Chris Wallace smacks Dick Durbin over Barack Obama’s debt rhetoric hypocrisy.

I personally think that maybe Chris Wallace shouldn’t have done this to Senator Dick Durbin. Executive summary of “this:” Wallace asked Durbin why it was that President Barack Obama in 2013 declared that our $16 trillion debt was “sustainable,” when Candidate Barack Obama in 2008 declared that $9 trillion debt was “unpatriotic;” and Durbin answered the question by declaring to Wallace that Durbin had had a dry night and did not need to go potty.

Note that I am trying to give the semantic gist of the conversation, here: as Doug Power notes, Durbin didn’t even try to answer the question.

Anyway, again: I’m almost upset at Chris Wallace for this smacking around of Durbin.  It is unkind to remind those who are more than one standard deviation below average intelligence that they cannot in fact function in modern society without a full-time caretaker.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

4 thoughts on “Chris Wallace smacks Dick Durbin over Barack Obama’s debt rhetoric hypocrisy.”

  1. Frankly this is a problem with both party’s insiders. When it’s their guy doing it, it’s fine. When it’s the other team’s guy, it’s the end of western civilization. Nine trillion was terrible. One of W.’s great failings was the continued expansion of Federal spending levels. Sixteen trillion is even worse, of course, espceially when there is no plan to do anything about it. ever.

  2. We don’t call Durbin the “Eddie Haskell of Illinois politics” without reason…
    It’s not that Durbin isn’t smart .. or at least somewhat clever, in a manipulative way .. it’s that you cannot trust a single thing that comes out of his mouth.

    1. That is good, I was going to call him the Jose Jalepeno of politics. I see his lips moving but I hear David Plouffe’s voice.

  3. Synchronistically, I am currently reading Churchill’s History of the Second World War (spoiler – it’s currently August 1939 and things are shortly going to be Teh Suck) and I was struck by a line in his description of Molotov (paraphrased as the book is elsewhere at the moment): “Communication with him on substantive issues was useless, and eventually ended with lies and insults.” It’s like the man was prescient, or something…

Comments are closed.