So, our nation has fully accepted the fact that low-blow insults and childish retaliation is a-okay. The proof? Our House of Representatives have weighed in on what is and what is not acceptable when insulting the President.
In light of the national conversation of lawmakers' — ie, Joe Wilson's — personal outbursts, the House Rules Committee today weighed in on how Congressional leaders should and should not respond to Presidential or other governmental edicts. Here's a breakdown...
First and foremost, if you disagree with general policies, it's quite alright to refer to our government as "something hated and oppressive." Hoorah!
Looking to insult our elected officials? Well, now you can say that unnamed officials are "our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs." That will come in handy.
It is, for the record, unacceptable to call a presidential decree "intellectually dishonest." Well, for Congressional leaders, at least. The rest of you, have at it!
Has the Commander-in-Chief been sticking it around town? Well, you better shut your face, because it's inappropriate to refer to the President's "sexual misconduct." Somewhere, someway, Bill Clinton's nodding his head. Which one remains open to debate — but we can't go on...
If you're a Congressional leader and want to insult the President's message, it's totally cool if you refer to said message as a "disgrace to the country." Use said phrase wisely...
Did the President just veto something you support? Well, tough shit, because Congressional leaders cannot describe such legislative shoot-downs as "cowardly."
Do you disagree with the President's policy? Well, that's fine, but don't you dare claim that he's "giving aid and comfort to the enemy." That's just wrong and, we're sure, misguided.