apparently the nytimes thinks it's not nice to fight back, children

hello, everyone, skippy here. while searching for a link to make a rush limbaugh joke we ran across this ny times editorial by nicholas kristof. mr. kristof takes exception to the fact that the left is apparently sinking to the right's level in vitrol.

"yet these days, the intelligent left is dumbing down and showing signs of slipping into a similar cesspool of outraged incoherence. it's debasing and marginalizing itself by marshaling epithets rather than arguments," mr. kristof says.

and he's right. but we say, so what, assh*le? no, actually, we don't say the assh*le part, we are making a joke. but we do maintain that it's not a sign of weakness or immaturity to fight fire with fire.

sure, there are fringe elements on all sides of the political aisle. lyndon larouche has been running for president since we were young bush kangaroos in our mother's pouch. so, it's rather disengenous to take a nutty remark from the edge and accuse the whole side of the political spectrum of going crazy. do we use the fact that trent lott spoke at the council of conservative citizens to condemn the whole republican party as racist bigots? no, we refuse to paint the whole party with a brush dipped in one member's disgusting waste. and we'd appreciate it if mr. kristof would show the left the same consideration.

he rails against the current wellstone-death conspiracy theories, likening them to vince foster rumors. well, sorry to bring this up, but there's still tons of theories about jfk's assassination. conspiracy theories abound on all sides, mr. kristof. but we don't say that because one theory has one political slant, then it follows that all who have that same political slant also believe in the same conspiracy. that would be like saying that we are sure you hate wen ho lee, just because you work at the times.

it is our position that, after 8 years or more of seeing how undocumented and unsubstantiated hyperbole (as we have witnessed from the right) gets the media's attention, it only makes sense to try it ourselves. you assh*le.

ok, ok, we were just joking again. but you take our point. (and shove it up your...ok, ok, we'll stop, we promise). we are not ghandi. we are not promoting pacifism against violence. we are fighting fire with fire. we are rolling up our sleeves and calling it like we see it.

when mr. kristof wrote a column decrying dick cheney's halliburton dealings, he received, and was incensed by, a letter saying "dick cheney is a maggot feeding on the decaying flesh of human misery." what, he doesn't like metaphors?

"the vitriol is bad for the country, by turning every policy fight into a zero-sum game, and it's also counterproductive," he writes. well, then, why don't you say something to the guys who started the whole thing, like newsmax, and free republic? and while you're at it, ask drudge to be a little less partisan in his link titles ("laughter at wellstone memorial" took you to a picture of clinton and mondale greeting each other fondly before entering the service) before you admonish buzzflash and bartcop.

and, of course, mr. kristof makes a common error in logic: "then there's iraq. i'm afraid that president bush is making a historic mistake by pushing obsessively to invade that country. but it doesn't follow that he's necessarily stupid or venal."

well, no, it doesn't, you're right. he isn't stupid because he wants to invade iraq. it may not even be visa versa. we're not pointing out any cause and effect here. a cat doesn't bury its feces because it licks its fur. but it all happens, doesn't it?

no, we have no idea what we meant by that last phrase, but we still defend the left's right not to be left out by the right, correct? yes, and we'll say it again if we can remember it. after all, mr. kristof, it takes two to tangle, and if you're going to berate the left for sinking to the level of the right, you had better say something to the right first.

assh*le.