The Washington Post had an incredibly chilling look inside the mind of the fringe left last week:
In the angry life of Maryscott O’Connor, the rage begins as soon as she opens her eyes and realizes that her president is still George W. Bush. The sun has yet to rise and her family is asleep, but no matter; as soon as the realization kicks in, O’Connor, 37, is out of bed and heading toward her computer.
Out there, awaiting her building fury: the Angry Left, where O’Connor’s reputation is as one of the angriest of all. “One long, sustained scream” is how she describes the writing she does for various Web logs, as she wonders what she should scream about this day.
She smokes a cigarette. Should it be about Bush, whom she considers “malevolent,” a “sociopath” and “the Antichrist”? She smokes another cigarette. Should it be about Vice President Cheney, whom she thinks of as “Satan,” or about Karl Rove, “the devil”? Should it be about the “evil” Republican Party, or the “weaselly, capitulating, self-aggrandizing, self-serving” Democrats, or the Catholic Church, for which she says “I have a special place in my heart . . . a burning, sizzling, putrescent place where the guilty suffer the tortures of the damned”?
Sadly, she isn’t alone. In fact, I’d argue that she’s probably representative of the average denizen of The Daily Kos or one of the other Democratic community sites. Now, there is no doubt that the right has its fringe lunatics as well, but the level of vitriol and abject hatred coming from the Left these days is absolutely shocking. O’Connor’s impotent rage seems to be the hallmark of the typical left-wing blogger these days. This hatred isn’t as much about policy as it is personal. It’s all about George W. Bush and his litany of sins, real and imagined. It isn’t a question of policy, a question of different aims, it’s the utter demonization of the other side.
The left side of the blogosphere has become a fever swamp of hate and irrationality – what value is a place like Eschaton to someone who doesn’t share it its strident anti-Bush convictions? Is a blog like that designed to persuade or to vent? Based on O’Connor’s own attitudes, the latter is clear.
The problem with hatred like this is that it doesn’t go away. And there’s nothing that a fanatic hates more than an apostate, which is why the Democratic Party is getting pulled farther and farther towards the fringes and moderates like Sen. Joe Lieberman are being punished for having the audacity of standing behind their principles. Does anyone really believe that all that anger will go away on January 21, 2009? Or will the left find new targets for their ire. Those who profit from this anger have every reason to keep fanning the flames of hatful partisanship – after all, that hate keeps their books flying off the shelves – how long will it be before that hatred turns on the party that helped spawn it?
The level of partisan hatred from the left is poisonous to rational civil discourse. The argument that “well, they do it too” is absolutely no excuse. If the left wants to have more than their own impotent rage, they’ll have to moderate themselves. Sadly, moderation seems to be in short supply these days.
Visit the Free Republic and see how relaxed the conversation is there compared to The Daily Kos. While there are no shortage of pissed off people on the latter website (anyone who isn’t pissed off isn’t paying attention), Maryscott O’Connor is a cartoonish representation of over-the-top partisan excess just as Ann Coulter on your side of the spectrum. Notice how conservatives are willing to give Coulter a mainstream bully pulpit to unleash her hate on the world, while the “liberal media” isn’t hitching their wagon to O’Connor’s trailer. That’s why she’s condemned to the op-ed ghetto of the blogosphere and the subject of ridicule, not adulation, by those flaming lefties at the Washington Post.
Thanks for the link and you’re right, tit for tattism doesn’t solve this.
What would solve this is conservative bloggers like you making some tiny effort to get past the language to see why people on the left are teed off. The anger on the right grew into eliminationist rhetoric (see Orcinus blog), while the left responded with vitriol. If you find us hard to read, maybe that’s because we’re goring some of your oxen. We do that well because we take the time to study your positions while the right, in general, just ignores the left or quibbles about our language.
You could as easily dismiss us by saying we all smell bad, although, as a matter of fact, that is what the right did with the anti-war movement of the ’60s.
Jay, take ANY topic and take a stand. I’ll reply, and we’ll see who can stick to substance longest — and who’s the first to retreat into rhetoric, out-of-context quotes, and/or spurious sources.
