Skip to main content

View Diary: Optics Not Good for Brennan at Swearing-in Ceremony-Uses U.S. Constitution Without Bill of Rights (46 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  For the record. I think putting one's hand on... (0+ / 0-)

    the Bible's even more stupid than picking the wrong Constitution.

    "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history." ~ Aldous Huxley

    by markthshark on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 09:55:19 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  And yet, there's a paucity of pieces here by you.. (0+ / 0-)

      ...attacking elected officials, including Brennan's boss, for putting their hand on the Bible when being sworn in.

      So one is forced to conclude from your dead silence when other elected officials were sworn in on the Bible, that your criticism of Brennan here is about something else rather than about his choice of hand-rests while being sworn in—something you yourself acknowledge throughout this piece and the comments.

      So why not make this piece about what you are actually criticizing him for, rather than seizing on the Andrew Breitbart Memorial Ridiculous Petty Outrage Du Jour to attack the guy for swearing on a historical version of the Constitution?

      "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

      by JamesGG on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 10:14:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're a regular bulldog on these non sequiturs... (0+ / 0-)

        Not once have you addressed the point of the diary: that a man with a dubious past on Constitutional issues was actually sworn in using a draft Constitution that didn't include the Bill of Rights, and the fact that it didn't look good.

        Somehow, you've got it in your head that because I haven't previously done a diary on Obama's swearing-in ceremony where he used a Bible; somehow precludes me from writing about Brennan's faux pas.

        That's amusing... but wrong.

        News flash: the two subjects are mutually exclusive. One has nothing to do with the other.

        It really must be tough being a John Brennan fan these days.

        "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history." ~ Aldous Huxley

        by markthshark on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 05:29:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who said I was a John Brennan fan? (0+ / 0-)

          As I mentioned, if your issue is Brennan's "dubious past on Constitutional issues," then write about that. If your issue is what you think Brennan will do running the CIA, then write about that.

          There's enough relevant criticism to be directed at John Brennan that there should be absolutely no need to stoop to irrelevant criticism that not only sets you up for the obvious rejoinder that you haven't criticized other national leaders for not swearing in on the Constitution with the Bill of Rights, but that also lends credibility to scum like the Breitbart crowd.

          John Brennan and this administration's stance toward intelligence and the "war on terror" deserve no shortage of criticism. But the existence of Breitbart and a right-wing noise machine whose entire purpose is to engage in any tactic, no matter how low or dishonest, to destroy anyone with a D after their name is also a major problem for this country and our future.

          The use of Breitbart's irrelevant grounds for criticism of the administration's "war on terror" only emboldens and legitimizes the Breitbart right-wing hate machine, when we should be devoted to delegitimizing and ultimately dismantling that machine.

          "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

          by JamesGG on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 07:07:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site