We're angry fascists

It seems that some of the "opinion makers" in the mainstream media are getting a bit upset that many people are ditching their inane ramblings and are instead reading the blogs.

For example, Lee Siegel of The New Republic;

It's a bizarre phenomenon, the blogosphere. It radiates democracy's dream of full participation but practices democracy's nightmare of populist crudity, character-assassination, and emotional stupefaction. It's hard fascism with a Microsoft face. It puts some people, like me, in the equally bizarre position of wanting desperately for Joe Lieberman to lose the Democratic primary to Ned Lamont so that true liberal values might, maybe, possibly prevail, yet at the same time wanting Lamont, the hero of the blogosphere, to lose so that the fascists forces ranged against Lieberman might be defeated. (Every critical event in democracy is symbolic of the problem with democracy.)

I am overwhelmed by the intolerance and rage in the blogosphere. Conscientiously criticize, in the form of a real argument, blogospheric favorites like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, and the response isn't similar criticism, done conscientiously and in the form of an argument, but insults, personal attacks, and even threats. This truly is the stuff of thuggery and fascism.

The theme that is emerging for me is one of substance. Way back when, I thought about the style I'd use in writing the blog, and queried some regular readers to see if I should tone it down, and stop the f-bombs and all that. The consensus from what I consider to be "enlightened" people was to leave it as is.

Now we're seeing MSM writers that are focusing on the style and "anger" of the blogs in supporting their disparaging of the lefty blogs. The conclusion I've come to is that these people are so intellectually barren that they can't debate the central point of an argument when the writing style catches their eyes, like an autistic kid that stares at the record player going round and round. The kid doesn't hear the music when all he can focus on is the turning of the record.

It's the same argument I have with people here at work. The question is, are engineers trained or is it natural ability? Some think they are trained, but the vast majority of the good ones know it's natural ability. For the vast majority of the people in the world, I could sit down and train them for countless hours and they'd never "get it". The exact same phenomenon applies when debating. Just as most people have no natural skill in logic, most lack the critical thinking required to parse an argument from it's style.

Hence, you see the river of tears from the MSM writers as they lose more relevance to the bloggers every single day. After all, if people are attracted to a blog writer, that's a pretty good indication that the writer is doing a very good job and was not merely appointed to, say, The New Republic.

Oh.. and I forgot to make the stupid people go all Rain Man.. lest they actually start to understand what I'm saying, let me offend their sensibilities.

Fuck.

There.. that should have invalidated my entire argument.

** update **

The Rude Pundit weighs in on this topic, and in typical rude fashion, turns up the record player to the 78 speed. He is the ultimate Rain Man test.

** update 2 **

It seems this anti-blogger rant at TNR is a big deal. From what I'm reading, the traditional pundits are just now catching onto the democratic "base" of the party. From a Kossack:

The Republican grassroots, of course, are characterized by a lemming-like herd which is purely reactionary. There exists a hierarchy on the right, characterized at the bottom by a scared shitless base huddled together in a FOX-induced stupor, awaiting the clarion call of one hate-mongerer after the other, whether it be blubbering idiocies of one Jerry Falwell, or the logically-impaired tirades of one Rush Limbaugh, or the shrill and maniacal rants of one Ann Coulter. What should we fear today? The gays or the Hispanics? The Muslims or the abortion doctors? Ted Kennedy or Jane Fonda? The New York Times or The New York Times? Theirs is a world filled with proud "Dittoheads" who take the word of those with the loudest and most obnoxious voices as Gospel.