We ARE reading the blogs on the right, and that IS why we are so angry. From my perspective, the current debate goes something like this:
LEFT: Here’s what the right is saying, here’s the facts, here’s what I think.
RIGHT: Here’s the potty language the left is using to trash the blogosphere.
LEFT: Respond to my points!
RIGHT: Stop being a pottymouth!
Jay, I can do this without swearing a lot more easily than you can do it without rhetoric. Prove me wrong. Give me a link to a post you’re proud of, or pick a new topic and make your argument. I’m confident that you’ll prove each of my points in short order.
Mark, you’re funny–
“Notice how conservatives are willing to give Coulter a mainstream bully pulpit to unleash her hate on the world, while the “liberal media†isn’t hitching their wagon to O’Connor’s trailer”
Why would the MSM hitch to O’Commor? She’s hitched to them. To Michael Moore, Chris Matthews, George Clooney, Al Franken, Kanye West. Green Day, Keith Oberman….I can just kepp going, and going and going–and that’s with restricting myself to ‘media’ sources.
The left likes to pretend that it doesn’t engage in this sort of thing, that it was Republicans that brough political discourse low when they attacked Clinton.
But I remember what they did to Reagan. The choice words, the frivolous indictments. The endless cries of ‘idiot’, ‘too old’, ‘evil’–and again, I’m refraining from their precise wording.
I watched The first President Bush accede to Democrat demands, and break his promise, only to have those same Democrats excoriate him for breaking his promise
Newt was reviled from the moment he stepped on the national stage.
So give me a break.
Oh, and the article didn’t chastise O’Connor for her rhetoric or her anger, it highlighted it, to be sure–to give the MSM the tantalizing chance to voice their own feelings about Bush, if only in echoing the posters on various leftwing sites. But the real thrust of the article was merely wondering if sites like O’Connor’s accomplished anything besides serving as a vent…
Understand? The Post was wondering if O’Connor’s site did ENOUGH.
Jack, funny how you equate Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann with the “angry left”. I was certain Matthews was a Republican O’Reilly clone until I heard he had worked in the Carter administration. As for Michael Moore, George Clooney, Kanye West, and Green Day, they’re entertainers. They have nothing to do with the “mainstream media”. Oh scratch that….I guess Moore did cover the GOP convention for “USA Today”. Still, one semi-correct example out of six is still an “F” even by the most generous grading curve.
As for The Washington Post, which just last weekend humped George Bush’s leg over the Plamegate leak, promoting Maryscott O’Connor and the “angry left” as their ally in their crusade for overlooking Bush’s indiscretions……huh?
Except when you take a look at the top “righty” blogs (InstaPundit, , PowerLine, Captain’s Quarters, etc…) you’d don’t see that at all. The top “lefty” blogs, Kos, Eschaton, MyDD are filled with invective that you don’t see on other other side of the aisle. Even a blog as stridently partisan as Red State isn’t nearly as bad as Kos’ site.
Take an uncommitted voter and show them Kos then show them Red State. Which one would they find more offputting? The left doesn’t get how all this anti-Bush hyperbole turns off anyone who doesn’t drink that particular flavor of Kool-Aid.
OK, let’s test that little theory, shall we? Here’s a nice piece from the front page of Eschaton this afternoon:
Yeah, there’s some measured, persuasive rhetoric.
Here’s “TBogg” on the “Euston Manifesto” (which I’ll be posting about shortly):
As I said, anyone who doesn’t meet their particular brand of ideological purity is an apostate, and deserves contempt.
I’d go on, but I think the point has been made. These aren’t even examples from some random blogger, these are from the most-visited left-wing blogs out there. And that’s not even delving into the comments, which can charitably be called fever swamps.
Now, I don’t think O’Connor is the poster child from the MSM at large, their brand of liberalism is far more erudite and (occasionally) more measured, but I’d guess she’s typical for the audience of a site like Kos, Eschaton, TBogg, or the other major lefty blogs out there.
OK, let’s go back to my second sentence: “What would solve this is conservative bloggers like you making some tiny effort to get past the language to see why people on the left are teed off.”
So, you turn around and dig up the most inflammatory language you can find from the expected sources, and then IGNORE the point of their comments.
