The Bad Grammar of Hyper-Aggression

The Republicans let the nation know over and over that the real war for them is the war against the Democrats. The Bush administration says it's on the offensive against global terrrorism, but American policy in Iraq is an essentially defensive, keep casualties as low as possible, let's not have the war on the front page position. However, the administration and the Republican leadership keep the offensive going against the Democrats at all costs.

Today, Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia sent a note to Nancy Pelosi demanding to know if Pelosi and the minority leadership were keeping the Mark Foley scandal under wraps until just before the election. I would say "democratic" leadership, but Kingston insists on the bad grammar of "democrat leadership. Like most conservatives, Kingston assumes that ignorance and macho aggression are closely allied.

Here's the quote from Kingston's statement:

"Just as it must be determined whether any Republican members or political operatives were aware of and attempted to conceal Mr. Foley's activities, it must also be determined whether any Democrat members or political operatives were aware of and attempted to conceal these same activities."

I guess it's an interesting possibility, but Kingston has no more evidence that Pelosi was covering up the Foley scandal than the Bush administration had for WMD in Iraq.

The key point is that evidence and truth matter just as little for the Republican leadership in the U. S. anymore than they've mattered in Iraq--perhaps less. Perhaps the Bush administration and the Republican leadership would do better if they fought al-Qaeda with the same intensity they fight the Democrats.