Dispatch from the Fever Swamps

It infuriates me that when trying to discuss real issues with liberals, they always speak in generalities and they always claim moral superiority.  When Glenn Beck says something outrageous, he is inciting a right wing coup d'etat, but when Keith Olbermann says something outrageous, he is simply stating a truism.  What difference does it make that a Republican Congressman shouted "You lie!" to President Obama while a Democratic Congressman shouted on the floor of the House of Representatives that the Republican health care plan calls for everyone who is sick to "Die Quickly"?  Neither comment added anything to the debate.  For goodness' sake, cannot we just discuss the issues on the merits?

I am rambling on this topic because I visited the fever swamps today, specifically the online edition of The Nation, and I came away infected.  In this article, written by one "Leslie Savan," we learn that, when it comes to overheated rhetoric, the lefties are all just lovable teddy bears, while the righties are extremists of the worse sort:

The thing about liberals is they do this [denounce George W. Bush] standing naked in a shower and come out merely wet and spluttering. The thing about rightwingers is they work themselves up into a similar rage, strap on a .45 loaded with dum-dums, and go to political meetings screaming that something must be done about Adolf Obama--or maybe write columns seriously suggesting a military coup "to resolve the 'Obama problem.'"

Yep, that's us alright.  Now, where did I put my .45?