Home » Holder: Obama’s sin eater

Comments

Holder: Obama’s sin eater — 10 Comments

  1. How much dreck can a wretched wretch munch before the wretched wretch retches? Five times — real fast.

  2. When necessary, plaintiff attorneys “polarize the case,” which, if successful, wins by forcing defendants to reveal their real arguments.

    When a defendant lacks the truth for his defense, all he has to do is throw enough doubt and suspicion on the plaintiff’s case so that the burden of proof is not met. The prosecution must makes the fact finders see the gamesmanship of the defense as it tries to remain in murky waters. Or, even better, the prosecution obtains admissions, previously only implied, which show the true nature of the defense arguments are that plaintiffs are liars and cheats.

    Of course a political issue is already polarized, but if there is some level of truth or standard still adhered to by all, then forcing the underlying but unstated argument/justification into the open will get results. The unstated justifications, in Obama’s regime, are mainly two: One, I am Obama and can do anything because they are the enemy, and, well, I am Obama; and two, all must obey.

    These two justifications find acceptance in a way too high proportion of our populace, but there may still be a significant percentage of even liberals who resist the complete domination of liberal fascism. They may have sympathies for it, but in the end, when the full truth is admitted and the proud and aggressive leader is exposed, even most liberals will find the two justifications distasteful, even if only for the fact they themselves can brook no impostor on their own throne.

  3. IMO an interesting sidebar to this entire Rosen-gate affair (if I may) is that not only has the tactic backfired on the administration but it positively redounds to Fox News.

    Many of the reporters now calling for “heads to roll” were never fond of Fox News to begin with (Huffington Post, anyone?); many of them joined in the chorus that Fox was not a ‘real’ news organization, and many of tacitly agreed if only by their silence. I believe that this is undoubtedly why a Fox reporter was individually chosen over a traditional network figure.

    Now, attacking the govt and tacitly or outrightly defending Fox News the message is clear; “Fox News is one of us! How dare you illegally attack one of us!”

    Coming our of this fracas, I think we will see more credibility given to Fox News reports than prior to the scandal. At the very least, no journalist can now return to the “Fox News really isn’t a news organization” meme. If so, this is a very good omen, indeed.

  4. Can’t help but notice that all three of Turley’s examples of previous “sin eaters” are Republicans. The Turleys of the world are shameless, but transparent.

    Expletive voluntarily deleted.

  5. Can’t help but feel that in this case “sin eater” is just a more polite term for the real menu.

  6. attributed to Iowahawk:
    After an extensive self investigation, Eric holder has arrested himself as part of a DOJ sting; and then releases self after forgetting to read self Miranda rights!

  7. There was an episode of Rod Serling’s Night Gallery back in the 70s about sin eaters. It starred Richard Thomas (John-Boy of The Waltons.)

  8. Novel by Alice Thomas Ellis. I haven’t read it, but have read two other books by her, one fiction and one non-, and liked them both.

    In passing: odd that Turley would specify “18th century.” Such a custom would surely have come into being much earlier than in that time of rising skepticism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>