=

Hey, Obamaites... you like apples?

How do you like them apples?

A little bit more commentary on the John Stewart "Rally to Restore Sanity" from last Saturday. The emerging narrative that we happen to believe as well is that for all of Stewart's good intentions, for the majority of the attendees, "sanity" is defined as "agreeing with my political positions". This, of course, makes the Reason.tv video above that much more delicious.

And a comment to an article by the National Review's Yuval Levin "Sane or Smug" caught our attention. Joseph Yeager writes:

The Stewbertsheviks may well be exemplars of sanity, but their grasp of the English language speaks poorly for their intelligence. Hence, fear is anything but the antithesis of sanity. If your femoral artery is gashed and you're in a lagoon filled with great white sharks, fear is imminently reasonable. In such a situation, poised confidence would be the essence of insanity. And when the most radical president in the nation's history is spending non-existent cash like a sailor on shore leave, and is hewing to an economic policy more amenable to Vladimir Lenin than Adam Smith, it is quite sane to be frightened. Hmmmm. Come to think of it, perhaps the Stewbertsheviks aren't so sane after all.

That's roughly akin to our contention regarding the Republican Party being the Party of "No": We're you to see your young child wander over to a hot open oven and watch as he is about to put his hands on the oven door, would you a) calmly and rationally explain to your child the pros and cons of continuing with the assumed course of action or would you b) assume fight or flight mode, immediately springing into action to head off the disastrous consequences while yelling "No!" or "Stop!" at the top of your lungs?

We understand the prudence of having a plan or policy of your own but often times the first "sane" response is to, as WFB put it, to "stand athwart history yelling, 'Stop!'"