Whew! Finally, we're not hearing that incessant murmur of lefty gloaters anticipating federal indictments of Bush and Cheney. (Who's delusional again?)

Making up absurdities for the express purpose of "debunking" them: apparently, it's the prime directive of the blogosphere.
 

I don't understand your point. A week ago, there were rumors on the lefty "news" site Raw Story that there would be 22 indictments. If you wade into the fever swamps of Daily Kos and the Democratic Underground, they were sure that Bush and Cheney were on the list. Is there another absurdity in Steyn's article I'm missing?
 

The point: excavating the shrillest nonsense from the internet, then citing it as mainstream opinion to be lampooned, is a childish and stupid dead end. It's done in order to invent an imaginary opposition of drooling psychotics which must forever be "defeated." And unfortunately, it's a tactic that both sides now use routinely.

Thus, the one-billionth example of this tactic is hardly a "must-read," even if it packs 5 tortured wordplays into 2 sentences. And talk about "strained analogy" overload: the scandal is a country song, the indictments are Christmas, foreign policy is a commercial airline flight, and the whole thing's a 007 movie. "Must" anyone read this stuff?