"It's just that [liberals] are always wrong"

"Of course, all the Bushies have to do is whisper to National Review and the Wall Street Journal that Joe Wilson is Saddam Hussein's love child and a double secret agent for North Korea, and before long all those reasonable people on the Right Blogosphere will be repeating this as gospel and wondering why us whackjob lefties can't understand simple facts," writes Barbara O'Brien of Mahablog [via Laura Lee of The Wide Awake Cafe], projecting her own modus operandi onto her political opponents. She may get her talking points from the DNC and fellow travelers in the MSM, but we prefer to formulate our own arguments. O'Brien's excellent writing skills are sadly wasted in a fruitless attempt to give life to effete exudations spun of resentment by the likes of Frank Rich, whose NYT op ed column this morning tells little about what's going on in the world of geopolitics but worlds about what's going on in the navel-gazing mind of the left: 

This case is about Iraq, not Niger. The real victims are the American people, not the Wilsons. The real culprit -- the big enchilada, to borrow a 1973 John Ehrlichman phrase from the Nixon tapes -- is not Mr. Rove but the gang that sent American sons and daughters to war on trumped-up grounds and in so doing diverted finite resources, human and otherwise, from fighting the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. That's why the stakes are so high: this scandal is about the unmasking of an ill-conceived war, not the unmasking of a C.I.A. operative who posed for Vanity Fair.

That's what we figured. Hoping against hope that PlameGate will finally render the elusive smoking gun that will prove once and for all that Bush Lied, People Died, and the left was right all along about everything.

Back to Barbara O'Brien, who's featured as the left half of a dueling-divas profile in this week's Washington Post Magazine [via Michelle Malkin] that's the talk of the 'sphere. Conservative blogstar Betsy Newmark of Betsy's Page represents the right half of the blogosphere:

Each one pours several hours each day into her Internet diary, reading, analyzing, criticizing, praising and echoing the political events and commentary of the moment. They link their diaries electronically to dozens of other blogs, and those blogs are linked, in turn, to still other blogs, ultimately forming a blogosphere -- a word that obviously did not come from a marketing department.

"Working in public schools, I've seen how poorly the government runs things," history teacher Betsy tells WaPo reporter David Von Drehle:

Her breed of thinker is quite common among the right blogosphere. Newmark's philosophy of deregulation, muscular foreign policy and a live-and-let-live take on social issues is thriving on the Internet, and Newmark reads and links voraciously. Her site is a common feature on the "blogrolls" -- lists of favorite sites -- of leading conservative bloggers.

When readers follow these links to Betsy's Page, they find a modest and good-natured voice, compared with the name-calling and screeds that can make the blogosphere feel like "Crossfire" with Tourette's syndrome. In fact, Newmark seems to have nothing personal against liberals. "Of course I have liberal friends," she says, "I'm a schoolteacher!"

It's just that they're always wrong.

Right on, Betsy.

Comments

[goomp]

I agree with Besty 100%. Now I ponder, why? Is it because of fear. Personally I have made my peace with the fact of human nature. I am not always able to control my feelings to meet the ideals laid down by the Judao-Christian traditions. So I do the best I can inasmuch as these traditions are asperations for the kinder, gentler side of human nature. Are liberals so distressed by their humanness that they must hide from it by adopting programs for controlling the thinking of people to deny that human nature exists? Is this what leads to socialist thinking and programs which are usually if not always wrong for the conduct of human affairs?