Thursday, February 03, 2005

Janeanne Garofalo Accuses GOP Members of Congress of Saluting Nazi-Fashion

From the Media Research Center. The link contains a specific bookmark to the fifth of ten stories about MSM coverage of the State of the Union address. Most of these are preposterous, but this one I just couldn't let pass--and neither could WorldNetDaily.

At issue was a gesture that the Republican caucus in the House and Senate made, to demonstrate their support of the mission in Iraq: they stained their fingers in indelible ink. Why did they do this? Because the Iraqis who voted in last Sunday's election had their fingers stained in that way, to prevent anyone from voting twice. (When you have millions of people voting with paper ballots, and the bulk of them can't even read, how else are you going to enforce the no-double-voting rule? Those Iraqis could probably teach some of our Superintendents of Elections a thing or two about how to keep an election fair and stop people from voting twice, or voting the cemetary. But I digress.)

So what does Janeane Garofalo choose to say? She said--on national television, no less--that those Republican Members of Congress were raising their hands in a Nazi salute. She even demonstrated this on camera to show people what she meant. You want to see? Follow this link, and make sure you have RealPlayer installed on your system.

Now I normally don't give an unripe fig about someone who thinks she's funny long after everyone has walked out of the improv, making a bigger fool of herself than she already is. But she just accused a bunch of people of doing something that they did not do, and that one of the most odious gestures that anyone could have made--one that would be tantamount to treason had we not won a certain war a long time ago.

My wife and I watched that State of the Union address on C-SPAN, the one station that doesn't interrupt you when you're trying to watch a live event. (Once we caught a rerun of the Inaugural Parade, which even Fox News Channel never saw fit to show.) On the few occasions when C-SPAN's cameras panned the House and Senate, we saw those Republicans holding up their ink-stained fingers. And we saw no one--is Janeanne Garofalo's agent reading this?--no one holding up his hand with all the fingers together in anything resembling a Nazi--or a Roman--salute. To paraphrase Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas, this did not occur.

And I'll tell you something else: I have a first cousin once removed who lost an eye in the Battle of the Bulge. I can't speak for him, but I know this: he has one good eye remaining to him. And if he ever finds out about that accusation, it will probably break his heart.

Ms. Garofalo went on to suggest that "those ink-fingered Republicans" cannot claim credit for the Iraqis risking life and limb to vote. Oh, yes, they can. Had they not voted as they did, those Iraqis wouldn't have had any polling places to go to. And that Iraqi woman who hugged the parents of the fallen Marine knew that, and was showing her appreciation. (Elsewhere on the linked page is a recounting of Chris Matthews' outrageous suggestion that the hugging event was staged, an accusation that only Diane Sawyer even asked about, and no other MSM personality dared make--except for Ronald Prescott Reagan, whom the MSM can now always count upon to say something outrageous.)

As Media Research points out, this is the same Janeanne Garofalo who declared that George W. Bush was unelectable--this after he had just been re-inaugurated. Would she please run that by me again? Actually, she did--because she hinted that George W. Bush kept winning elections because he voted the cemetery--or because the MSM aren't doing what she says is their job. Both of which claims are absurd on their face.

Janeanne Garofalo is part of the liberal side of the Alternative Media--and I would have to describe her as the sort of person whom, did she not exist, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would have to invent in order to have a foil--or in Sean's case, someone of whom to say, "Joining me now to defend her latest outrage is..." But frankly, I start to wonder, as does Joseph L. Farah in another context, when "protected free speech" ends and treason begins.