Washington Post reconfirms its status as fishwrap

[n2doc]

Joining the LA Times as rags willing to print RW idiot Dinesh D'Souza's rantings....

Bin Laden, The Left and Me
By Dinesh D'Souza
Sunday, January 28, 2007; Page B01


As a conservative author, I'm used to a little controversy. Even so, the reaction to my new book, "The Enemy at Home," has felt, well, a little hysterical.

"Ratfink writes new book," James Wolcott, cultural critic for Vanity Fair, declares in his blog. He goes on to call my book a "sleazy, shameless, ignorant, ahistorical, tendentious, meretricious lie."

In the pages of Esquire, Mark Warren charges that I "hate America" and have "taken to heart" Osama bin Laden's view of the United States. (Warren also challenged me to a fight and threatened to put me in the hospital.) In his New York Times review of my book last week, Alan Wolfe calls my work "a national disgrace . . . either self-delusional or dishonest." I am "a childish thinker" with "no sense of shame," he argues. "D'Souza writes like a lover spurned; despite all his efforts to reach out to Bin Laden, the man insists on joining forces with the Satanists."

It goes on. The Washington Post's Warren Bass writes that I think Jerry Falwell was "on to something" when he blamed the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, on pagans, gays and the ACLU. Slate's Timothy Noah diagnoses me with "Mullah envy," while the Nation's Katha Pollitt calls me a "surrender monkey" and the headline to her article brands me "Ayatollah D'Souza." And in my recent appearance on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," I had to fend off the insistent host. "But you agree with the Islamic radicals, don't you?" Stephen Colbert asked again and again.

more garbage at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012601624.html

Awww.... Stephen Colbert was mean to him! Call the Waaaaahbulance!

[hatrack]

1. So he had to "fend off" that "insistent" Stephen Colbert?

1. What did he expect?

2. And if he expected it, WHY DID HE GO ON THE SHOW?

Whiny dumbass.

[Clark2008]

2. Didn't he used to date Ann Coulter?

I mean, he should be used to hysteria and insistant hosts.

:shrug:

[geomon666]

3. And unsightly body hair.

*shivers*

[nuxvomica]

7. He learned the language of love in the arms of Coulter and Ingraham

So let's pity him for that.

[originalpckelly]

4. Dinesh wants America to be more like Afghanistan...

How does he plan on winning the war on terror, if we are more like our enemies?

[WinstonSmith4740]

5. Just another of the RW hacks who are pissed off.

People have finally begun to wise up to their hypocrisy. This guy should top the list. He had to "fend off" Colbert? I think that gives us an example of the bubble these bozos live in. First of all, do they not get it? (Considering the level of the sense of humor on that side of the aisle, my guess is "no".) Maybe they can't read what's on the screen while he's doing "The Word." Here's a heads up to the freepers here, so they can warn their idols...it's a put on, folks! He's doing O'Reilly. All the irrational arguments, all the rudeness to guests, all the RW cheerleading IS AN ACT folks. He's mirroring YOUR side. Isn't it funny how they go nuts when the same techniques are turned around on them? What probably got Dinesh so upset this time is even his wing-nut buddies had to admit that blaming FDR for 9/11 was probably a bit of a stretch. And it never ceases to amaze me how brutal, bloodthirsty dictators (like the Shah) are perfectly fine, as long as they're OUR brutal, bloodthirsty dictators. And Carter didn't turn his back on the Shah. He was brought to this country for medical treatment, and was here when the Embassy was seized. Let's not also forget that the Reagan campaign made a deal with the devil to KEEP our citizens there until after the election. Remember Iran/Contra freepers? Of course not.

Can we also not forget that this is the man who declared on Bill Maher's "Politically Incorrect" show that while Clinton had committed adultery with Monica, Eisenhauer's affair with Kay Summersby was NOT. Why? Because Eisenhauer and Summersby were in love, so it was a love affair, not adultery. And yes, he said it with a straight face, just like the FDR statement. I'm sure if Mamie were asked her opinion, it would have been adultery.

I'd say we need to ignore these people, but ignoring them is dangerous. They work in the darkest corners of our ignorance to exploit people's fears. The November elections has put them in a glaring spotlight, and even the conservatives among us have said, "Wait a minute...these guys can't be serious." They didn't lose in November because their "base" stayed home. They lost because their base has gotten wise to them.

[nuxvomica]

6. D'Souza's straw men prove the fallaciousness of his arguments

For example, he writes:
"Bin Laden isn't upset because there are U.S. troops in Mecca, as liberals are fond of saying."
Well liberals aren't fond of saying that. Bin Laden demanded the removal of bases established in SA during Desert Storm because it took away Saudi control over the protection of the sacred cities. Nobody has ever said, to my knowledge, that troops were actually stationed in Mecca except in D'Souza's straw man. If he can get this critical point wrong how can we believe anything else he says?

[librechik]

8. C-Span is giving him 3 HOURS!!! (but there will be call ins!)

so get ready to harass this unAmerican loser, if you are up to it.