WILLisms.com: The Right Hand Of Satan Survives Assassination Attempt

« Going To Africa To Climb Mt. Kilimanjaro, Be Back Soon... | WILLisms.com | Wednesday Caption Contest: Part 93 »

The Right Hand Of Satan Survives Assassination Attempt

Why, oh why, do they hate Dick Cheney so?

The left, that is, not the Taliban.

It can't be because he was a draft dodger, because the left has nothing at all against draft dodgers - even ones who start illegal, preemptive unilateral wars (i.e., Bill Clinton).

It can't be because he swears a lot. After all, who swears more than leftists? Or Hillary Clinton for that matter?

It can't be because he got a DWI. For all the leftists who think that is a bad, bad thing, I have one word: Chappaquiddick.

And for those who think his relationship with Halliburton is such a terrible thing, I have news for you - contrary to what you read at the Huffington Post, Halliburton is not, in fact, the black hole singularity of all evil in the universe.

It can't be because he actually likes JOOS and cares about Israel. Hell, I bet some of you leftists out there know some jews yourself! You might even be one!

I feel like I have said it a million times - the left blogosphere is far nastier, puerile and stoopid than anything found on the right. Isn't this exactly what the Amanda Marcotte deal taught us? Oh, but the collective personalities that are Glenn Greenwald warns us against 'cherrypicking' hateful comments to somehow prove that leftists are inordinately vile (and sorry, Glenn, if I can't squeeze out a tear if any Iranian nuclear scientists meet an untimely end). Talk about low hanging fruit. You can't surf through the leftist blogosphere without being assaulted by f-bombs, infantile political 'reasoning' and constant, unrelenting demonization of all things Republican. So naturally, all of their spite aimed at Dick Cheney is vastly overblown and way out of proportion to any faults that guy actually has.

Why all the leftist hate?

Glad you asked! Apparently, when there is a chicken in every pot, there is peace in the land, and a full gas tank in the hybrid, there remains this unfulfilled longing to have an enemy, some kind of enemy, to rail against. Stanley Kurtz, in reviewing Peter Wood’s new book, A Bee in the Mouth: Anger in America Now tells us that "Americans must now imagine and oppose oppressive authorities or hateful enemies, even where none exist. The newly unbounded American self, says Wood, is a ghostlike figure, perpetually in search of “something solid against which it can prove its own existence.” New Anger, Wood concludes, “is the desperately intense effort of these ghosts to feel real.”

Not everyone agrees with Wood's analysis, and in fact Jamie Malanowski complains that, no, anger is good!

When a man who ran as a moderate conservative governs from the far right [heh, if only! - ed.] after winning an election he has arguably lost, when he lies about the reasons for launching a war and then criminally bungles the management of that war in such a way that it will redound to the country’s disadvantage for at least a generation, I think folks are entitled to be miffed. I also think that after a man takes an oath to faithfully execute the laws of the country, and then takes another oath to always tell the truth, and then tells lies, people are entitled to get a little hot under the collar. Moreover, when one of the corporately underwritten political parties who run this country gets us into a quagmire of a war, and the other corporately underwritten political parties can’t get us out, I think all of us are entitled to be righteously, Old Testament Yahwehly, smite-them-with-a-thunderboltly pissed off. But maybe that’s just me.

Yeah, actually, it is just you Jamie - because there is not one scintilla of truth in anything you have written there. Actually, I suspect Jamie secretly supports Wood, and has graciously written an article to illustrate Wood's point about needing to invent enemies.

Update: Well ain't this rich. The 'cherrypicked' comments are falling from the tree so fast and furiously that Arianna decided to do a little ethical cleansing on scores of the egregious comments to salvage some semblence of nascent decency over at HuffPo. Too late for that, I think.

Posted by Ken McCracken · 27 February 2007 05:23 PM

Comments

Oh, you can find such hateful comments somewhere on the Right. It's just that the liberal mainstream is as fevered as the conservative fringes. Does anyone ever hear about Falwell and Robertson except when they say something particularly egregious? But Kennedy, Durbin, Waters, Carter, Clinton - these people of the left can say things of absolutely jaw-dropping bigotry and get taken seriously.

Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at February 27, 2007 05:46 PM

Ken...I think your James Carville sketches need to come out. AND you should whip up a few new ones of Huffington...

Posted by: zsa zsa at February 27, 2007 06:02 PM

I've always been particularly astonished at the hate directed toward Cheney.

Back in the day (1980s), Cheney was considered a smart, fair guy. Something of a straight shooting power broker in the senate, respected for his intelligence and integrity by both sides. He was brought on to Bush's ticket as V.P. to balance things - the old trusted Washington hand next to neophyte Bush.

But the left started the meme that Bush was stupid. Once he beat them in the general election, for the stupid meme to stay alive, there had to be a power behind the throne. Bush was still stupid, but also a puppet.

Cheney fit the bill. The teeth gritting smile didn't help. Rove was also demonized.

So Cheney is hated and evil just because the left simply couldn't admit that Bush wasn't stupid.

Posted by: Big D at March 1, 2007 11:34 AM

Big D, I too have been astonished about that sterotype of Cheney. He seems really sweet to me. The political arena is a tough place to be. Especially today!

Posted by: zsa zsa at March 1, 2007 12:35 PM