ZIP IT, moonbats!

Folks, it pains me to say it, but over the past few years the political Left has simply become too combative for its own good. It may be cathartic to vent and bash and swear, but every day Cassandras like like Kos and Atrios cause us to lose important credibility with the centrist mainstream, and I am very concerned about it.  Today's column by David Broder illustrates the problem:

"The speaker was Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the exceptionally bright liberal who has long been a respected voice in Democratic debates. His subject was the Bush presidency. Frank began by separating himself from the strident voices on the left -- frequent in the world of blogging -- that accuse Bush of subverting American democracy.

I wrote to commend Mr. Broder on his valuable insight, and very frankly I think all of us here ought to tone down the rhetoric a little and listen to common sense.  Follow me on down...

Mr. Frank continues:

"'Some of the words that get thrown around, authoritarianism and worse, should not be used lightly,' Frank said. 'This remains, in the sixth year of the Bush presidency, a very free country.'"

Dear Mr. Broder,

First, a personal question: do you live in some kind of museum, library, or 19th-century drawing-room where "stridency" is a principal taboo?  [Ed.: Hmmm, bad start here...sarcasm isn't very nice!] People in your profession--perhaps I should use 'ilk' here to bolster my loose-screw credentials--very often seem to value comity and 'bipartisanship' above all else, including substance:

"...this week the Senate joined the House in passing the stem cell research bill despite the fact that Bush had said it would provoke his first veto. It was a heartening thing to see Bill Frist, the senator from Tennessee, speaking and acting as the leader of a bipartisan Senate majority..."

 
What exactly is the significance of Senator Frist presiding over the election-year theater of a stem-cell vote?  Except for Nelson of Nebraska, Dem support was a given; while Republicans from socially moderate or purple states were handed a welcome opportunity to distance themselves from Bush as he played to his right-wing base. Do you really think our unitary Decider is losing sleep over this?  The GOP majority does whatever it can to get out the conservative vote and cling to power--and, in other news, dog bites man, film at 11. [Ed.: Aww, screw it.  Sarcasm's more fun anyway.]

Still, you've occasioned a wondrous epiphany for me, Mr. Broder.  I had always supposed that being strident required saying some very nasty things, like "Five ropes, five robes, five trees. Some assembly required" in reference to Supreme Court justices, or "How do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much!" in reference to 9/11 widows.  

I'd also figured any truly dedicated aspirant to shrill-dom would be obliged to at least dump some tea in a harbor, or call for whistleblowing journalists to be tried as traitors.  And (as I never was much good at shooting people in the face properly), I had long since resigned myself to the necessity of flattening a few earlobes in the Senate chamber with variations on the cherished American refrain of "Go fuck yourself!!!"

But happily, as it turns out, the bar's set much lower in Broderville.  Given a president who asserts the unilateral authority to spy on Americans illegally and without oversight, personally blocks investigations of his misconduct, and routinely employs 'signing statements' to subvert acts of Congress, any blogger worthy of Broder's much-coveted disregard need only misinterpret such behavior as "authoritarian subversion of democracy" to be dismissed as a belligerent barnacle, clinging irrelevantly to the loony left fringe of our decorous discourse (pace Maureen).

"The problem, as Frank sees it, is that Bush believes in a 'plebiscitary presidency' in which the election makes the chief executive the 'decider' of national policy, to use one of Bush's favorite terms."

Well, that does clear things up.  Amid all this moonbat End-Times clamor, it sure is nice to know we have both the respectable Barney Frank and the Op-Ed pages of the Washington Post to reassure us reg'lar-type folks that we're merely dealing with a "plebiscitary decider" who's just bit fuzzy on Constitutional fine print, bless his simple God-fearing soul.  

"Many committees have all but abandoned their traditional oversight role, failing to conduct the investigations or raise the questions that hold the executive branch accountable. But that is beginning to change. Frank said he saw 'stirrings' of institutional pride among some of his Republican colleagues."

What's that you say?  The self-same Republicans who once rose up in righteous wrath to impeach a president for lying to us about blowjobs now show "stirrings of institutional pride" as they confront the bracing electoral ramifications of President 35%?  I'll be jiggered.

But, hey, as long as our checks and balances show some palpable "stirrings" every election year or so, I'm happy.  In fact, as i read your column, Mr. Broder, I feel a calm certitude, confident that Yeats' fabled center shall ne'er lose its hold with y'all on the job.  And I know you guys at the Post aren't worried about any old "blood-dimm'd tides", "anarchy loosed upon the world", or scarcity of "conviction", as these things are all in a day's work for guys like David Broder: guys who've seen it all and never broken a sweat.

Yeah, this Democracy stuff, hell, it's nothing to lose sleep over--and definitely not worth raising our voices on STRIDENT BLOGS!!!.

Oops--sorry! I'll tiptoe on my way out, David.