Annals of Republican racism, latest installment
Why, I hadn’t thought of that before:
…the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank suggests on Al Sharpton that [Sebelius] wasn’t threatened with impeachment (as Holder was) because she’s white.
Of course [slaps hand on forehead].
Or perhaps it’s because she has white hair?
Personally, I think it’s because she looks like Peter O’Toole, but I already failed to get much traction on that.
“…. she looks like Peter O’Toole,”
You run that up and it is shot down in flames. So you run it up again, and again , AND AGAIN!
And she still does not look like Peter O’Toole…. but you just can’t let it go…. you keep circling around to it over and over as if saying it a thousand times will expunge your error.
But it won’t. And what is more IT NEVER WILL!
Accept this error and move on…. It is for the best. Do it for the children!
vanderleun:
You’re just filled with bile and envy because you don’t look like Peter O’Toole.
The difference was that Sibelius was visibly uncomfortable at lying, whereas Holder didn’t display any discomfort at lying- only at being caught.
When she is as dead as O’Toole, I’ll jump on the Neo band wagon, per say.
Milbank, doing his usual toady dance. Has he ever not fallen in line with the Dems meme du jour?
Zombies do as they are told. Many of them congregate in California.
I see the Peter O’Toole resemblance since you pointed it out but on him it looked good. Not on her.
Richard Burton said Peter O”Toole was a great actor with extraordinary looks. He said he looked like a “secretary bird.” That is an African bird with long, long legs and a thin appearance.
Perhaps the reason she was never threatened with impeachment is that her unlikeable and ever-bumbling presence as the poster girl for Obamacare has been such a great boon to Republican hopes for 2014.
OlderandWheezier,
I think most people figure she is not competent enough to commit a high crime or misdemeanor.
Or maybe it is because Sebelius promoted and tried to implement an agenda that, noxious though it may have been, was passed into law by the Congress and signed by the President.
Sure she was very slippery in testimony, and maybe they could nail her for perjury, misleading, or whatever term of choice they use. But, any prosecution is problematic because she can fall back on the argument that she was attempting–however ineptly–to carry out a law.
Holder, on the other hand, is sworn to enforce the laws. He deliberately does not enforce those laws that are contrary to his agenda, and does not pretend to do so. In certain instances, Fast & Furious for one, immigration laws for another, it could be charged, and perhaps proven, that he directed his department to subvert or break laws.
I believe that he has demonstrably lied to Congress, overtly obstructed their lawful business, and abused the powers of his office.
The comparison between the two is not close.
Seb was a useful tool, now mostly broken and needs replacement. Holder is a more refined tool.
I hope I wasn’t the only one who noticed the irony of making an accusation of racism “on Al Sharpton”.