The New Weenie Enema Mission.

About a year ago, Weenie Enema embarked on a largely successful sociological experiment involving adulterers. It was enormously popular, and though it's hard to deduce whether any legitimate conclusions were made based on our findings, a good time was had by all, except by the adulterer who Inna was assigned, who got scared when she started sending him emails about a rectal fetish. In the tradition of making Weenie Enema social experimentations an annual event, I am embarking on my most perilous mission to date - infiltrating the crazy liberal blogosphere.

As most loyalists are aware, I am a moderate Democrat with conservative sympathies. However, the only blogs I read are conservative because I can't stand how immature and vile most of the left-wing blogs are. Part of this, I suspect, is because liberals have had a reputation for decades of being more openminded than conservatives - history teaches us that Democratic administrations have orchestrated more changes involving free speech and minority rights. That's not necessarily inaccurate, but as a result, PC-eschewing conservatives have an automatic reputation for being, if not racists, at least people who aren't interested in helping the downtrodden. The world is free to disagree with my conclusion. At any rate, the majority of the conservative blogs that I have encountered (I'm not saying all of them abide by this unwritten rule) appear to make an extra effort at presenting civilized political discussions in an attempt to debunk those conceptions.

What I have observed is that if there is an issue of contention among either liberals or conservatives, the way it's presented in each respective blogosphere is very different. If Michelle Malkin devoted a post to, say, Hillary Clinton, a woman she clearly doesn't like in the least, she wouldn't ramble for paragraph after paragraph about what a giant cunt Hillary was - she would certainly make some negative comments about her, but would more than likely present, at the very least, a rational, coherent case that wasn't submerged with Emma-like vitriol. However, if someone at the Daily Kos wrote a post about a prominent Republican like Bill Frist, it would be an automatic excuse for a rampaging hoard of leftist commenters to start saying mouthdroppingly nasty things that would make me look downright respectful of other people.

Today's mission is simple. If I told an acquiantance that lefty commentators were much meaner and more disrespectful than conservative ones, no one would believe me. They would either automatically dismiss it, or would defend the attackers by saying that the Republican leadership is so horrible, it's warranted. This experiment is not about making a case for Bush being a noble leader of the free world, the next Hitler, or something in between. It's simply to show what happens when you make anti-Bush comments on a Website that not only doesn't agree with his policies, but thinks the man himself is pure evil. I have signed up for the discussion boards on the Democratic Underground blog with the screenname "hatenazibush," which was readily accepted as my handle, even though the terms and conditions upon signing up emphasized the kind of constructive, polite dialogue I'm talking about. But I guess calling Bush a Nazi is still within the limits of civilized debate.