Karl’s Roving Standards
Nothing brings out Republican hypocrisy like a nice, juicy U.S. Supreme Court vacancy. Take Karl Rove, for instance, on Obama’s potential nominees to replace Justice David Souter:
Karl Rove rails against the possible nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor because “her opinions…have been very liberal.” But when Sandra Day O’Connor retired, Rove said the opposition has a responsibility to approve judges who are qualified, even if they disagree with their views.
And that brings me to my latest double limerick:
Karl’s Roving Standards
By Madeleine Begun Kane
Rove’s memory’s certainly short.
Back when dealing with names for the Court,
He said Dems must not nix
Any Bush judgeship picks
Based on views that they failed to support.
But now that the tables are turned,
He says Dem nominees must be spurned
If Republicans think
That their politics stink.
Consistency? Karl? Unconcerned!
Tags: Bush, David Souter, Hypocrisy, Judiciary Satire, Karl Rove, Obama, Republicans Humor, Sandra Day O’Connor, Sotomayor, Supreme Court
Because his memory’s short, he’s betting ours is, too. What a buncha jokers. Great limerick! I like your double style which ties in with two-faced – so much to be said!
Actually, he’s perfectly consistent – all arguments support one consistent theme: Only conservatives should be allowed on the court.
Tis not hypocrisy, Madame Kane
For the man who serves as reality’s thane.
His job it is to say what’s true
And what is not is et by grues,
Then rinse, repeat, and turn again.
Thanks so much Tumblewords. I like your point about my double style tying in with two-faced, though I can’t take credit for thinking of it. :)
You make a good point, Avedon.
And Charles, thanks for joining in on the limerick fun.
Madeleine,
I love your work, even when I disagree with your politics. Included your marginally on-topic limerick in my latest carnival. However, I have to say that whenever a partisan accuses another partisan of hypocrisy, as *ahem* the talented Ms. Kane does here, the riposte is always absurdly easy to craft – just flip-flop the argument or in this case – the verse:
Citizen Kane’s Court
by mw
Kane’s memory is equally short.
Back when dealing with names for the Court,
She demanded Dems nix
Any Bush judgeship picks
Based on views that she failed to support.
But now that the tables are turned,
She feels no nominee should be spurned
as long as Madeleine is feeling
their politics are appealing.
Consistency? Mads? Unconcerned!
Thanks mw. :)