I think Republicans should stop using "legitimate". I do not think it means what they think it means - Edit 3
Before modification by Joel at 16/03/2011 07:04:58 PM
I saw this in Doonesbury's "Say What?" section:
This has to be a tough call for the environmentalists around the world. They're scrambling now to blame this on global warming...Much of the damage seems to have happened in that part of Japan most heavily involved in manufacturing cars. So do environmentalists cheer or do they pretend to be saddened by this? It's a legitimate question.
This has to be a tough call for the environmentalists around the world. They're scrambling now to blame this on global warming...Much of the damage seems to have happened in that part of Japan most heavily involved in manufacturing cars. So do environmentalists cheer or do they pretend to be saddened by this? It's a legitimate question.
Peter King thinks terrorism against those he dislikes "legitimate" and Limbaugh thinks a question about invented allegations are; ah, rhetoric....
Exactly what events in Japan does he think environmentalists are "scrambling" to blame on global warming? The earthquake? The tsunami? The worsening dangers at the nuclear power plant? Which environmentalists are involved in his "scramble"; does he have any examples or did he just pull that out of his ample posterior? THOSE are legitimate questions. Accusing foes of a position they haven't taken just to rhetorically ask which reprehensible (and imaginary) choice they'll make is an ILlegitimate question, by definition, little more than slander (we all know Rushs feelings on THAT.
)