Wingnuts and Moonbats

There is a discussion about Constitutional amendments over at http://www.rightwingnews.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5264 and it's amazing how quickly it centered on gay marrige, adoption etc. Yes, there are mentions of balanced budget amendments, line item vetos and the like, but most of the more virulent discussion is on the Christian Fundamentalists agenda. I've been checking out some of the more popular blogs on both sides of politics, from DailyKos to StopTheACLU. And the one thing in common between them all is that no matter how reasonable the intial point is, the discussion goes to the extreme. Checkout the HBO Real Sports community boards about Bryant Gumbels rant about racism in the Olympics, and what you will find is that over half of the posters would have been members of the KKK or in a lynch mob not too many years ago.
I've never understood the use for Wingnuts and Moonbats in political movements. They get most of the press and just polarize the discussion, and destroy any chance of civil discourse. Tomorrow, Tavis Smiley will be hosting the 2006 version of "The State of the Black Union" it will be televised on CSPAN, and they generally have the videos on their website by Monday. I urge you to watch it. You will hear reasoned, logical discussion about how to correct the state of affairs in the Black community. You will also hear ranting and raving and so much hatred towards whites that it will get uncomfortable, and stir anger. What parts of the panel discussions do you think will make the news? What parts do you think the audience will applaud for? And better yet, what parts will simply play into the Wingnuts racism, and the Moonbats yahooism? The net result will be the status quo remains, and nothing gets better.
Oh well, the beat goes on.