Fun with Straw...

Over the weekend on ABC's This Week, after being pressed by Staphy about the lack of any mention of the phrase, NOOOT propped up this beauty:

You're asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there clearly are people in America who believe in -- in establishing euthanasia, including selective standards.

So, what other public policy decisions should be determined by this test?

Can you prop up a bigger Strawthing?

I mean there are clearly people in America who believe in __(Blank)___...so we can't ___(Blank)___

We can't lower the drinking age, because I mean there are clearly people in America who believe in infant alcohol use.

any others come to mind?

Let's talk about restructuring for a moment, shall we?

To the Senators from the Deep South who decided that clinging to a dying ideology was more important than thousands of middle class jobs:

I couldn't help but notice that many of your home states receive much more federal revenue than you pay in taxes. Hardly the model of self-sufficient, pull yourself up by your bootstraps-tuitiveness, eh? Yet somehow you manage to pony up massive subsidies in order to lure automotive manufacturers from overseas into your states. In other words, the hippy-dippy West Coast, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, and yes, Michigan - the very people you just completely fucked over - are making it possible for your state governments to give massive handouts to automotive companies (some based in "socialist," big gummint countries with free shriek! health care) that are directly competing with the domestic industry.

Let's say we withhold highway dollars, medicare funds, and social security payments until your states "restructure" those sweetheart deals. What's that? That will hurt people whose jobs and livelihoods depend on the flow of those federal dollars? That didn't seem to keep you from fucking anyone over, now did it?

What Digby said...

Wobs, I feel for you. I have a fundamentalist cousin who sounds much like your sister.
On that topic, I just came across this at Hullabaloo:

Rove's job, and by extension McCain's job, is to basically nuke reality and leave everything open to question. In a world where there is an objective reality, Republicans can't function and certainly can't run their electoral strategy. They need two things - ignorance and an unknowable truth. That's been true since well before the Mayberry Machiavellis arrived in Washington and will be true long after they leave.

And so Sarah Palin's ignorance of the Bush Doctrine is OK, because most Americans don't know what it means either. In fact, the less knowledge a world leader has, the better, because they can't be muddled up with all those facts about how occupied countries historically resist occupation or how countries become interdependent or which country wields power over their sphere of influence, or such related nonsense. Candidates who have little interest in foreign affairs are "authentic" and the kind of reg'lar folks we need to rule with their gut-level belief.

If ruling from the gut is good, voting from the gut must be divine...

Enter the Strawman

Anyone else notice how McLame/PaLIEn aren't campaigning against any known arguments?

McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent wants to teach babys sex ed... we oppose.
McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent wants to raise everyone's taxes...we think that is unwise.
McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent doesn't even want us to drill for water...we like very much.
McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent thinks we should coddle all terrarists...we would liquify them, my friends
McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent supports all earmarks (even Alaska's)....we have always opposed all thing earmarkish.
McLame/PaLIEn: My opponent wants to put lipstick on all pigs....we are against it.

Is there a trend? How does one combat such tactics?