Here’s an excellent report by Rachel Maddow on right wing media’s coverage of the capture of the main suspect in the Benghazi attacks, focusing on the king of all wingnut sites, Drudge Report — and segueing into a look at how the media is pushing so many pundits who were disastrously wrong about Iraq as “experts” once again.
You might think that by this time, conservatives would experience qualms about recommending wrong-headed military incursions into foreign countries. You might think that, but then you’d read this ludicrous article at the National Review by Andrew Langer and you’d realize that qualms just aren’t in the cards for this crew: The Case for Ground Forces in Ukraine.
Placing a strong U.S. presence in Ukraine now would be a show of force that Vladimir Putin could understand.
Possibly the worst idea I’ve read today, but of course the day is still young.
Today’s bitter wingnut screed comes from talk radio host Michael Medved, with a by-the-numbers rant attacking godless liberals and their crazy belief that government should try to protect citizens from violent criminals: The Liberal God Delusion.
See what he did there? He turned the tables on the godless liberals! (Wingnuts never get tired of this “I’m rubber, you’re glue” tactic.)
if you’ve read one article like this, you’ve read them all; liberals are stupid and government is bad unless it’s time for a war, in which case government is infallible.
Right-wingers passionately proclaim the ideal of “peace through strength,” arguing that a powerful, self-confident America with dominant military resources remains the only guarantee of national security. Progressives, on the other hand, dream of multilateral consensus, comprehensive treaties, disarmament, grand peace deals, and vastly enhanced authority for the United Nations. Once again, liberals place a touching and naive faith in the ideal of a higher power—potential world government—while conservatives insist that the United States, like any nation, must ultimately rely only on itself.
Unsurprisingly, Medved concludes by warning that liberals are a danger to the republic, and only conservatism can save us. Never mind those right wing religious fanatics, they’re unimportant next to this horrible threat.
In the wake of Obama’s reelection, unreasoning reliance on federal power distorts our politics far more destructively than simple-minded faith in God. At the moment, big-government fundamentalism poses more of a threat to the republic than religious absolutism.
Oh yeah … about that “reelection.” Michael Medved’s the guy who published an e-book in August titled: The Odds Against Obama: Why History and Logic Make the President a Likely Loser.
The book’s description is a hoot:
Most Americans instinctively assume the President will cruise to reelection in November. This notion has been bolstered by the Obama campaign’s relentless efforts to portray the president as unbeatable and to characterize Mitt Romney as a hapless loser.
THE ODDS AGAINST OBAMA provides the tools to shatter that impression, and to put the campaign in proper perspective based on the iron rules of history and logic.
The iron rule of wingnut history and logic is that pseudo-pundits like Medved can be totally, outrageously wrong about something, never explain or apologize or account for it in any way whatsoever, yet continue writing more hack pieces like this without even slowing down.