The left, always quick to defend free speech and independence whenever it involves bashing America seems to have a problem with that sort of American right the minute it veers off the reservation of approved topics. "No war for oil", "Bushitler", "9/11 conspiracy", "the war is lost", "sheesh", these are all approved phrases; use them freely and liberally, 10 points if you can work one of them into everyday conversation.
But use something else such as "Support the Troops", "progress", "we can win", those are fightin' words. Quick, organize and shut it down before someone reads it!
Evidence of this can be seen by the simple fact that the call to action was issued before the article even came out. It seems that the TPM blogger was so upset that he actually contacted the Dallas Morning News for verification ahead of time (they assured him that Broder's column would in fact be on the topic he fears).
In a twist of ironic phrasing the blogger asks "What is it that's so profoundly threatening about Reid's success to the Broders of the world?". This is a real head scratcher for sure.
Luckily Broder answered that question himself in the column that came out this morning.
Here's a Washington political riddle where you fill in the blanks: As Alberto Gonzales is to the Republicans, Blank Blank is to the Democrats -- a continuing embarrassment thanks to his amateurish performance.
If you answered " Harry Reid," give yourself an A. And join the long list of senators of both parties who are ready for these two springtime exhibitions of ineptitude to end. (all emphasis mine)
For Broder's part he is harsh on President Bush and Alberto Gonzales as well. But the article isn't about them; it's about Democrats and their gaffe's that rarely get covered in the mainstream media. This my friends is an outrage!
As if that were not mind-boggling enough, consider the mental gyrations performed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) as he rationalized the recent comment from his majority leader, Harry Reid, the leading light of Searchlight, Nev., that the war in Iraq "is lost."
On "Fox News Sunday," Schumer offered this clarification of Reid's off-the-cuff comment. "What Harry Reid is saying is that this war is lost -- in other words, a war where we mainly spend our time policing a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis. We are not going to solve that problem. . . . The war is not lost. And Harry Reid believes this -- we Democrats believe it. . . . So the bottom line is if the war continues on this path, if we continue to try to police and settle a civil war that's been going on for hundreds of years in Iraq, we can't win. But on the other hand, if we change the mission and have that mission focus on the more narrow goal of counterterrorism, we sure can win."
Everyone got that? This war is lost. But the war can be won. Not since Bill Clinton famously pondered the meaning of the word "is" has a Democratic leader confused things as much as Harry Reid did with his inept discussion of the alternatives in Iraq.
The name calling has already begun over at the TPM thread, some words that I can not print here but you have all been subjected to them before. Now Broder, a person who has been a pretty good mouthpiece for the Democrats in the past joins the not so elite list of neocons that some are calling on to "be retired".
So much for open minds. Will the Washington Post survive?
Terry Trippany is the editor at Webloggin