archy

I called it
In my previous post, I predicted that some on the Right would accuse us on the Left of being sad about Zarqawi's death.

[W]e're in for a round of the chickenhawks strutting and talking tough. Some of them will taunt the liberal strawmen who are sad at the loss of Zarqawi and who only exist in fevered right-wing imaginations.

Right on schedule, Don Imus and his gang are accusing us of just that.

IMUS: We'll continue to cover this al-Zarqawi thing all morning, obviously. Although I don't know how much of the same videotape I want to see over and over and over again, like it's on a tape loop. He's dead, we'll find out what it means. It's got to be good, doesn't it, Charles?

CHARLES McCORD [co-host]: It cannot possibly be bad, obviously.

[Co-host Bernard] McGUIRK: Except to people like Michael Moore. And notice, probably, the long faces over at CNN this morning, but otherwise.

[...]

[Congressional Quarterly columnist Craig] CRAWFORD: I don't guess we'll get the video of his dead body. We got that on the brother -- on the sons, Hussein's sons. That would be good.

IMUS: Usually, I don't like that kind of stuff, but I would like to see this one, this bastard.

CRAWFORD: I'd like to see this guy chopped up. Just run him through a wood chipper.

IMUS: There has got to be people, though, like some of my liberal friends -- which, I have far too many, by the way. I've got to try to rethink that whole thing. But gotta be some of them that actually, just because they hate President Bush so much, probably look at this as on some level as bad news, don't they?

I expected this kind of nonsense from Imus. Crawford is new to me. Let's display the dead as trophies and desecrate their bodies; that's a great way to demonstrate to the world that we're better than monsters like Zarqawi.

Update: Here's number two.