I tell people that you have to read what liberals say on occasion so that you know the current line, but I advise that you always do it on an empty stomach because ninety-nine times out of a hundred, what you read will make you sick.
But on rare occasions, you come across something so amazing it makes it all worthwhile. And today is two of those days.
The first is a commentary on a site called Common Dreams. I have no idea how prominent this site is in Liberaland, but what matters is that the writer is far more literate than most liberals – which makes his hysterics far more exhilarating.
His name is David Michael Green, and he starts out by scolding liberals for not thinking. After the first few lines, I thought I was about to read something profound, but in the next breath, he blames the lack of liberal thinkers… on Republicans.
Before you know it, liberals are helpless victims of Karl Rove and what follows is a litany of why they shouldn't be – but apparently, they can't help themselves, at least not without his assistance.
And Green dances like a ballerina as he hops from one unsubstantiated yet taken for granted "fact" to the next, each one supposedly stemming from the last… near as I could gather anyway. And as he dances, he leaves behind an itemization of all the liberal arguments that don't hold any water whatsoever. He apparently thinks that stringing them all together will browbeat the reader into agreement, and I have no doubt it all makes perfect sense to locals like Snowie and Aput.
I'm disappointed that I can't parse it all, but that would take days, and it would spoil the fun you're gonna have reading it as one continuous rant, but there are several things I'd like to note.
The first is that when I wasn't looking, Green advises that we went past a million civilian casualties in Iraq. I believe this tops Snowie's 600,000 reached only last week.
Somewhere in the second half of the piece, Mr. Green likens Republicans to Kindergärtners, and when he did, my jaw dropped. That was exactly what I was thinking about his reasoning and writing style. it's like a child having a tantrum, which, I believe, you'll find all the more amazing when you learn who Mr. Green is, and It's what really makes the whole thing memorable.
David Michael Green is a political science professor at Hofstra University. Which reminds me of a line that Max von Sydow utters in Hannah and Her Sisters: "Can you imagine the sort of a mind that watches wrestling?" Or emerges from Professor Green's course?
But if the above is the cake, what came next is the Icing – a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal by a guy calling himself John Kerry.
Remember that only the other day, Mr. Kerry said that the aftermath of Vietnam "didn't happen." Well, the botched joke wanted to clarify his statement.
It turns out what he meant was that the aftermath was not as bad as the war, and he may or may not have a point. The problem is that the aftermath affected people who may not have been affected if we'd continued to support South Vietnam, and -that- aftermath may have been much more favorable – but we'll never know.
What I found even more interesting is Kerry's desire to try to set the record straight. Here's a guy who believes he's never wrong, it's only that his words get misconstrued, and I can't wait for James Taranto's response to the Kerrygram.
It was Taranto whose comments about the Kerry statement irked provoked the response from the junior Senator, "Junitor" if you will, and it's Taranto who's in the same intellectual company as Mark Steyn and Christopher Hitchens, so Monday can't come soon enough.
Now the next item doesn't involve the printed word, but rather the spoken one, and it's about the immature and dangerous comments emanating lately from the Ill. Junitor, Barry Obama.
What's notable, aside from the obvious, is what started (for me) on Special Report with Brit Hume last Thursday when the discussion panel turned it's attention to Obo's incomprehensible Invasion of Pakistan Proclamation. It's not about the idle threat itself, but about one panelist's odd reaction to it.
The resident liberal, one Mara Liasson chose not to address the specific remark. Instead she focused her broader attention on the overall speech which she characterized as "muscular."
What an odd word, wouldn't you say? And it didn't flow from her mouth any better than it reads here. Very bewildering I thought, but then she's a liberal so that is, after all, the rule.
But on Friday it became clear. That's when Rush Limbaugh presented a montage of broadcasters and commentators who all had used, as part of their assessments of the Obotched joke, the word (say it with me now) MUSCULAR!
It was a true gravitas moment! The talking points had gone out, but from whom? And just how stupid are all of these liberals? Well, OK, we can't know that unless and until they ever hit bottom. But we do know that all either marched in step or they were to unmuscular about finding their own synonym.
Finally, and please forgive the length, but there was one more item I felt was worth noting. It involves the Kos convention and the fact that all the Democrat candidates are ignoring the Daily Hate to speak at it.
During a panel discussion entitled The Military and Progressives, which was apparently captured on video, a man in a military uniform, wanted to argue that the surge was working.
The moderator apparently totally unaware of the meaning of the word "moderator," went ballistic, closed the discussion, and stomped offstage. It was Wesley Clark who tried to explain the whole thing and concluded with:
"… it was an uncomfortable few moments, and seemed fairly contrary to the spirit of the panel to roar down the member of the military who tried to speak with a contrary voice."
It was good of the general not to whitewash the behavior, but it also kind of makes you wonder what universe Mr. Clark has been residing in of late?
By the way, the article didn't provide the name of the moderator, but my sources say it was Jack Murtha…