald Reagan's, and even three times by Mr. Peanut?)