TNR today:
Many left-wing bloggers are struggling to survive financially and would love to begin earning salaries as political operatives.
Heck, yeah. That DOES pay more than being a senior software developer at a Fortune 500 company, right?
It pays WHAT? Forget it.
All of which can unquestionably be laid directly at the doorstep of the crazed hatemongers on the right. But will we ever see that aspect of the situation in the press? Dream on.
We can all only hope the right's hatred destroys them before it destroys the rest of us.
From the SisterShip:
DNC chairman Howard Dean gave a fiery speech in Florida yesterday, with at least one zinger aimed at Rep. Katherine Harris that's sure to rile up her weary supporters in the GOP base. "This is not Russia and she is not Stalin," Dean told a crowd of Democratic supporters Wednesday, comparing "Pink Sugar" herself to the infamous autocratic Soviet leader who was responsible for the deaths of millions.
I hate to be picky, boys, because I know you wanted to get in that crack about Dean being crazy, but would a little context be too much to ask in a progressive news blog?
And permit me to say that just because you boys had never heard the common slang for Sweet'n'Low, that doesn't exactly make her odd for using the term, and it really isn't a very good mocking nickname for her, since all it does is point out that you had never heard this common expression.
The degree of left hatred toward Joe sometimes betrays something deeper. One can see it on the threads on left wing web sites where they routinely refer to "Holy Joe" and charge him with dual loyalty to Israel. Anti-Semitism will often not speak its name directly, but there is a distinct undercurrent that may explain some of the irrational venom.
OK. Now I'm angry. No more Mr. Nice Sundog.
From the sistership:
Late, Late Update: Reader LM thinks he's solved the "pink sugar" mystery: "Surely, she must be referring to Sweet N Low, which comes in a pink-colored packet."
Well, duhh! You guys need any help over there?
I applaud the Not Guilty verdict in the Andrea Yates case, as much as I sigh over the fact that the real verdict will go right over the heads of those who need to understand it: religious beliefs are by definition not-sane, and when fully internalized, the results are indistinguishable from insanity.
The Democratic Leadership Council employs as one of their chief, most accessible spokesmen Marshall Wittman ("The Bull Moose") who today proclaimed his support for McCain for president in 2008.
If you are wondering why an organization with the supposed goal of electing Democrats employs a spokesman who quite openly stabs them in the back, here is a page where you can ask the DLC just what's up with that.
The Moose has made official what we knew all along: he simply isn't a Democrat. Quoting today's column:
The Moose reveals his political affiliation.... The truth is that both parties are failing the American people. The Republicans put the donor class before the national interest...And the Democrats are more focused on their rage against the President than forging a politics of national unity...Given the structure of our political system, it is highly unlikely that there will be a serious third party in the foreseeable future. That is why the Moose will pick and choose stalwart national greatness politicians regardless of their party affiliation.
Who could have a problem with that? A perfectly sane outlook. As long as, umm, your day job is not an advisor to the Democratic Party.
Besides that, it's a rather obvious telegraph message that he'll be supporting Lieberman even if he runs as an independent. So there's THAT question answered.
The Democratic Leadership Council must now part ways with the Moose or have it be a known, documented fact that the DLC doesn't really care about Democrats so much as pushing an ideology.
What's it going to be, DLC?
You know what doesn't help, Marshall? People who are supposedly Democrats who promulgate and keep alive this dastardly lie for their own selfish ideological reasons. Like, for instance and in particular, yourself, Moosie. Half of each column of yours seems devoted to keeping alive the lies about the unhinged left. Why not take your own advice and quit spreading this vile meme?
We all know why, of course. Because, like your soulmate Karl Rove, it serves your interests to vilify the left.
I know, I said I wasn't going to blog about Lebanon. But I think Matthew Yglesias's post about "The Silence of the Blogs" deserves a response.
I'm an extremely minor player so maybe my feelings aren't representative of anyone but myself, but here's why I think I don't blog about the situation, as clearly as I can state it.
First of all, I try not to blog about things I don't fully understand, and I certainly don't understand the dynamics of the Middle East. If I were a Republican, of course, I wouldn't let this stop me from having a loud opinion, but Democrats tend to be a little more thoughtful.
Other considerations are: already too much heat and not enough light on the subject; it's one of those subjects where people who DO have strong opinions are disinclined to consider the points of the opposition, so why add to the noise level; and the fact that a blog might have some miniscule effect on a domestic event, but blogging about the Middle East is mere baying at the moon.
Add to that that the people who ARE blogging about it seem in a constant state of hair-on-fire.
Actually, my views are nothing like Adesnik's point. As the days go by, even a know-nothing like myself can see that something's wrong here. I can't support either side. I began by thinking "good for Israel". They are absolutely entitled to defend themselves and strike a hard retribution for the kidnappings, and that's exactly what they appeared to begin by doing, in my humble, uninformed opinion.
But as the days go by it is clear that something else is going on. It's clear that too many civilians and targets having nothing to do with Hezbollah are being targeted; it is clear that Lebabon is being purposely, systematically destroyed. It is clear that both sides are committing real, actionable war crimes.
Allow me to express the understatement that I have a problem with that.
