Hardly an hour passes in this forum now when someone does not post a piece by a right wing pundit who was universally reviled on DU only a few months ago but is now considered a great progressive voice.
For just one example among many possible ones, let's take Michael Goodwin of the
New York Daily News. We can't get enough of him right now at DU, probably because he has recently published some scathing anti-Clinton editorials. That means he must surely be a progressive, right?
Well, not really. He's a knuckledragging reptilian fascist who just happens to share a hatred with many people here. But no, he's no progressive, as becomes clear with a passing glance at some of his other recent editorials:
Middle name Hussein is only one reason terror thugs like Barack ObamaBarack Hussein Obama wants it both ways.
Any American who uses his full name is trying to scare voters, his wife charges. But Obama says he understands why Islamic terror group Hamas looks at his middle name and trusts him.
Ditto for his plan to meet with Iran's madman president and other rogue leaders. Obama sees his open-door policy as evidence he will end President Bush's "cowboy diplomacy." When Bush slammed that plan Thursday as "appeasement," Obama accused him of a "false political attack."
It's a legitimate attack, because Obama's kumbaya foreign policy is dangerous. And his name, including the Hussein part, is fair game because Obama has declared it an international advantage.
Barack Obama's support of Rev. Jeremiah Wright was wrong choiceThe message lives, but the messenger is wounded, perhaps fatally. And Obama has only himself to blame.
He practically called out the divorce lawyers Tuesday, but what took him so long? How could he sit and listen to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's wackiness for 20 years and fail to see him for what he so obviously is?
Or is it true, as many suspect, that Obama did see Wright in full, but rationalized his presence in the church and the financial support he gave it as the cost of building a base in Chicago's often-radical black politics?
Either way, the fundamental doubt is not that Obama shares Wright's anti-American views. The doubt is about his judgment in sticking with Wright as the pastor for himself and his young children.
(I believe the kool kiddies refer to this as pastorbating.)
Snob-ama slight a big-time errorSnob-ama's lame concession yesterday that his mistake was "I didn't say it as well as I should have" only makes the repeated smear worse. He should get off his Ivy League horse and apologize to the millions of Americans he insulted. As it stands, he has confirmed he doesn't understand or respect them.
Through his warped vision, if you own a gun, oppose gay marriage or want our nation's borders sealed, you're just bitter over your lousy job. Amazingly, he even sees the embrace of God as a reaction to the bad economy.
As gaffes go, they don't get much bigger. Then again, it's not a gaffe when you believe what you're saying, as Snob-ama clearly does.
Barack Obama, our new appeaserAfter all, we have nuclear weapons and so does Israel, so who are we to deny Iran? Or, as Obama put it Friday when talking about race relations, "People all want the same thing."
They don't, but appeasement thinking often credits everybody with equally good and worthy intentions. That was the mistake of the most infamous appeaser of modern times, Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister who, with France's help, gave in to Adolf Hitler in hopes of heading off war. In exchange for sacrificing innocent Czechs and others living on lands Hitler wanted, Chamberlain famously waved a treaty with Hitler's name on it that he insisted would secure "peace for our time."
Within days, Herr Hitler, as Chamberlain called him, attacked his neighbors and within a year Europe was engulfed in World War II.
Would Obama be so naive or craven? Because of his limited experience, we don't know. That's why the Wright episode, the most difficult issue of his idealistic campaign, takes on huge importance. The lessons are not pretty.
__________
Please, let's not legitimize people like Goodwin and Sullivan and Noonan and Krauthammer and the others by inviting them into DU.