Richard Cohen-Right Wing Jerk of the Week

It never fails. The right seems to dig these idiots out of some pile of steaming Novak. The Op-ed by Richard Cohen in today's WaPo is just the most disingenuous piece of turd I have ever read or he is just an asshole.

This Is the Free-Speech Party?
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, October 4, 2005; Page A23

There are times when I sorely miss boilerplate -- those entirely predictable statements made by politicians that often begin with the word "frankly," then proceed to the phrase "I don't think the American people want," and conclude with a thundering banality that a drowsy dog could see coming. That was especially the case last week when I started reading what Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, had to say about Tom DeLay, her Republican opposite. I fully expected boilerplate, something about innocent until proved guilty. But Pelosi crossed me up. DeLay, as it turned out, was guilty until proved innocent.

Oh for Jeesbus' sake Dick. You've got to be kidding. Even by Texas standards DeLay is corrupt. Its no secret about his trips and association with a man who may be indicted for murder let alone money laundering.

Pelosi's statement:

"The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people,"

Should we start the litany: Ohio's coingate, the Shakespearean twists and turns of Rovegate, the sheer tragedy of Gitmo and Abu Grahib, and lest we forget the absolute incompetence and cronyism in the aftermath of Katrina and to a lesser extent Rita.

Dick, the above only highlights your WILLFUL ignorance of current events, something you are apparently paid to comment on. What really made me spit my morning coffee all over my monitor was the succeeding paragraphs of unabashed racism that would make Lester Maddox blush.

Responding to a caller who argued that if abortion were outlawed the Social Security trust fund would benefit -- more people, more contributions, was the apparent (idiotic) reasoning -- Bennett said, sure, he understood what the fellow was saying. It was similar to the theory that the low crime rate of recent years was the consequence of high abortion rates: the fewer African American males born, the fewer crimes committed. (Young black males commit a disproportionate share of crime.) This theory has been around for some time. Bennett was not referring to anything new.

I was convinced I was reading satire. My mind just couldn't wrap itself around the idea that this was written in 2005. This is called a weasel folks. Statistically speaking African American males do commit a higher proportion of crimes in the U.S. Ok. Fine. Bennett's comments did not have to single out over 16% of the American population for abortion. I feel Bennett's comments were not taken out of context, read the transcript, and exposes more about his beliefs (and no yours Dick) than he may have wanted revealed. Just one more point Dick, in just what circles is this theory you refer to discussed in? Does it involve bed sheet masks and/or your choice of burning religious symbol?

But you couldn't just leave your apparent (idiotic) statement alone could you Dick:

Actually, it is Reid and the others who should apologize to Bennett. They were condemning and attempting to silence a public intellectual for a reference to a theory. It was not a proposal and not a recommendation -- nothing more than a possible explanation. But the Democrats preferred to pander to an audience that either had heard Bennett's remarks out of context, or merely thought that any time conservatives talk about race, they are being racist

An explanation of what? The rights continuing demonization of no-whites? The rights continued willful ignorance and neglect to the social problems that plague us right tot the high water mark of Katrina?

I began this little missive by asking if you article was "just the most disingenuous piece of turd I have ever read" or if you were "just an asshole". Upon further reflection I have decided that turd hardly describes your Op-Ed and that my second query does not go far enough.