Taliban Republicans
Today is Saturday, 12 August 2006.
Whenever I read the columnist Cal Thomas, I am reminded of a Herblock cartoon of Richard Nixon, arriving at a campaign rally via sewer.
Cal’s latest flush (11 August) is titled, “Lieberman defeated by ‘Taliban” Democrats”.
“But they have now morphed into Taliban Democrats because they are willing to “kill” one of their own, if he does not conform to the narrow and rigid agenda of the party’s kook fringe.”
It’s obvious that Ned Lamont defeated Joementum Lieberman largely because of the latter’s blinkered support for the Bush regime’s conquest of Iraq. Given that the latest polls show that ca. 60% of Americans support the Lamont position, precisely what percentage of Americans, less 60%, are not the “kook fringe”, according to Cal?
Of course, war-lover Cal, a charter member of the 82nd Chairborne Fighting Keyboardists, is hunkered-down in his D.C.-area command post, hardly to be bothered with joining the troops in Iraq. Not a surprise for one who flacked for the Moral Majority.
Cal lives in Orwell’s “memory hole”. The Taliban are, of course, the creation of the CIA as directed by the Republican Ronald Reagan, as an instrument to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. So what if the Taliban, and that other grateful recipient of Reagan-dispensed American taxpayer largesse, Osama bin Laden, got a tad out of hand?
It’s obviously the fault of the Democratic Party.
Get real, Cal: the proper term is “Taliban Republicans”.
Whenever I read the columnist Cal Thomas, I am reminded of a Herblock cartoon of Richard Nixon, arriving at a campaign rally via sewer.
Cal’s latest flush (11 August) is titled, “Lieberman defeated by ‘Taliban” Democrats”.
“But they have now morphed into Taliban Democrats because they are willing to “kill” one of their own, if he does not conform to the narrow and rigid agenda of the party’s kook fringe.”
It’s obvious that Ned Lamont defeated Joementum Lieberman largely because of the latter’s blinkered support for the Bush regime’s conquest of Iraq. Given that the latest polls show that ca. 60% of Americans support the Lamont position, precisely what percentage of Americans, less 60%, are not the “kook fringe”, according to Cal?
Of course, war-lover Cal, a charter member of the 82nd Chairborne Fighting Keyboardists, is hunkered-down in his D.C.-area command post, hardly to be bothered with joining the troops in Iraq. Not a surprise for one who flacked for the Moral Majority.
Cal lives in Orwell’s “memory hole”. The Taliban are, of course, the creation of the CIA as directed by the Republican Ronald Reagan, as an instrument to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. So what if the Taliban, and that other grateful recipient of Reagan-dispensed American taxpayer largesse, Osama bin Laden, got a tad out of hand?
It’s obviously the fault of the Democratic Party.
Get real, Cal: the proper term is “Taliban Republicans”.
posted by HH at 7:45 AM
2 Comments:
Cal publicly boo-hooed in his column over the Democrats marginalizing themselves by taking a position shared by 60% of Americans.
If he actually believed what he said, he should have kept his mouth shut to help the Demos along the road to self-destruction.
Instead, he made a big phony show of it. He seems to think he can scare Demos into line with this patently bogus threat of irrelevance.
I watched Cal on Bill Moyers' program a couple of years ago. Apparently, he had just come from Fox News, because he was in cheap shot mode, which looked absurd juxtaposed with Moyers' even-handedness.
I saw the glittering eye of the fanatic in his presentation.
Here's the strategy Cal is serving:
From Digby's Hullabaloo:
"Since Karl doesn't have a single candidate to tar with cowardly Vietnam stories he has chosen instead to run against the fabled "left wing" of the Democratic party circa 68-72. The point is less to convince the electorate than it is to trash talk the Democrats into backing off a harsh critique of the war. And it's remarkably effective. As we can see from countless articles and columns of the past few weeks, nothing sends the timorous insider Dems scurrying like an accusation that the Party is in the clutches of the crazy liberals. The man knows his adversaries.
"But the other side of the coin is to present the Codpiece as grown-up contrast and rehab his reputation. Bush is, aftger all, remarkably unpopular and he is what's dragging down the party. Part of the plan requires him and all his minions to swagger and talk tough, of course. But this formulation of the hippie kids running amuck also needs something less confrontational: the patient parent who can calm the waters. Here comes Ben Cartwright, the pops of the Ponderosa whose credo was "A man's never wrong doing what he thinks is right."
"I don't think it's going to work again. It's like the third sequel of a bad movie. The hippie extremist plot is absurd, the hysterical dialog is unintentionally funny and the actors are out of shape and looking old. Worst of all, the star is now box-office poison."
Post a Comment
<< Home