Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for September 21, 2008
September 20, 2008
September 22, 2008
Transcript:
Mark: Can I hold it? Woman: If you're careful. Mark: Wow... still warm to the touch! Woman: Remarkable, isn't it? Mark: Time for another visit from Library of Congress archivist Violet McPhee! What do you have for us today, Violet? Woman: An exquisite new acquisition, Mark... the founding document of the modern hate-speech movement - Newt Gingrich's famous GOPAC memo! In it, the Speaker instructs Republican candidates to smear their opponents with words like "sick, disgrace, corrupt, cheat, decay, pathetic, radical, traitor, greed, anti-family" and so on! The GOPAC memo is the Magna Carta of attack politics. It codified the toxic rhetoric that came to define an era! Mark: Fascinating... Woman: By the way, that's the Speaker's original copy - it's an extremely valuable acquisition! Mark: Even with the discoloration? Woman: Well, those are original mud stains - much prized by curators!
IamNoMan about 16 years ago
Whaddya bet someone at APA approved that list, wink wink nudge nudge?
longtimecomicsfan about 16 years ago
It’s still warm because of the toxicity
pschearer Premium Member about 16 years ago
Wow, America’s so lucky no leftist ever slimed a conservative.
Eugeno about 16 years ago
Yes - especially since there was/is such a preponderance of conservative example to draw upon. Yet ad hominem is still an invalid rhetorical tactic - too bad hardly anyone has had the opportunity to study it any more, since forensic speech has largely gone away in the schools, mostly because of conservative budget cuts.
runar about 16 years ago
You can see parts of it yourselves at http://web.utk.edu/~glenn/GopacMemo.html and http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1276
margueritem about 16 years ago
runar, where did you find that? Is it serious, or a joke? If it’s not a joke whoever wrote it is right on the money.
tobybartels about 16 years ago
Grokenstein, you've said that before, but you've never answered my question: who said that?
Nobody that I know stumped for Nader in 2000 but is stumping for Obama today. (To vote is one thing, of course, but to actively campaign is another.) So who are these progressive flip-floppers???
Edit: I've read elsewhere that Michael Moore stumped for Nader in 2000 but is stumping for Obama in 2008. But he'd already flipped in 2004 to stump for Kerry, so he doesn't fit Grok's pattern.
Surely there must be somebody who does, but I don't think that it's common!