Liberal vs. liberal
In the blue corner: Glenn Greenwald of Salon. In the red corner: Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and DailyKos. The issue: Sen. Barack Obama's reversal of his opposition to a bill to update the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which largely grants the administration what it wants on the hot-button issue of immunity for telecommunications firms.
At his Salon blog Unclaimed Territory, Mr. Greenwald noted Mr. Olbermann's having called the provision a "literally textbook example of Fascism" being pushed by "the bureaucrats of the Third Reich." Then he crammed down Mr. Olbermann's throat an MSNBC transcript in which the host praised the Obama vote as "not cowering to the left, not going along with ... the new conventional thinking on the FISA bill."
"What's much more notable is Olbermann's full-scale reversal on how he talks about these measures now that Obama - rather than George Bush - supports them," Mr. Greenwald notes. "Grave warning on Olbermann's show that telecom amnesty and FISA revisions were hallmarks of Bush Fascism instantaneously transformed into a celebration that Obama, by supporting the same things, was leading a courageous, centrist crusade in defense of our Constitution."
In a pungent response in his DailyKos diary, Mr. Olbermann said he had changed his mind about the poisonous nature of the FISA bill after talking to John Dean, whom he said had told him that it would only grant the companies civil immunity, but they still could be criminally prosecuted.
Mr. Olbermann said he hoped Mr. Obama's strategy was to "shut up and take the criticism and hope the Republicans don't see the loophole," though a cynic might question the wisdom of saying this publicly at one of the most widely read sites on the Internet. He then went on to the kidney punches ("I don't know much about Mr. Greenwald and I didn't read his full piece") and the rabbit punches (his "suggestion of some kind of betrayal on my part is simplistic and childish.")
Mr. Greenwald fired back the next day, criticizing both Mr. Olbermann's rationalization (noting the skepticism of both Mr. Dean and "Kos" himself Markos Moulitsas) and also the mentality he said it reflected (throwing the lowest liberal blow: a comparison to President Bush).
"There are likely many reasons for [the bill to confine] immunity to civil liability - including the heightened difficulty of proving criminal intent and, most importantly, the fact that Bush, on his way out, can pardon telecoms from criminal but not civil liability. So it's far from certain that Obama - even if he did have a Secret Plan criminally to prosecute telecoms once in office - would even be able to do so," he noted.
"To give Obama a pass on his support for such a heinous bill ... based on this imagined secret plan for the Good that Obama is harboring is to illustrate exactly the sort of blind faith in political leaders that is so dangerous. That's been the Right's mentality to excuse every last thing Bush does."
Ronald Reagan used to say that "government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
The latest French social fad - line dancing - has become so popular that the civil service has made a prophet again of Mr. Reagan.
"Sure they have a relatively sane President now and a smoking hot first lady but the place is still messed up beyond redemption. What's the latest craze in France? Country line dancing! And they've managed to muck even that up by regulating the [heck] out of it," wrote Drew M., one of the bloggers at the redesigned conservative blog Ace of Spades.
"In a peculiarly Gallic approach to the phenomenon, French civil servants say line dancing should be submitted to the same rules as sports such as football and rugby. This means imposing training courses for line dancing teachers and a state-approved diploma for anyone who wants to give lessons or run clubs," read a recent London Times article being quoted at the site.
"Of all the things that the French could pick to worship from America they go with line dancing and Jerry Lewis. And they think they are so superior why exactly?" Drew M. wondered.
Green with envy
"If you don't eat your veggies, you hate America!" (See Sith-Monkey)
"One nation under arugula." (See-Dubya)
"The huddled masses gathering for the coronation of King Obama will be secretly dying for some french fries." (the Jammie Wearing Fool.)
Conservative bloggers had great fun last weekend with a Denver Post report that the caterers for the Democratic National Convention in Denver will not be allowed to serve fried food.
"No fried chicken. No fried catfish. No fried green tomatoes. No fried okra. No fried anything. In promoting healthy eating habits, the Democratic guidelines say every meal should be nutritious and include 'at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, purple/blue and white,'" reported Scott Shepard of Cox News Service.
"It's affirmative action for food!" said an incredulous See-Dubya.
And the most-mocked line in the Cox report was "'It's the new patriotism,' says Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, the driving force behind the greening of the Democratic convention."
"Maybe Obama ought to show up with ... alfalfa sprouts on his lapel to show his patriotism," said one commenter at Little Green Footballs.
No to 'Just say no'
Warner Todd Huston at Stop the ACLU notes that owners of several Blogger sites critical of Sen. Barack Obama have had access to their sites cut.
"Google has terminated the access by blog owners to 7 such sites and the list may be growing. ... It turns out that there is an interesting pattern where it concerns the blogs that Google's Blogspot team have summarily locked down on their service. They all belong to the Just Say No Deal coalition, a group of blogs that are standing against the Obama campaign. It seems the largest portion of these blogs are Hillary-supporting blogs, too," Mr. Huston wrote.
He later updated the post by suggesting that perhaps "it isn't google, but Obamaniacs taking advantage of google's faulty sytem. A commenter explains: 'The problem with blogger is that a group of people with an ax to grind can report any blog as spam and after enough complaints, it's automatically suspended until a real live human being can get around to examining it. If enough complaints are registered with blogger, you might get a response within 5 days but it takes a concerted effort. This is a huge problem with blogger and something google needs to get a handle on.'"
By Victor Morton.