The Liberal Army Of Idiots

The increasingly nonsensical American Left has spent the post-Viet Nam era defining itself as peace loving and only willing to fight "just" wars. Defining a just war can get a little tricky sometimes. The War on Terror seems very just to those of us who, you know, read and keep our blood alcohol contents low at work. To others, it's merely a slogan to scare people or a good reason to move to France and forgo bathing. But, hey, it's America and we're all entitled to our beliefs. That is, of course, until we lose something like a War on Terror and our enemies inform us that they're removing our rights along with our heads. They're focused that way, the terror guys.

These notorious peace lovers over there at Nancy Pelosi's house don't exactly embrace the whole concept of peace. It doesn't simply mean an absence of war, it also implies harmonious relations all around. Oops, that doesn't sound like anything Harry Reid's unstoppable mouth has ever endorsed.

The fact is that the Democrats absolutely love wars, just not the kind that are fought with guns. Against real enemies. Who have publicly stated that they would like to kill us.

A quick look around this week and you can see the Liberal Army of Idiots engaged in battle on several fronts. Their enemies? Other Americans, of course. Oh, and that pesky Truth stuff.

The most recent targets include Clarence Thomas, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, among others. You don't have to like all of these guys, I don't (you'd probably be surprised at which one it is), but a critical (key word here) look at what's being done to each of them reveals just how bloodthirsty these war mongering libs really are.

The continued war on Justice Thomas is by far the most shameful as he can't continually defend himself. He's too busy engaged in the monumental struggle to ensure that the courts don't take over America before the terrorists do.

Justice Thomas has finally gone public about the circus surrounding his nomination. How can anyone forget the bloated Senator from Massachusetts grilling Thomas about sexual harassment? ("Excuse me, Senator Kennedy, your question got kind of drowned out.") So, after sixteen years, Thomas has decided to avail himself of his right to defend himself.

The Left won't have any of that. You see, the "right to choose" that's spoken of over there doesn't extend to choosing to vote Republican, especially if you're an African-American. Threaten to destroy our civilization or blow up a bunch of our citizens and the Left would prefer to give you a free pass. Try to be a Black Republican, however, and they're coming after you. There won't be a draw-down of their media troops until you're destroyed.

The execrable New York Times could barely contain its glee at having a reason to trot Anita Hill out again (I think she lives there). (I'm investigating a rumor that nine out of ten dog breeds will begin crapping immediately upon seeing any section of the Times on the floor.) They gave her some space today over on their Opinion page. Apparently Maureen Dowd gets Tuesdays off to practice actually sounding bitchy in print.

In the editorial, Professor Hill vowed not to "stand by silently" while Justice Thomas "in his anger" reinvents her. Another quick search of the Times archives shows that she's in no danger of being silent any time soon. In her defense, she hasn't gotten a shout out on the Opinion page since June of this year so she may have been feeling a little muzzled. I think the word processing software at the Times automatically inserts "Anita Hill" and "sexual harassment" after any mention of Clarence Thomas.

As long as the New York Times remains the scum of record in this country, your silence will be almost impossible, Prof. Hill.

The two other battle fronts for the Army of Idiots this week involve taking things out of context and letting those little Che Guevaras at MoveOn.org and Media Matters distort them. These particular idiots deal almost solely in out of context stories that are turned into complete lies. Why? Because that's easier than original thought. You know why they need a Fairness Doctrine? Because talk radio is a free-market airing of ideas and you can't survive there if you don't have any. So they need the government (or George Soros-same thing if any Democrat wins the White House now) to ensure that they can broadcast a bunch of dead air that no one was listening to in the first place.

It was a relief to see Harry Reid all over the place condemning Rush. He was so silent during the MoveOn.org/Gen. Petraeus controversy that I thought he'd taken ill.

That's not really sarcasm. I truly don't want anyone on the Left to get sick or die. I just want them to start thinking. After they do that for a while they might open their eyes and identify our real enemies. After that we might, just might, start winning the actual wars with the blessing of our elected leaders.

I know, it sounds crazy. But then, I am.

I don't think I'm done with this one yet.