Why would I say such a thing about the Supreme Blogger? All will become clear.
Lately I've become fascinated with the right wing of U.S. politics. It's really a compelling subculture, much like a cult in many ways. To name just three cult-like qualities: 1) It has a dogma to which one is forbidden to apply reason, 2) It personally attacks its critics (because the dogma can't be defended by more reasonable means), and, 3) It insists that the cult itself is the only trustworthy source of information about the cult.
The run-up to the Iraq war is a good example of the first quality. The Bush Administration, committed to a neoconservative plan for the Middle East that defied reality, rejected the input of its own experts and intelligence agencies--i.e., rejected facts and clear-eyed analysis--because the conclusions of these reality-obsessed folks conflicted with, shall we say, "The Way." "The Way" said that Iraq had tons of WMD and that installing a peaceful, U.S.-friendly government would be a piece of cake. How dare you "experts" contradict the word of The Leader with your "facts"! Where is your loyalty?
With regard to the second quality, I wrote a play examining the ugliness of right-wing terrorists, er, commentators like Bill O'Reilly, and where their standard of conduct may lead us. And here on Blogcritics, an extremely long comments thread on an extremely repulsive post shows Blogcritics' own right wing's obsession with personal attacks. The conclusion I reached after participating in this conversation (for too long): Conservatives (at least here) will never acknowledge that a personal attack in response to a factual claim is a dodge--because the personal attack is their primary means of dodging the facts. Take away the personal-attack option, and the right wing would be helpless.
Cults don't acknowledge facts. And the third quality is one more way that the right-wing cult dodges them: By insisting that all members of the cult get their information about the cult, and preferably the rest of the world, exlusively from the cult. Here, I'm stretching the metaphor a bit; the U.S. right-wing cult has not yet achieved the ideal totalitarian state that other cults possess. But it is making fantastic progress in that direction. Someone who wishes to live within the cult's reality-distortion shelter can be supplied with a seemingly wide variety of news and information, whether on TV (Fox News), newspapers (Washington Times, New York Post) or talk radio (talk radio). The brand "Fair & Balanced" is obviously intended to assure the cult member that he or she is getting all of the necessary information. What more do you need than "Fair & Balanced"? Sounds like the complete picture to me.