by Teh Nutroots | Ha, ha, this is rich. Right wing bloggers are masters of the maladroit reframe and the transparent revisionism. From the conduct of the loons at The Corner and as illustrated elsewhere, one can distill their entire M.O. and fit it into a nutshell. A wing-nutshell.
1. Get into a paranoid lather about some perceived, totally imaginary "threat" to their constantly imperilled sense of security/self-worth.
2. Blame perceived threat on liberal target of the day, making up on the spot whatever lies or perpetuating whatever ill-founded rumors are necessary to convince their pitiably gullible and ill-educated fellow maroons.
3. Pretend to believe said lies and ill-founded rumors for dramatic effect.
4. Begin actually believing them, due to echo chamber effect of wingnuttosphere.
5. Become more angry and fearful at having their worst fears "confirmed." Make up more propaganda to support their delusions. Repeat.
Because---as repeatedly illustrated here, here, here,and here--- they believe their own drivelling, they tend to think that a lie (particularly one swallowed whole by their credulous base) is as good as, if not better than, the truth.
One reason wingnut demagogues like Michelle Malkin hate liberals so much as that their terror-mongering doesn't work on us. We already know the world is a scary and a dangerous place, and we're at peace with that.
Even the (relatively) respectable pundits can apparently talk themselves into believing that up is down, blue is red, and that Obama, who the other day they couldn't bring themselves to deny might be a socialist, actually tilts to the right.
With all the wingnuts threatening to build an ark (Golgafrincham B Ark, anyone?) and sail off to a far countree that is less socialist than the US of Obamerica, I wish the punditocracy would shut up about Obama's "centrism."
What if they catch the gibbering hordes of scared right wingers at a moment when they don't have their fingers in their ears or on the greasy, tear-splattered keys of their laptops and they all decide to stick around after all?
But of course they're not going to shut up: that's what makes a pundit a pundit. From Amanda Terkel, this compilation:
Terkel quotes the mastermind of the repudiated erstwhile realignment:
KARL ROVE: Barack Obama understands this is a center-right country and he smartly and wisely ran a campaign that emphasized it.
See also Matt Yglesias's comment.
The day before the election, Barack Obama was a socialist. The day after the election, he only won because he’s a centrist in line with the views of “center-right” America.
I happen to disagree with Terkel and Yglesias: I think Obama IS a centrist (though left-tilting) and that he has listed, and will list, only slightly liberalward. I like him, but I don't see him as a progressive. (Will be happy to be proven wrong).
But that isn't the point. The point is that he was only ever a "far left" progressive in comparison to the far right loonies to whom McCain insisted on pandering.
And though the maroons who constitute the "base" clearly have only the faintest idea what socialism is or means, they know it's "European," therefore effete and wrong, and somehow connected to Marxism and to commies and fascism (including Islamofascism) and therefore by definition to terrorism. None of them had the faintest idea why these various conflicting labels are bad, or what any of these words means---but they confidently believed, in the grand tradition of Republican politics, that you can get rid of people you fear by pinning labels on them that you think will make other people hate them.
Now half of them are threatening to leave the country. If only. Let's hope they disregard the latest reframe of reality by their favorite pundits.
And Malkin has the gall to call liberals moonbats.
Comments