It was an interesting week. Liberal commentators, personalities and politicians engaged in misogyny, playground taunts, religious crusades and contributed further to the Beavis-and-Butthead-ization of political discourse.
There were, of course, the usual suspects, the sort who could easily end up winning this award weekly. I have to raise the hate-bar for these people just to give the others a fair shot.
Joy Behar called Obama critics "the stinky kids in the coatroom who eat their own boogers". And both Congressman Alan Grayson and MSNBC TV host Ed Schultz tried to earn their way into the he-man woman-haters club by calling someone a "whore". Grayson's
target was an advisor to Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, while
Schultz went after the wife of independent Senator Joe Lieberman.
We saw more uses of the pejorative "teabagger" to describe tea party protesters. Note to the uninitiated: tea partiers do not use that term for themselves. It is actually a rather sick sexual joke, a term used to belittle those people disagree with. It's morally equivalent of referring to a homosexual as a "fudge packer": just incredibly sick and wrong. If you want to be taken seriously as an adult, don't use the term.
Unfortunately, too many liberals who ought to know better are still trying to mainstream the term. Frank Rich went the Beavis route in his
column in the pages of the New York Times in which he also, incredibly, referred to Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin as "Stalinists" (somehow calling Barack Obama a "socialist" doesn't seem so bad any more). And NJ.com writer Jamie Duffy
used the term not once, not twice, but seven times in her story on the Morristown, New Jersey, tea party.
And speaking of the New York Times, Maureen Dowd was the latest columnist from that paper to
engage in
Know-Nothing-ness, spreading lies about the Pope and the Catholic church. She misrepresented a
letter Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote before he became Pope Benedict XVI, saying it called for women to be submissive when it actually spoke of "active collaboration" between the sexes and also said that
"women should be present in the world of work and in the organization of society, and that women should have access to positions of responsibility which allow them to inspire the policies of nations and to promote innovative solutions to economic and social problems."
Hardly seems like wanting to keep 'em barefoot and pregnant, doesn't it? She also repeats the
discredited claim that he had joined the Hitler Youth. Membership was compulsory and he deserted the group as soon as he was able, even though doing so made it harder to pay tuition.
And then there was Mike Malloy, radio show host, who responded to Dick Cheney's criticism of the President's policy (or lack thereof) in Afghanistan. Malloy showed what an astute observer he was when he
exclaimed that Cheney was looking "very ruddy"...and concluded that he must have just eaten a baby. He then expounded for a bit on this observation, telling how it must have been a Jewish or Muslim baby and not a Christian baby, and referred to Liz Cheney as his "spawn" rather than his daughter.
On face value, Malloy is the worst of the bunch. But it is clear that he is joking, as over the top and sick as the joke is, while Dowd clearly believes her drivel. So I'm splitting the prize this week. Maureen Dowd and Mike Malloy are this week's co-winners of the Liberal Hater of the Week award.
Chatboard (6)