I think I have to stop reading this site. I don't know how many bangs against the desk my skull can handle, but I must be approaching the limit.
I very much appreciate and respect what you do, but I do have a job to do, and constant nausea doesn't help my productivity.

Oh, please, Richard Cohen won't still be with us in 3003 will he?

Oh, please, Richard Cohen won't still be with us in 3003 will he?

Yes. But I've decided to change it to the incorrect 2003 because it would make the weak-minded break.

I'm with Reid S. My fragile psyche can't take any more of your horridly abusive recounting of the truth.

I won't be held responsible for whatever irrational thing is bound to occur eventually. You're pushing us over the brink.

Is all I'm saying.

How did a fool like Richard Cohen get a column at the WaPo? Oh right--you explained it two posts earlier: Free press isn't free.

Kucinich himself seemed only momentarily fazed by Perle's sharp right to his integrity and went on, indomitable demagogue that he seems to be

What particularly stands out to me when I read what neoconservatives, or their toadies in the media, say about people like Kucinich, is their tendency to exaggerate.

When our media describes a person who says something pro-peace, or even just commonsensically honest, they say, "The Radical Dennis Kucinich raved, 'Iraq is about Oil!'". Anytime someone says something vaguely anti-war or anti-Bush, even if it was silly and obvious, the media presents it with some headline: "Critic Slams Iraq War". I always notice that. Even papers like the New York Times do that.

When this same media describes something pro-war said by, say, Giuliani, they say, "Giuliani mentioned that he would like to nuke Iran until it glows" without exaggeration.

It's hard to decide who's worse in the WaPost: Cohen or Kissinger. They're even on smarminess. Kissinger is the clear winner in the cliche category. Kissinger beats Cohen on the big lies, Cohen rises to the top with the little ones.
But Kissinger's long-winded and wannabe elder-statesman musings do transport you into the early stages of the flu--headache, dizziness, hot flahes, vomiting. Cohen just causes bloating.
Final Score: Kissinger 28 Cohen 10
Both lose 5 points for humorlessness.

How dare you read what he wrote then and compare it to what he's writing now? That's so uncivil.

OK, using Cohen's logic and standards of morality:

In Minneapolis a few weeks ago, a man's pit bull attacked and killed his young son. As a major pundit, Cohen almost certainly heard about this story, but he did not denounce the dog or get personally involved in ending this type of tragedy. Therefore, it seems that Cohen fully approves of pit bulls killing children.

As a major pundit, Cohen almost certainly heard about this story...

In your allegory you forgot to mention that a few days before the event Cohen wrote a column for a major newspaper stating that pit bulls never ever attack children and that only a demagogue and fool would suggest that they might...

I agree with Reid, perhaps one of the reasons I seldom comment, as my fingers are usually massaging my skull after smacking it against the desk.

That said, I find it amusing that some writers can just write whatever, and never look back at their previous work. Would that us plebes could do that in our personal lives.

I need a drink.

Ah, yes -- Richard Cohen. He hasn't changed. I recall right after the Iran/contra scandal came to light (no thanks to the American Free Press, btw), Cohen, fellow lib scribe Mark Shields, and A. Cockburn appeared on the old Phil Donahue show to discuss it. Cockburn was great (this was back in his prime), but Cohen and Shields defended Reagan, made excuses for the arms sales, and generally did what they could to bolster the imperial system. That's when I stopped listening to Cohen. Jon may now want to follow suit.

"[S]omething truly awful has happened. The looming war has already become deeply and biliously ideological."

That's a remarkable remark.

That's a very interesting Feb. 2003 quote from Cohen. It acknowledges the existence of dissenters prior to the Great Adventure's start. But then as now, what matters is not that these people were right but that they were divisive.

What is truly bizarre is that no one writes about Dick Cheney the way they write about Dennis Kucinich. The crazy lying man gets treated with respect and fear while the brave truth-telling guy gets dismissed as a joke and a lightweight and 'unelectable'. Yet another case of the analysis revealing far more about the analyst(s) than about the subject.

Aunt Deb - I just wish Dennis's young, tall, hot, tongue-studded Brit wife got more publicity - the Wikipedia article on her refers to her MySpace page, where she notes that "My final exam for my MA [University of Kent at Canterbury] was on “Conflict Resolution in World Politics” - the date of the exam: September 11th, 2001.

I told George that he should've put general Glxtcherieiux in charge of the report to congress, given the difficulty people have rhyming stuff with his name, but did he listen?

I recoiled at Cohen's latest the other day, but had missed this Kucinich piece.

So this guy, who Deep in His Heart Knows He's Funny, is scandalized by Stephen Colbert mocking Bush and by Hillary Clinton not falling into lockstep with the right-wing, and cuts loose on Kucinich?!? He's even more of an ass and an idiot than I thought.

What really got me about his latest is that he completely ignores discussing any of the substance of the Move On ad, regardless of any critiques of their style. But Cohen has always been shallow and a bourgeois pearl-clutcher.

[S]omething truly awful has happened. The looming war has already become deeply and biliously ideological.

Now that I look back on this Cohen quote, something else jumps out at me: war is "looming", but Cohen doesn't find that "awful", rather, it's the fact that people are being "ideological" about it.

So, facing the prospect of thousands of innocents being torn apart by bombs, Cohen sees Dennis Kucinich's appearance on Meet the Press and is horrified.

Honestly, what more do you need to know about the man? "Why can't we have a nice little non-ideological war here?", he cries, "Is that too much to ask for?"

I told George that he should've put general Glxtcherieiux in charge of the report to congress, given the difficulty people have rhyming stuff with his name, but did he listen?

Dat funnnny!
I'd bet dollars to dog dooky he was known as Lootenant Betrayus by his men back in the day...

Aunt Deb: Ole Cousin Deadeye has the Media in fear of getting gutshot, whereas Kucinich seems nonthreating and peaceable. (and the Media, being sharks)