Noam Chomsky, Bloggin' Fool
The first thing you're likely to notice is the eye-wateringly garish color scheme. Then one is assaulted by a template worthy of a special mention in a junior high web design contest. (Thank god for him that there's a halfway decent art department at the publishing house that markets his loony screeds next to the Lindsey Lohan CDs and the Altoids display in the Virgin Megastore checkout line.) The four consecutive identical entries entitled "Invading Cuba" make it look suspiciously like Prof. Chomsky, genius that he is, hasn't mastered the art of deleting a post.
As they say, "form follows function," and the content doesn't disappoint.
Why won't the US abandon Iraq to internal conflict? Of course, it's because "it would mean abandoning the primary and quite crucial war aim of establishing the first stable military bases in a dependent client state at the heart of the energy-producing regions, a major lever of world control, as has long been understood."
I guess our bases in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar don't quite qualify as being in the "heart of the energy-producing regions."
He shows admirable restraint in his entry entitled "Iran's Threat" by waiting fully two sentences before changing the subject to Israel and then accusing the US of trying to manufacture pretexts upon which we can justify attacks on Syria and Iran.
The aforementioned "Invading Cuba" post hints at the Bush administration's sinister plans to attack Cuba as soon as its internal defenses have deteriorated sufficiently.
He makes these insane claims in the blase, paranoid voice of a cult leader speaking the gospel to his followers, or of someone so thoroughly embittered by his own irrelevance that he can do nothing but sneer.
As it turns out, Chomsky has abandoned this original blog and has set up shop over at ZNet Blogs. This one is, if possible, more ineptly put together than the old one. It's fitting, since his ramblings are truly approaching senility at this point.
For sheer incoherence and moral relativism, take a look at "Freedom: a Moral Hypothesis."
My favorite moment, however, is in a post entitled "State Terror vs. Resistance" where those who "lament piously when [insurgents] resort to criminal acts to try to free themselves from the horrendous conditions we impose on them" are compared to "Nazi and Stalinist apologists."
He really wrote that.
That he is incapable of recognizing that he is an apologist for beheaders and suicide bombers says it all.
Worst. Blog. Ever.