« Spirit of America -- and the left is MIA | Main | What this gal needs is a good, hard ... »

December 06, 2004

Newsflash -- Arafat is still dead

and Kerry still lost.

Psychologists are standing by with emergency therapy for distraught moonbats.

Posted by Darleen at December 6, 2004 09:44 PM


Please don't imply that most people on the left are distraught about Arafat's death. I don't remember any wailing or shedding of tears when the news was announced on DailyKos. I (and many of us) view it as a positive thing, at least if he's replaced by Abbas. If one of those Hamas guys takes over, though, it could be a mess.

Bush's victory, however, is indeed a source of great pain. I don't look forward to four years of big deficits, economic mismanagement, and strengthening terrorists through sheer incompetence.

Posted by: Ethical Werewolf at December 7, 2004 11:53 PM


Ummm .. that wasn't my implication at all. My subject line could have been "Generalissimo Franco is still dead" or "The sun rose today in the east"


And about those terrorists .. ya think if a terrorist blows up a bus of kids and no one reports on it, it doesn't happen?

Posted by: Darleen at December 8, 2004 06:25 AM

Ah, okay. I interpreted the title as being more deeply relevant to the body of the post.

Events occur regardless of whether they are reported on. Do I seem to hold otherwise?

Posted by: Ethical Werewolf at December 8, 2004 09:17 AM

- Hmmmm... well I doubt the NYT would report it unless they heard a rumor from one of Hussein's cousins, or Chirac, or Annan, that the attackers were actually coalition troops posing as Jihadists....(I'm assuming here that McAuliffe, Dean, and Gore would all be unavailable for comment...)....

- And the good Generalissimo was seen recently having Latte's with Elvis in a Madrid Starbucks, so cross that one off your list.... A very distant liberal aquaintance (I keep a great deal of distance for obvious reasons) swears to me its true.....

Posted by: Hunter at December 8, 2004 01:19 PM

As the whole Judith Miller/WMD mess shows, the Times is perfectly willing to print the neocons' disinformation as well.

Posted by: Neil Sinhababu at December 8, 2004 05:20 PM

There was a period of time, oh, about two or so years ago, when I was happy that "they" finally came out with a word to describe me. "We've made it" was my thought - that certain powers-that-be at Iconic liberal establishments finally realized that Jews weren't simply sheep to herd to DNC events, but that we thought about politics too.

Then I saw how it was being used.

Sure, "neocon" is easy to say, it's six letters; three sylables. But, there's a four-letter, two sylable version that carries the same connotation. That may not be how you intended to use it, but that's sure as h*ll how others - a whole lot of 'em - use it.

Put aside euphamisms, and say what you mean. Still, I give you the benefit of the doubt, and say this "for your information" so you don't unintentionally go pissing people off.


Posted by: Lysander at December 9, 2004 09:55 AM

By "neocon" I, and most people on the left, mean people who support a foreign policy of attacking and toppling any foreign regimes they don't like, with very little concern for whether it's practical to do so and stunning overconfidence that a peaceful democracy will easily follow. If you asked me to name a neocon, "Donald Rumsfeld" would be the first name that came to me.

When people on the right start telling you what people on the left mean by their words, they're likely to give the least charitable interpretation possible. I read a lot of left-wing blogs and not once have I read the word "neocon" there and even imagined that the author intended any connection to Judaism. Attempting to tar us as anti-Semites by completely misinterpreting us is a disgusting move, and I'd urge you not to fall for it.

Posted by: Neil Sinhababu at December 10, 2004 03:43 PM