I mean, what else can you say about the folks featured in this article? They are pretty frightening, and sound like they need to be heavily medicated -- especially Maryscott O'Connor.

In the angry life of Maryscott O'Connor, the rage begins as soon as she opens her eyes and realizes that her president is still George W. Bush. The sun has yet to rise and her family is asleep, but no matter; as soon as the realization kicks in, O'Connor, 37, is out of bed and heading toward her computer.

Out there, awaiting her building fury: the Angry Left, where O'Connor's reputation is as one of the angriest of all. "One long, sustained scream" is how she describes the writing she does for various Web logs, as she wonders what she should scream about this day.

She smokes a cigarette. Should it be about Bush, whom she considers "malevolent," a "sociopath" and "the Antichrist"? She smokes another cigarette. Should it be about Vice President Cheney, whom she thinks of as "Satan," or about Karl Rove, "the devil"? Should it be about the "evil" Republican Party, or the "weaselly, capitulating, self-aggrandizing, self-serving" Democrats, or the Catholic Church, for which she says "I have a special place in my heart . . . a burning, sizzling, putrescent place where the guilty suffer the tortures of the damned"?

Psychologically healthy people do not act that way. Clearly, this is a woman in need of some serious psychotropic medication -- no sane person burns with that sort of seething, corrosive hatred for those with whom they disagree. It isn't called Bush Derangement Syndrome for nothing.

In the end, I don't know what to feel. Should I be frightened of someone so rage-filled? Thankful that she has found some outlet other than violence through which to vent her rage? Or saddened that someone so in need of help is not getting it the thorazine and haldol she clearly needs.

Maybe I'll just settled for being sorry that the Washington Post didn't do a better job of picking a responsible, reasonable Lefty (like John Aravosis or Oliver Willis, for example) to feature. I think liberals in the blogosphere have been done a grave disservice with this piece.

MORE AT: Malcontent, FBIHOP, Jawa Report, Bluto, Iowa Voice, MahaBlog, Mudville Gazette, Political Pit Bull, Latino Issues, No Kool Aid Zone, Tennessee Guerilla Women, Beautiful Attrocities, Club for Growth, NewsHog, Six Meat Buffet, Gun Toting Liberal, Blogger's Blog, Leather Penguin, Seeing the Forest, Alternate Brain, Dr. Sanity, Cheat Seeking Missle

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Thorazine? Add Lithium to that list!! ;-)

Posted by: Hube at Sat Apr 15 01:06:57 2006 (YJyKI)

2 Or a heavy dose of hot lead. j/k

We just gotta do everything in our power, to keep the insane leftists out of power.

Posted by: Chad at Sat Apr 15 07:36:12 2006 (3K65W)

3 Hah - funny article, and untruthful as well. Not many of us hate Bush - we just think of him as dangerously incompetent. BTW, get used to hearing that phrase, dangerously incompetent. It will be used to help recapture the senate and house.

Posted by: Dan at Sat Apr 15 14:22:55 2006 (aSKj6)

4 Notice -- I didn't say that this woman was representative of the Left, and in fact lament that someone else was not picked.

On the other hand, your comment does indicate that there are a number of you on the left who are delusional -- both for believing Bush to be dangerous and incompetent, and for believing that your side is going to recapture either house of congress.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat Apr 15 14:28:09 2006 (VMkk1)

5 Oh, and by the way -- she and her commenters are absolutely thrilled with the article -- click the link on her name above.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat Apr 15 14:30:04 2006 (VMkk1)

6 I wholeheartedly agree that Finkel should have used an example of a more... restrained figure of hte Left.

Finkel never said in the article (at least I don't think he did ) that she was not a typical representative of the Left side of the blogosphere.

Horrible journalism, imo.

Posted by: LP at Sat Apr 15 14:51:17 2006 (5nRnl)

7 Finkel never said in the article (at least I don't think he did ) that she was not a typical representative of the Left side of the blogosphere.

Did you RTFA?

He specifically mentioned "Daily Kos".
He specifically mentioned "Atrios".
He specifically mentioned "Crooks and Liars".
He specifically mentioned "Rude Pundit".
He specifically mentioned "Smirking Chimp".

All of the above indicated they were in total agreement with her viewpoint!

That is the Left side of the blogosphere...

Posted by: fletch at Sat Apr 15 16:36:55 2006 (elMOd)

8 No, no they aren't. Maybe you think that from the selected posts you read, but a vast majority aren't like that.

Daily Kos is by no means like that, that sort of crazy anger. If you think it is, then this page is just as bad; many of hte diaries are well-reasoned and insightful.

Crooks and Liars? Give me a break. Atrios can dabble in that, but rarely.

Seriously, saying they are all in total agreement with her based on the selected quotes he used is just stupid.

Posted by: LP at Sun Apr 16 08:34:43 2006 (ZercO)

9 If you want to see how much this member of the left agrees with the Deranged Maryscott O'Connor, just look at my comments on DKos here:

http://www.dailykos.com/user/Lawyer%20to%20Capitalists/comments

I will do everything in my power to see that there is no Republican in the White House 2 years from now, and despise what this administration has done to our country, but I do not share her methods or point of view. She does not speak for me or for many others.

Posted by: Lisa at Sun Apr 16 11:42:56 2006 (vW7iC)

10 And please note -- I'm married to a Democrat who would generally agree with the statement you made, Lisa. That is why I lament the fact that the blogger selected was one so incindiary.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sun Apr 16 12:49:56 2006 (oFqcI)

Hide Comments | Add Comment