Informed Speculation

The Blogometer at National Journal’s Hotline says the partisanship regarding the Michael Moore / Washington Post kerfuffles is off the charts:

Is it just us, or has the polarity of the blog poles reversed? Two years ago, liberal bloggers were heavily involved in their WH’04 nominating process, leaving the conservative bloggers to criticize the MSM for perceived liberal bias. But now, conservative bloggers are the ones focused on an intra-party election while liberals are firing volleys at the MSM for buying into GOP talking points. Further evidence that this is actually ’04 — filmmaker Michael Moore is once again a political football. As we noted on 1/20, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews is under fire for comparing Osama bin Laden’s rhetoric to Moore’s. Now some on the left are trying to turn the tables, tying bin Laden to Pres. Bush. Neither is an original concept.

In fact, as you read through today’s edition, it sometimes seems as if the left and right are trying to out-compare each other to the enemy. Neither side thinks they really mean it themselves, and few on either side are willing to ascribe anything but the basest motives to the other. Civility isn’t the blogosphere’s strong suit, but this is perhaps just a bit much.

The great Tom Maguire weighs in as well:

Matthews point is that Osama is adopting the rhetoric of Michael Moore, NOT that Michael Moore is adopting the rhetoric of Osama Bin Laden. This is an important distinction that the critics on the left seem to be determined to blur…

That’s exactly right; there may be some on the right equating opposition to Bush’s policies with tacit support for bin Laden, but that is not the case here. Tom’s distinction makes all the difference; in pointing out the ridiculous nature of this ‘controversy’, I have been trying to make a similar point: to say that bin Laden has adopted the talking points of the left is not to equate the left with terrorists…after all, bin Laden can choose to adopt the talking points of whomever he wishes, and there should be no shame where there is no responsibility.

It’s a relatively smart move by bin Laden that has nothing whatsoever to do with those who oppose Bush politically, legally, and peacefully…

However, the Washington Post story is another one entirely; in this case, the leftie blogs that sent the swarming hordes of profane pundits in attack mode bear all the responsibility for their obscene discourse. One situation was the result of bin Laden and he bears all the responsibility thereof; the other was a chosen path that reflects very poorly on those who chose to take it…