Thursday, May 19, 2011


Good Lord, these people are delicate flowers. Jay Cost, blogging for The Weekly Standard:

AP Takes Cheap Shot at Dick Cheney

Reading a short AP story on the new Dick Cheney book, I couldn't help but note this line:
A favorite of the right, Cheney is widely regarded as among the most powerful and controversial of vice presidents and his book is the most anticipated vice presidential memoir in recent history.
How ignorant and disrespectful it is to suggest that Cheney is "widely regarded" as the most "controversial of vice presidents!"

Cost then goes on for another 184 words, listing eight other vice presidents who might be deemed more controversial (John C. Breckenridge! Schuyler Colfax!). How dare AP say Cheney is "'widely regarded' as the most 'controversial of vice presidents!'"

Of course, Cost is having a reading comprehension problem -- AP told us that Cheney is regarded as among the most controversial VPs. But now, apparently, it's offensive to say even that.

Is there anything these people won't whine about?


Cheney's lucky he's a Republican, because if he weren't, he'd be getting grief for the very title of his book:

In My Time? Oooh, it's all about him, isn't it?

Now, I read that title as a more ponderous version of "in my day...," which seems perfectly appropriate for an old man's memoirs. I don't begrudge him the title.

But imagine if he were a Democrat. I invoked the phrase "it's all about him" because wingers routinely use it in reference to Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. And I thought I did a pretty good job of debunking Victor Davis Hanson's assertion that Obama overused the word "I" in his we-got-Osama speech, but there was Fox Nation going after Obama using the same evidence-challenged argument Hanson used -- and doing so yesterday, sixteen freaking days after the speech was delivered. The right just can't let this go.

So when Obama leaves office, he'd better not use a personal pronoun in the title of his memoir, or we'll never hear the end of it from right-wingers.

No comments: