barking yonkers

the thing about the national review online (no, you get no stinking link, beeyotch) that really gets to me is that they are barking mad. also, they are incoherent.

i can't even understand the nutjob rantings they are making - understand meaning, of course, 'parse their claims into coherent sentences' rather than 'see how someone might think said chain of thoughts followed the rules of logic'.

i can't stomach citing an example, i just can't. but take it from me that i have been scratching my head trying to make sense out of posts that have sentences a propos of no previous argument and yet presuppose said previous arguments.

i decided to stomach an extract:

HANNITIZING THE VOTE [KJL]

I think it's important that Bush did that Sean Hannity interview--of which I've heard and watched parts. It's important because he gets to make his case, to a wide national audience and rally the troops. And take a second to contrast, say, the Kerry-Couric interview and the Bush-Hannity. Hannity asks actual intelligent questions, and Bush answers them well, substantively. Bush, of course, besides doing a "friendly," sat down with Gibson (and some of his silly questions), not knowing what he'd get. Kerry knew pretty full well.

that was not taken out of context. i get the general gist - bush + hannity good, kerry + couric bad - but what the frelling hezmana do those sentences mean? are they typing these entries after their liquid lunch? i mean, "It's important because he gets to make his case, to a wide national audience and rally the troops." what? is that, like, the grocer's comma or something?

and sweet six-teated mother of the tcho-tcho, sean hannity's interview was as hard-hitting as jon stewart's was. so i gotta ask - sean, baby: what did the prezninent have for lunch two weeks ago? i mean, here's a quote from faux nudes' own transcript:

HANNITY: Do you think that when he says these things, John Kerry, your opponent, you were in these three debates with him, do you think he knows he's not telling the truth? I mean...

BUSH: I'm not sure Sean.

HANNITY: You've been pretty clear on the issue, but yet he continues to go out there and say it. When I think of old people that I know that say to you, uh oh, somebody is going to take my Social Security and that scares them.

well, i'm sure glad he's not biased, or stumping for bush, or making the talking points for bush, who has a robot attached to his back to control his desire to do a line of coke right on national television when hannity sucks his faux-texan cock like that. (he can't help it - pavlovian response.)

let's just recap the nro's perception with what we just read: "Hannity asks actual intelligent questions, and Bush answers them well, substantively."

having the stomach flu was less nauseating than reading that kind of dren.