President Bush's former speech writer Michael Gerson goes on attack on behalf of Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) today. Gerson is the man responsible for writing the speeches that lied us into the Iraq War. Now as a journalist, he's been a defender and advocate of all things Republican. From defending the lies he helped construct to lead us into war to beating the Iran war drum to now defending vulnerable Republicans, Gerson has a prominent location from which to expound ... The Washington Post.

In the razor-close and nationally important Senate race in Minnesota, Republican incumbent Norm Coleman is presented with a unique political problem. Should he raise in his ads the issue of comedian Al Franken's offensive vulgarity? Or would this risk a backlash against Coleman for coarsening the public conversation? Remember that when Ken Starr detailed Bill Clinton's most repulsive antics -- stained dresses and such -- it was Starr who was accused of sexual obsessiveness.
(Washington Post)

Norm doesn't have to "coarsen" the public discourse, because there are thousands of right wing shills like Gerson to do it for him. Gerson understands that Coleman's strategy must be deflecting attention from his cheerleading of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, from his partisan voting record and from his flip-flops on the major issues of the day. What better way than to attack Norm's opponent for him from the lofty heights of serious journalism and a twice weekly column in the Washington Post?

In Gerson's twisted worldview it is far worse to write offensive satire than cheerlead the country into a war and occupation based upon lies. Unforgivable for Al to propose a tasteless bit of satire during a brainstorming session, whereas Norm, as Chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, was ignoring the greed, corruption, lawlessness and incompetence of the Bush Administration. Unconscionable of Al to perform impersonations of conservative icons while Norm kept voting for blank checks for Iraq as well as tax cuts for the rich which have resulted in mortgaging our future to the Chinese and the Saudis.

In attacking Al Franken, Gerson overlooks the vast majority of Franken's work and speeches. In Gerson's warped worldview Al's major works include his time on SNL, the offending Playboy article and a few speeches. This is taking the art of taking things out of context to a new extreme. There is no mention of "Rush Limbaugh is a Big, Fat Idiot" or "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them." Since the publication of "Rush Limbaugh is a Big, Fat Idiot" Al has spoken at least several dozen times per year, yet Gerson singles out three speeches out of hundreds, one SNL skit that never made it out of the brainstorming stage and one magazine article.

Franken's "brand name" includes other highlights. In 2006, after a long monologue about a dog and its vomit, Franken impersonated the deceased Sen. Strom Thurmond as saying: "Yeah, I screwed a woman who was vomiting once." He once proposed a television sketch about a female CBS reporter being drugged and raped. He has suggested that his next book title might be "I F -- -- -- Hate Those Right-Wing Motherf -- -- -- !" At an event hosted by the Feminist Majority Foundation in 1999, Franken offered this thigh-slapper: "Why don't we focus on what Afghan women can do? They can cook, bear children and pray. As I recall, that was fine for our grandmothers."

Our popular culture, of course, violates even these expansive boundaries of tastelessness with regularity. We laugh at comedies featuring the C-word and at cartoons of foul-mouthed third-graders. In the cause of relevance and realism, our common life is already decorated with excrement. Why should political discourse be any different?

For at least one reason: Because vulgarity is often the opposite of civility. This is not, of course, always true. I know a brilliant and large-hearted academic with roots in south Philly who uses the F-word with the frequency of "like" or "and." But the vulgarity of "The Jerry Springer Show" or misogynous rap music -- the cultural equivalents of Franken's political "satire" -- generally expresses contempt and cruelty. Franken is not content to disagree with Karl Rove; he calls him "human filth." He is not satisfied to criticize Ari Fleischer; Franken terms him a "chimp." The objects of Franken's humor -- including political opponents and women -- are not merely mocked but dehumanized. His trashiness is also nastiness. Rather than lampooning the emptiness and viciousness of our political discourse -- a proper role for satire -- Franken has powerfully reinforced those failures.
(Washington Post)

Gerson is pointing this out for specific reasons -- to keep the focus off of Norm's record. Gerson is not offended enough by Glenn Beck calling electing a progressive congress tantamount to treason to write anything. Gerson is not offended by Grandpa McSame calling his wife a ****. Gerson was not offended by Dick Cheney's vulgarity when he told Sen. Patrick Leahy to "go **** yourself" on the floor of the Senate. Gerson is not offended by Bush's latest slander of anyone who opposes torture, rendition and Guantanamo during an interview:

BOULTON: There are those who would say look, lets take Guantanamo Bay, and Abu Ghraib, and rendition and all those things and to them that is the complete opposite of freedom.

BUSH: Of course, if you want to slander America.
(Think Progress)

No, Michael Gerson is as selective in his outrage as Norm is select in his oversight.

Orwell would be proud

In Gerson's parrallel universe, we should be offended when he claims that "Orwell would be proud." Apparently, Gerson either never read Orwell's "1984" or is misremembering it. Orwell was trying to point out that when guys like Gerson write speeches for shrubbery like our President that conflate aluminum tubes into nuclear bomb shells, losing into winning, lies into truth, darkness into light, torture into interrogation, we should all be scared.

So Orwell would probably be proud that Al Franken stood up when few would and tell the truth ... that Limbaugh is a fat, lying gasbag, that Bill O'Reilly is loofah-loving @$$ clown. Al was one of the few people who stood up in the face of the 24/7 right wing media blitz and said that the emperor has no clothes.

Hypocrisy at its finest

The man who brings us those infamous 16 words in the 2003 State of Union address, the man who crafted the speeches of the most divisive, incompetent and corrupt President in the history of the United States, the man who wrote the speeches that steered our national discourse into the depths it now currently languishes, sums it all up:

Some institutions must be more than a mirror to our culture, including families, religious communities and government. At its best, politics can offer examples of civility and generosity that challenge selfishness and prejudice -- the tradition so far embraced by both John McCain and Barack Obama. At the very least, politics should not actively push our culture toward vulgarity and viciousness. This is not prudery; it is a practical concern for the cooperation and mutual respect necessary in a functioning democracy. And it is hard to believe those causes would be served by a Sen. Franken.
(Washington Post)

Irony? Hypocrisy? Sheesh. These Republicans have absolutely no shame. Politics at its worst is Michael Gerson's speeches for George Bush. Cynical, orwellian, folksy, dogmatic ... aw **** ... I'm running out of adjectives.