What is thy bidding, Darth Kos
Posted on 06/22/2006 11:30:34 PM PDT by RWR8189
realize that the new, counterintuitive thing to say about the left blogosphere these days is that it's not really that radical. Markos Moulitsas Zuniga says nice things about Mark Warner, which means he's really just a pragmatist (or easily co-opted, but the effect is the same). All this is mostly true. What this interpretation misses, however, is that the radicalism of the lefty bloggers lies not so much in their ideological platform but in their ideological style. They think like sectarians. And that style is on perfect display in Kos's attack on The New Republic. Kos announces in his headline, "TNR's defection to the Right is now complete." If this sounds vaguely familiar, it's because it is. More than two years ago, Kos launched what he called his "anti-TNR campaign," in which he declared us to be enemies of the people. Wait, sorry, wrong jargon--I meant, enemies of the people-powered movement. Some examples of the anti-TNR campaign can be found here, here, and here. He has refused to link to our stories--except of course the minority that attack the left, all the better to display our enemy status--and declared us irrelevant and buried in the dustbin of history. Except now, two years after having unleashed his most terrible weapons, he has to bury us all over again. And so, he urges his readers, "If you still hold a subscription to that magazine, it really is time to call it quits." This is like the Catholic Church digging up the heretic it had already burned at the stake so it can excommunicate the corpse a second time. Kos, seemingly aware that this is an unsatisfactory punishment, proceeds to urge his readers, "If you see it in a magazine rack, you might as well move it behind the National Review or even NewsMax, since that's who they want to be associated with these days." Not subscribing isn't enough. Loyal Kossacks must hide it in newsstands so other liberals will not be exposed to our ideological impurities. And what are those impurities? Kos explains, again lapsing into hilariously crude jargon, that TNR "seeks to destroy the new people-powered movement for the sake of its Lieberman-worshipping neocon owners." I would humbly suggest that Kos needs to straighten out his liturgy. Is our owner a Lieberman-worshipper, or is he a Gore-worshipper? Neocons are resolute monotheists, you know. The paranoid mentality that Kos displays is obviously incapable of grasping the possibility that an institution like TNR might not act monolithically, and might publish articles simply because they are true and interesting rather than in the service of some political goal. Still, I wonder how he reconciles his dark interpretation with the fact that most of our staff published written endorsements of other Democratic candidates. I, to take one example, wrote that "the Democratic Party would have to be crazy to nominate Joe Lieberman for president." That line must have slipped right past them. Even our most pro-Lieberman staffer, Peter Beinart, wrote a recent column in which he criticized Lieberman just as strongly as the left blogosphere, angering die-hard Lieberman backer Marshall Wittmann. All this is pretty hard to square with the notion that everything TNR does is directed by its owners and designed for the greater glory of Joe Lieberman. In good revolutionary style, Kos ends with a ringing declaration that TNR remains dead and victory for people-power is at hand. "It is now beyond clear that the dying New Republic is mortally wounded," he writes. Where once it was clear, now it is beyond clear, and where once we were dying we are now both dying and mortally wounded. He continues, "They no longer (thank heavens!) have a monopoly on progressive punditry." When did we ever have a monopoly on progressive punditry? What about The Nation, The American Prospect, The Washington Monthly, every liberal op-ed columnist, and the like? How did I miss this period of all-consuming power? And did Kos just admit that we're progressive, after all? Might be time for another excommunication.
Jonathan Chait is a senior editor at The New Republic.
The leftists have murdered millions more people than the Catholic Church, yet there's no mention of digging up a Kulak. Yes, indeed, anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable form of bigotry in this country and the "tolerant" progressives are the worst purveyors.
He's married with child, despite his effeminacy.
Does it really matter?
Well .. those who read their Bible and believe God already know that when we pray - God sends ambushments and confusion into their midst!
Nothing surprising to me!
Did they name the child after it's father, Turkey baster.
What is thy bidding, Darth Kos
So he's doing it 'for the children'. He's got the looks of a liberal.
That's why I thought it was unfair to lump them The Nation and Rolling Stone, inter alia.
"That's why I thought it was unfair to lump them The Nation and Rolling Stone, inter alia."
Not everyone in the Free Republic carefully considers his comments before typing them. I know, because at times I haven't.
We're all human.
Nope. Liberals don't buy High Times.
First off, they are too paranoid they might end up on the enemies' list--even though they're willing to have the government do everything for everyone, they are skeert $#!#less of the cops grabbing High Times' subscription list or the Borders/Barnes&Nobles' credit card records.
Second, they're liberals. Why would they buy High Times? They don't grow their own, they just bum off others' stashes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.