How did the left get so extreme?

Here’s a pretty good reaction to the recent Osama tape and the increasing severity of mainstream leftist rhetoric:

Is there any doubt that some bootleg DVD or videotape of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" made it to a remote mountain village somewhere near the Afghan-Pakistan border?
Now we hear Osama
saying, "It never occurred to us that he, the commander in chief of the country, would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone, because he thought listening to a child discussing her goats was more important."

Was the story of Bush's seven minutes in the schoolhouse really well known or a hot topic of discussion before Moore's movie came out? Is there any doubt that if not Osama, then one of his flunkies watched that movie and excitedly repeated the story to his spiritual leader, bubbling with excitement that even American filmmakers were exposing the foolishness of the Crusader Bush?

Last night, I heard secondhand that a left-of-center friend said, during a discussion about the tape, “Well, now I actually agree with bin Laden, I mean, the stuff he said about Bush.”
It was probably meant as a joke, or as a statement of irony. I wasn’t there, so I don’t want to draw conclusions about the statement’s meaning, and apparently the topic of conversation shifted so that no one could really analyze what that speaker meant.
But I have little doubt that in some other corners of our country, a statement like that was probably said and wasn’t a joke, or wasn’t ironic.

There was an old saying about politics stopping at the water’s edge. Over the last three years or so, we have seen that concept obliterated. We’ve seen a truly unparalleled deluge of criticism of the president that well beyond policy differences. He is tarred as a war criminal, a fool, an idiot, a warmonger, a man who trades blood for oil, a mass murderer of innocent civilians, a stooge of sinister corporate interests, a puppet of Cheney, a terrorist himself, the anti-Christ, the second coming of Hitler, a slave to Ariel Sharon, an anti-Muslim hatemonger… and I’m sure I’ve left out plenty.

The far left hates George W. Bush with a raging fury. So does al-Qaeda. Was it really so shocking that the rhetoric of the former would eventually be taken up by the latter?
This tape should cause many on the left to stare into the mirror for a long time and ask, “What have I turned into? How did I become so reflexively partisan, so blinded by rage, so intemperate in my rhetoric that my own arguments are being echoed by a man who planned and enjoyed the mass murder of Americans?”

“How the hell did I reach the point where I agree with Osama bin Laden on Bush?”


Once again, Frontline rules

Frontline, one of my favorite t.v. news magazine type shows, just premiered "Rumsfeld's War." It was a really fascinating disection of the inner workings and political maneuverings of the Pentagon and Bush's cabinet. Basically, it showed how Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, and others in the "Vulcan," neo-con intelligentsia and bureacracy systematically dismantled and replaced the military establishment, which by and large rejected their small, fast army and their "they'll greet us as liberators, democracy will flourish" utiopianism. It also showed how Rumsfeld outmaneuvered Powell in the battle for Bush's ear and in the battle for control over "post-war" Iraq. It was really, really cool. They have Wolfowitz on camera stating (paraphrase), in response to Gen. Sinzecki's contention that reconstruction in Iraq would require several hundred thousand troops, that "it's hard to believe that the reconstruction will require more man-power than the war." But, in fact, that's exactly what most military people thought! It shows how the neo-con naivete has hijacked the power structure in this country.
In other news, I'm coming to Boston soon, so Bostonians, prepare for your enema.


Please don't vote for Dummy

For the last 4 years I've tried in vain to convince people that Bush is not a moron and in fact is probably more academically accomplished and intelligent than John Kerry. I then stumbled across this blog which analyzes all available academic and military records for both candidates and concludes that Bush probably has a higher IQ than Kerry. His analysis was apparently convincing enough that the NYTimes decided to run an article based on it. The money quote:

Linda Gottfredson, an I.Q. expert at the University of Delaware, called it a creditable analysis said she was not surprised at the results or that so many people had assumed that Mr. Kerry was smarter. "People will often be misled into thinking someone is brighter if he says something complicated they can't understand," Professor Gottfredson said.

This is yet another example where the real John Kerry isn't as impressive as the manufactured educated, nuanced war hero image he'd like us to accept. Do we really want a president who finds it necessary to regularly make himself appear more impressive than he really is? Can the world handle 4 years of bad Robert Frost knock off poetry written to impress us? Enjoy:

"I had a talk with a deer today/we met upon the road some way … between his frequent snorts/He asked me if I sought his pelt/cause if I did he said he felt/quite out of sorts!"