When Wingnuts Attack

A swarm of 'nuttery

This latest post from Glenn Greenwald (scroll down or go to his main page) reminded me of something else I saw thanks to Cursor the other day (Tuesday, in fact) that I almost linked to...but work has to come first over here, alas.

The focus of both posts is the ugly/violent rhetoric that seems to be a staple of wingnutology, particularly when in response to anything short of groveling subservience towards Dear Leader and the Shrub Wonder.

Greenwald:

I can't think of a single prominent Democratic political figure (perhaps other than Joe Lieberman) who hasn't been routinely accused of being a traitor and at whom threats of imprisonment haven't been launched by certain Bush followers around the blogosphere. News that journalists are being investigated, and even calls for the imprisonment of journalists, are now so routine that they hardly attract notice any longer. And anyone who reveals information that reflects poorly on the administration -- including life-long military veterans and pro-military Congressmen -- is an anti-American traitor who is tantamount to a criminal.

The Bush administration and many of its followers are coming increasingly to see hostile journalists and various political opponents as traitors and criminals, and their escalating rhetoric includes what are now routine calls for the investigation and punishment of those who politically harm the administration.

Robert Parry:

While Bush doesn't always join personally in the attack-dog operations, he has a remarkable record of never calling off the dogs, letting his surrogates inflict the damage while he winks his approval. In some cases, however, such as the punishment of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, CIA officer Valerie Plame, Bush has actually gotten his hands dirty...

Bush's backers even mocked U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix for not finding WMD in Iraq in the weeks before the U.S. invasion. CNBC's right-wing comic Dennis Miller likened Blix's U.N. inspectors to the cartoon character Scooby Doo, racing fruitlessly around Iraq in vans.

As it turned out, of course, the Iraq War critics were right. The problem wasn't the incompetence of Blix but the fact that Bush's claims about Iraq's WMD were false, as Bush's arms inspectors David Kay and Charles Duelfer concluded after the invasion.

And they're the ones accusing the left of being shrill.

Indeed, the entire conservative movement has been based on relentless attack to the extent that the very word "liberal" is now considered perjorative. And I doubt the 'nuts--or their nutsymps--have any problem going beyond the political...just a month or so ago, Michelle Malkin proudly took the low road in choosing to publicize personal phone numbers of campus activists...but couldn't reach quickly enough for a victim's badge when the tables were turned.

But the real issue with the sort of ugly rhetoric highlighed by Greenwald and Parry is that it reflects a decline in the degree of political tolerance in this country...or, perhaps, a return to something else entirely...after all, it wasn't THAT long ago when respect for political opponents was confined to those who could actually BE political without risking serious consequences.

Then again, it's not like the 'nuts have shown any genuine degree of remorse for the beliefs of their political, if not ancestral forebears. Sure, they toned down the ugliness for about fifteen years, until St. Ronald made it ok again. But they certainly never forgot how to hate...and the next generation is doing their best to carry the torch.

As for me, I'm torn--on the one hand, stooping to that level is, well, stooping to that level. On the other hand, sometimes you've got no alternative but to fight fire with fire. And let's not kid ourselves: when it comes to political rhetoric/political campaigning, and whatnot, everyone claims to hate negative advertsising, but negative advertising always ends up being part of the strategy...because it works...

Especially when it involves humor--not something wingnuts are noted for (which also probably explains the hysterical--literally--reaction to Stephen Colbert's speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Oh, and getting off topic for just a second, did anyone else see the L&O: CI rerun the other day featuring Colbert as forger/villain? I had to look it up to be sure it was him).

Anyway...I expect we'll continue to see the nuts ratchet things up (no pun intended). Let's just hope they don't end up inspiring more than rhetoric from some of their fold...