I Think Our National Discourse is in Big Trouble
Sadly, it took me three paragraphs to discern that this was a parody:
Declare Supreme Court Justices Enemy Combatants
In a victory for terrorists and their liberal sympathizers, five members of the United States Supreme Court have ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo deserve trials just like American citizens. I don’t know how anyone can argue that this does not “aid and abet” our enemies, which is the very definition of treason. Some people are arguing that President Bush should simply ignore the decision and tell the Supreme Court as Andrew Jackson once did that now that they have made their decision they should try to enforce it. Others are suggesting Congress pass a law negating the Court’s decision. No doubt, the Bush Administration is already at work thinking up other ways to get around the decision. But I think the best plan would be to declare these five Supreme Court justices themselves enemy combatants.
It goes on for a while, but this is what finally tipped me off:
One fringe benefit of this plan is that once these Justices are no longer able to sit on cases, the Bush Administration can finally enact some of its agenda without having to worry about the Supreme Court acting as a roadblock. We will finally be able to reverse Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v. Texas, the Miranda decision, Brown v. The Board of Education and other mistaken rulings.
Could some clever person try sending this to Glenn Reynolds to see if he’ll give it a “Heh-Indizzle?” Cheers.
The second paragraph is really the giveaway:
Yah, I chanced upon that as well during a search for Hamdan/SCOTUS info. It’s a well-crafted parody, and had me going for a minute.
But I’m sure someone, somewhere is nodding vigorously and exclaiming whoops of “Damn straight!” in response to that parody.
Sadly, can’t extremists out-psycho any conceivable parody?
I hope a radio talk show host buys into it. . . that would be funny.
Glenn Reynolds would give it a hehindeedlydoodly whether he recognised it as a parody or not. Plausible deniability, after all, which is his approach to everything he says.
Genetic engineering could not produce a more practiced liar.
Genetic engineering could not produce a more practiced liar.
Are you sure that’s not where Glenn came from?
Hmm…………the fact that the blog is written by someone claiming his name is Jonathan Swift should be the giveaway right there.
Jonathan Swift was actually a damn kewl guy. He was the world’s first Professional Revolutionary, basically.
Are you sure that’s not where Glenn came from?
Well, in a more primitive sense, since the genetic engineering technology of which Glenn is the product was more along the lines of Aldous Huxley’s Bokanovsky’s Process (and not direct gene-manipulation per se), through which Reynold’s blood-surrogate got a little alcohol in it it (and if you don’t know what I mean, ask Ma Reynolds and her lover, Jack Daniels.)
Hark, I can hear the traditional cries of due process now, “Burn them! Burn them!”
I swear, Glenn’s a cyborg. I have precisely zero evidence to back it up, but I think he’s a cyborg sent back in time by George W. Bush’s great, great, great, great, great grandson to save his famous relative’s tarnished image by posting defenses of his every action on the Internets. But unfortunately there was a program glitch, and mostly the robot can only spout out “Heh” and “Indeed.” It seems transhumanism wasn’t all it was cracked up to be.
If you remember the dust-up over the “Top 50 Conservative Rock Songs”, Jon Swift wrote a parody post adding even more songs, as a joke. When the NRO moron who published the first group added more, he linked to it. I died of amusement/disbelief/loss-of-hope-for-humankind.
I swear, Glenn’s a cyborg. I have precisely zero evidence to back it up…
Save that anti-science hoo-hah for wooing the sweet Marie Jon’. I’d much rather go with the clay-eating and FAS.
I swear, Glenn’s a cyborg. I have precisely zero evidence to back it up…
… so he should be linking here soon.
Admit it, you just said something stupid you couldn’t back up for no other reason than to get an Instalanche. Didn’t you?
[…] Compare and contrast this passage with Jon Swift’s clever parody of wingnuttery. Are there any detectable content differences? […]
Admit it, you just said something stupid you couldn’t back up for no other reason than to get an Instalanche. Didn’t you?
You have no evidence for that.
Guess Glenn’ll be linking to your sorry ass too.
Jon Swift is brilliant. But I notice that he lists Sadly,No among the links on his site. I sense some asymmetry
We love Jonathan Swift, the blogger, particularly because, like Stephen Colbert, every now and then people actually think he’s serious and cite him in their support.
Sadly, can’t extremists out-psycho any conceivable parody?
I read somewhere a while ago, that something did happen at Y2K. Reality overtook satire, and that is why you can’t come up with a parody or satire that’s too outlandish to be believable. No matter what you make up, there’s something out there that’s serious that’s even more outlandish.
What parody?