Thursday, January 19, 2006

Form Letter Editorial

Learned Foot at Kool-Aid Report has been posting an amusing series of Mad Libs based on lefty letters to the editor at Twin Cities-based newspapers. His point is that every letter repeats the same memes and tropes over and over again, that each one must have used the same template with blanks in which to fill in words.

The editorial writers at the Pittsburgh Moist-Towelette must operate the same way. How else to explain this morning's editorial explaining why the paper is opposed to Sam Alito's nomination to the
U.S. Supreme Court? The editors worked in a lot of material here:

  • We have too much information about Alito's experience, too little about his political views (even though his judicial qualifications are not what are on trial here -- isn't this a job interview?)
  • Alito is a symptom of what's wrong in Bush's America (because anything having to do with GWB undermines the causes of Socialism in America and Jihad abroad)
  • Alito is bad because Christians like him (since people who believe in God are evil)
  • Alito is a hypocrite who misrepresents himself (he has to deal with a bunch of smug, self-centered arsehole Democrats who would accuse him of lying if he tried to talk about the weather)
  • In spite of everything else you read in this editorial, Alito is well-qualified and even a lot of Democrats like him (this must be the P-G's way of trying to sound fair and balanced)
  • Alito is unworthy because of the CAP controversy (lame attempt at painting him guilty by association) and because Ted Kennedy, who is a political god, said so (the Chappaquiddick killer is untouchable because all of his brothers were shot to death)
  • Alito may be open-minded, but it's a conservative kind of open mind (the paper's grounds for immediate disqualification for anything)
  • An open appeal to Arlen Specter to change his mind (because Arlen is, you know, the only "good Republican in the country, in the eyes of the Moist-Towelette)
  • Alito is a fascist who is opposed to killing babies (and, for all we know, also opposes the drowning of young women in automobiles)
Go back and look at the rest of the editorial. You could substitute just about any judicial nominee's name for Alito's, and aside from a couple of minor details, the editorial would have been the same no matter what.

The left hasd really gotten predictable these days. I'm surprised, frankly, that Halliburton didn't somehow come up.

No comments: