I find her commentaries to be just a little more saucy than my own, but largely she holds the conservative torch fairly well. This is all to the good. She fully understands what she believes and has no problem stating that in her writing.
I have to say, though, that my attraction to her blog has less to do with what she's written, and more to do with the comments she gets from a few anonymous lefties.
It's altogether too easy to paint these characters with the same stroke of the brush. Reading their comments, one would gather that they have been well indoctrinated by the Kos Machine. That is to say, they spend more time making MTV-spawned personal attacks against the author ("You stink.") and less time arguing her more salient points ("You don't like Kerry. You stink."). Then, of course, they wait for guys like me to jump in and accuse them of just that so they can take the Victim POV and claim that we are all shills of the Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly triumvirate. (Did I mention that I never watch or listen to any of these gentlemen?)
Yeesh.
One such commenter to this post, wherein Jen links to some older commentary by Mark Steyn, went so far as to imply that we didn't get it. He (I'm assuming this is a "he") was only "poking fun" at Jen, apparently. I guess my own sense of humor is impaired enough that I didn't immediately see just how funny such zingers as "Boy, you are nothing but negative energy. Are you like this around your kids?" really are. Is this the sort of thing that Conan says? I've never watched the man, so I couldn't say.
But Mr. Anonymous went on to make (finally!) what I believe was his only money quote:
Sad actually, but the liberals were always more interesting since they are the ones who questioned authority and the status quo, kind of like some dudes 200 years ago who dared question a monarch.
To which I can only say: Dude, you'd really be surprised just how "right wing" those who questioned that monarch truly were.
No comments:
Post a Comment