Monday, July 03, 2006

AlterNet: Blogs: The Mix: The bed-wetters of the right have become parodies of themselves

The bed-wetters of the right have become parodies of themselves
By Joshua Holland
Posted on July 2, 2006, Printed on July 3, 2006

A few weeks ago, I followed a link to a site called David Brooks is Smart to read his silly column about how DailKos founder Marcos Moulitsas has some strange mind-control powers with which he enforces a rigid discipline on the left blogosphere -- or whatever.

When I saw "From the tiny mind of David Brooks" in the “about this blog” section, I knew it was a parody site. I read the column and had a chuckle, and then I had a friend who has Times Select send me the real column.

Lo and behold, it turned out that it had been the real column after all -- it was the same.

The right has become so paranoid — and often so filled with mindless hatred and bigotry — that, quite frankly, it's pretty much impossible to differentiate between real "conservatives" and the many wingnut parodies that have sprung up around the internet. Maybe the parody sites should close up shop.

Seriously, when She Who Will Not Be Named On These Pages says she wishes women had never gotten the vote or prattles on about how Canada sent troops to Vietnam, and a bozo radio host who regularly appears on Fox News says she'd "have no problem with [NYT Editor Bill Keller] being sent to the gas chamber," what's the point of parody?

(Jebus, even Eugene Debs was "only" jailed for a couple of years under the Espionage Act for undermining the war effort back in 1918.)

If you think I'm exaggerating, let's play a game. Below, are two excerpts courtesy of the gifted wingnutoligists at Sadly, No!. See if you can figure out which is the parody, and which comes from a genuine right-wing blogger.

Number one:

In a victory for terrorists and their liberal sympathizers, five members of the United States Supreme Court have ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo deserve trials just like American citizens. I don't know how anyone can argue that this does not "aid and abet" our enemies, which is the very definition of treason. Some people are arguing that President Bush should simply ignore the decision and tell the Supreme Court as Andrew Jackson once did that now that they have made their decision they should try to enforce it. Others are suggesting Congress pass a law negating the Court's decision. No doubt, the Bush Administration is already at work thinking up other ways to get around the decision. But I think the best plan would be to declare these five Supreme Court justices themselves enemy combatants.

Number two:

It may not be a popular or politically correct thing to say - though I've never courted popularity or embraced political correctness - but the editors and reporters at the New York Times ought to go to be put to death for their crimes against this country. The reporting of classified information about covert operations against terrorism - including the CIA's secret prisons, the NSA's Terrorist Surveillance Program, and the effort to monitor terrorist banking transactions through SWIFT are crimes against this nation at least as great as those of Aldrich Ames or the Rosenbergs. In reporting these vital national secrets, the media - and it's not just the Times, I'll add, they're merely the worst offenders - are virtually acting as spies on behalf of our enemies.

They're indistinguishable in their overall level of insanity, and that is, all snark aside, really quite frightening.

Now, imagine for a second if someone on the left suggested that Bush not be impeached, but hanged (which is actually in keeping with the punishment meted out at Nuremberg). They'd become Exhibit A -- proof positive that the left is unhinged.

Have you guessed which is the parody? The answer's in the comments.

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The first one is the parody.