Here’s a better test: go back to both posts and then summarize what they are saying. I’m betting you can’t do it. I mean, you couldn’t even read my comment properly. This isn’t hard Mr. Reding, just look past the language and tell me what Eschaton and TBogg are saying. You don’t have to agree with them, but if you would, please show me that you are capable of critically reading a post to see what’s being said.
The latest news from the Christians is that if you’re using birth control, you don’t really love your husband. Also, pharmacists have begun denying women antibiotics if they believe the women got their infections through “inappropriate activities”.
But yeah, we’re totally the crazy ones.
“As I said, anyone who doesn’t meet their particular brand of ideological purity is an apostate, and deserves contempt.”
Heh; given the way the conservative blogosphere has turned on their most vocal internal critics (and your hands aren’t clean, given your attacks on Andrew Sullivan), I’d say that the purity test for “conservatives” is pretty strict these days as well.
(But yes, TBogg sounds like an asshole.)
Mark, all the entertainers I put forth–those that read news and those that sing propanganda ARE media. MSM is a term that does not stop a lefty newsdesks.
Regarding Olberman and Matthews, it is somewhat frightening to think that you thought either of them–at any time was a ‘Republican O’Reilly clone’. How left are you?
And, while you make a point that the WaPo does, on occasion, run something that is not disparaging of this administration, you don’t answer my point regarding the fact that their ire focised more on the usefulness of such sites–as opposed to their tenor.
da Wege, I couldn’t let your comment pass–you want to know why rightside bloggers don’t take the time to ‘get past the language and find out why the left is teed off’.
To accomplish this you postulated rational leftist comments, followed by rightist umbrage at the language.
The problem, of course, is that so much leftist commentary isn’t ‘rational’–it IS venting. You don’t get that on the top rightside blogs. You get a point clearly. This is not true on the top leftside blogs. One must pick through the sewage for a point–and hope that there is one beyond–
“Invading Iran is bad, it’s racist, and we enlightened ones have known that since it was Iraq. And those who don’t think so are bloodthirsty war-mongers”
There. We’re past the language…..and the point is even more infantile. What do we get? The same mantra that’s been chanted at every half-brained protest, every sit-in, die-in, puke-in and every other moronic stunt the left has pulled to say basically–‘we’re not happy about this, we don’t know what to do about this, but what you’re doing is wrong’.
And we should ‘get past the language’? Why don’t you try it? Strip away the rhetoric and expose the paucity of thought that characterises leftist opinion.
Finally, Erica, where do you see anyone talking about Christians? Anywhere? Anywhere? No? Then please, take your strawman home.
jack, I’ve never talked to a Democrat who thought Chris Matthews was “one of them”. He’s an asshole to members of both parties, but a bigger asshole to Democrats. Keith Olbermann is a liberal, but to compare him with Maryscott O’Connor? Only on the big red planet.
And thank you for enlightening me that Green Day “IS the media”. Silly me, I thought they were a commercial music band when in fact they’re reporting news to us. How do you avoid burning up on that scorching red planet?
The reason you see the right side blogs as clear is because you agree with them.
The Republicans take Green Day very seriously. “Nice Guys Finish Last” is their theme song.
Mark, why continue denying Matthews membership in the Democrat party? What does it serve? You claim to not know any Democrats who think Chris Matthews is ‘one of them’. Fine. But my gut feeling is that you know some fairly thick Democrats.
And, to keep you from getting away with altering my point, I did not compare O’Connor to Olbermann–I said that she was ‘hitched’ to the MSM, rather than they to her, as you suggested.
Leftist moonbattery is one of the MSMs biggest products these days–small wonder that the leftist blogosphere has to go off into ranting insanity and invective before anyone can tell the difference between it and the nightly news. O’Connor is the product of the information she recieves from the media. And a sad product it is.
I am sorry to see that you lack the understanding to realise that the music industry is part of the media. Until you understand that, my comments about leftist invective spewing forth from our motion picture/ television industry, our music industry, and our broadcast/print news industry will fall on deaf ears.
“The latest news from the Christians is that if you’re using birth control, you don’t really love your husband. Also, pharmacists have begun denying women antibiotics if they believe the women got their infections through “inappropriate activitiesâ€. ”
How did you arrive at this?