Oh, of course

by Ted on June 13, 2005

The Poor Man has produced the finest PowerLine parody this side of paradise.[1] However, as Brad R. notes in the comments, there’s no beating the masters at their own game:

The Senate is poised to apologize for its failure to enact anti-lynching legislation between 1890 and 1952. Why didn’t the Senate act?

In the past, efforts to pass such legislation fell victim to Senate filibusters despite pleas for its passage by seven presidents, among others, between 1890 and 1952.

I suppose Senator Robert Byrd, widely known then as a former Kleagle, better known today as the “conscience of the Senate,” participated in some of those filibusters. Do you suppose he will oppose the current resolution, and explain that the filibuster is a pillar of democracy? No, probably not. I suspect the Senate Democrats will keep their “conscience” under wraps for this one.

UPDATE: As several readers have pointed out, Byrd isn’t quite that old–he was first elected to the Senate in 1958. So his personal involvement with the filibuster didn’t begin until the Civil Rights era. The point, of course, remains valid nevertheless.

[1] This is awfully good, too.



P O'Neill 06.13.05 at 9:49 pm

And in their self-parody, they also mimic the poor man’s parody of the The Corner:

IRAQ? NO PHOBIA!! [Mark R. Levin]
… [MSM] so intent on undermining our troops in the field that they have neglected to even mention that not a single US serviceman has been in killed in Iraq since May 17.

[UPDATE: I have been informed that there have been at least 67 American soldiers killed since May 17. I believe this only serves to strengthen my original point.]


Nanette 06.13.05 at 11:24 pm

The Poor Man has a tiny bit of competition in that… this is from Publius at the Legal Fiction blog: The Book of Hinderaker , loosely based on the Book of Job. Hilarious.


Seth Finkelstein 06.13.05 at 11:49 pm

As one press thinker put it, “the editing occurs after publication”


goesh 06.14.05 at 6:14 am

Well now, maybe the Senate can apologize to Native Americans too, or at least honor the treaties made with them. Will there be sauce for the goose and gander?


nofundy 06.14.05 at 8:06 am

Theh book of hindrocket was awesome! Thanks!


jet 06.14.05 at 9:59 am

This is awsome. “The Left” is showing malevolence towards Jerry Falwell for saying that “The Left” is malevolent to him for disagreeing with “The Left”. Kind of makes your head spin. Kind of like saying that someone sucks for punching you in the eye and in response the guy punches you in the eye.

I don’t understand what’s happening to this site. It used to be all about calm rational debate. Now seems more about shrill eye-gouging and mockery.

And on the quote from Powerline, I’m not sure I see the self-mockery in pointing out the past evils that filibusters were used for, while also reminding the readers that their political opponents embrace a former Klansmen. One great arguement to the Pathos and one great arguement to the Ethos. Calling that “self-mockery” kind of makes Falwell’s point.


BigMacAttack 06.14.05 at 10:27 am

‘It isn’t clear, however, what [the Downing Street memo] was intended to mean. [Juan] Cole’s implication, and the constant implication of the BUSH LIED! lefties, is that the administration really knew that Saddam didn’t have any WMDs, but fixed the intelligence to make it appear that he did. But we know that isn’t true.’

Ahh ha ha ha ha what a fool ah ……. oh wait a minute that is an accurate observation. So why am I laughing? Oh because he is a stupid Republican ahh ha hah ha hah hah ha ha stupid Republicans are funny.


Ray 06.14.05 at 10:43 am

The administration _thought_ that Iraq had WMDs, but couldn’t be sure. The intelligence they presented to the public was unqualified – they pretended that they did know Iraq had WMDs. Remember the UN presentation? No doubt there.
The fact that the UN inspectors didn’t find any WMDs? (and nobody has since)
The fact that the US and UK had clearly decided to go to war before the inspectors returned?
All this is irrelevant?


BigMacAttack 06.14.05 at 11:12 am


Close but not quite.

They didn’t think that there was a probability of 79% or 90% that Iraq had WMD.

They knew he did. This was an accepted fact. They were 100% sure.

Considering the lack of supporting details, the need to fix the facts to the case, they shouldn’t have accepted the existence of WMD as known fact.

But they did. The memo’s banal asides make that quite clear.

And so the leading ha ha in the satire is an accurate observation.

I doubt very much that this Hinderaker fellow much cares that Bush at best grossly exaggerated the threat and at worst out right fabricated evidence. I don’t doubt that he just toes the line.

So in that context the satire is pretty funny.

But it is also kind of funny that the lead blurb in the satire is an accurate observation.


Uncle Kvetch 06.14.05 at 11:43 am

Many thanks for the links, Ted–both pieces were brilliant. And the resulting comments thread on Publius’ site is, in some ways, even funnier.


bi 06.14.05 at 12:42 pm

jet’s and BigMacAttack’s remarks only serve to strengthen our original point, which is that they suck.


Grand Moff Texan 06.14.05 at 1:59 pm

Maybe powerwhine could tell us all about how Gawd made all de purty flowers again? That was so sweet!


Ray 06.14.05 at 4:42 pm

“They didn’t think that there was a probability of 79% or 90% that Iraq had WMD.
They knew he did. ”

Is there a philosopher in the house?


Uncle Kvetch 06.15.05 at 8:23 am

Shorter bigmacattack: The satire was both accurate and funny, but I’m still going to find a way to turn it into an opportunity to condemn The Left.

Comments on this entry are closed.