Now that Zarqawi’s Gone
words and music by Dr. BLT (c)2006
http://www.drblt.com/music/nowthatzarq.mp3

Now that Zarqawi’s Gone (acoustic mix)
words and music by Dr. BLT (c)2006
http://www.drblt.com/music/now.mp3

Now that Zarqawi’s Gone

words and music by Dr. BLT (c)2006

we can breathe a whole lot easier

now that Zarqawi’s gone

we can cautiously celebrate

now that Zarqawi’s gone

now that Zarqawi’s gone

we’ve got a reason for a brand new song

no, it ain’t over

but we’re feelin’ mighty strong

now that Zarqawi’s gone

when I heard it on

the evening news

I told myself

This must be wrong

But when I saw

The photographs

Upon the screen

I soon became convinced

Zarqawi’s gone

Now I know they’re gonna say

This doesn’t matter

‘cause we opened up a hornet’s nest

you know

yeah, some will say

it doesn’t matter

but it does to me

we’ve crushed the head of a serpent–

a serpent in his sleep

now that Zarqawi’s gone

we’ve got a reason for a brand new song

no, it ain’t over

but we’re feelin’ mighty strong

now that Zarqawi’s gone

I don’t know if you said this in response to my post, but if you did, you didn’t really address my point, which was that your quoting removes all context, which makes all the difference. Charles led with an unqualified “very good news.” Atrios led with snark: “I’m supposed to give the obligatory “YAY USA!” cheer here,”

The difference in attitude is clear.

Note the tone and content in this sentence – a classic case of projection.

“But that is not the converstation we were having.”

Strike as non – responsive; signs of cognitive dissonance are apparent here.

“So good day.”

Also note how the post ends with an expression of barely – concealed hostile “goodwill,” whereby said commenter assures himself of having won the argument without actually engaging in it, which is a strong sign of a highly – developed inferiority complex.

But since most on the right also view Zarqawi’s death as a non-event, this tactic is quite transparent in this situation.

Do you have any links to back up that claim of “most on the right”, or are you just pulling that out of your ass? Your quote from Charles Johnson is the only one you’ve cited and from what I’ve seen in the last 18 hours, it’s by far the most “negative” of any of the “rightie blogs”. Declaring victory by unsupported assertion is hardly “winning a debate”.

Open Thread

When Atrios says “good news, but it probably won’t amount to anything, ‘hopefully’ I’m wrong,” (also paraphrased) he doesn’t think we’ll win, and he really doesn’t believe we should.

Charles is doubtful about the impact this will have in winning the fight against terrorists in Iraq. Atrios is doubtful that it will have any true significance whatsoever, and he’s doubted we can win against them from the beginning.

While Charles takes a measured view on the subject, Atrios can’t help but be snarky. I suppose it might just be a difference in style, but what do I know.

No extras needed in Kos’s case, Brian. Kos made the following statement regarding the Iraq war:

“I feel nothing over the death of merceneries. They aren’t in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.”

Here’s a lovely survey I just looked up that they ran on Memorial Day:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/5/29/92153/4264

More deep thoughts from the great wizards of Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/16/18159/6294

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/30/185111/099

And so on, and so on, and so on…
You can shake a stick in any direction and view the kind of bile that’s posted on this guy’s site on a daily basis, and keep in mind that all of it is under the auspices of what he and his “editorial contributors” choose to present to their audience. This does not concern his readership’s comments, which are an entirely different subject matter. I don’t believe that Charles Johnson traffics in this kind of rhetoric regularly, although his readership often does – he does not edit his reader’s comments, and Kos lets his readers rant on at length as well.

Therefore, it is entirely logical to get a very distinct and vivid picture of what Kos thinks about a great many subjects, and his corresponding attitudes towards same. To insist otherwise is illogical, and pure folly on your part.

You praise the one who you say will have a party over what he admits is an insignificant event as being “logical” and “interested in the big picture”. Whereas the one who has no party and instead prefers to discuss what might actually improve the situation is “pining over the moment” and being “sullen”.

This is not a reasonable analysis of right vs. left reaction to Zarqawi’s death. This is an “I hate leftie blogs and love rightie blogs” post that could have been posted at any time without relation to any particular world event. But since most on the right also view Zarqawi’s death as a non-event, this tactic is quite transparent in this situation.

Charles just seems resigned to this being a non-event, but he gets a pass from you.

You seem to have missed his “Candygram for Zarqawi” post, where he has a movie of Zarqawi’s Moment of Zen, in which Zarqawi becomes one with the earth around him.

Charles Johnson is primarily a news aggregator, specifically for news relating to Islamofascists and their actions/policies. He doesn’t tend to go all out on posts. Off camera, he’s probably preparing to throw a bash with the lizardroids, as is befitting the moment.

He’s also not “sullen,” but rather logical about the situation. He’s happy, but more interested in the big picture than pining over these moments as lefty bloggers are wont to do.