The Unraveling Of Mark Levin

The beginning of serious discord on the right - as the tea party tiger they have ridden so cynically begins to bite the GOP in its behind - is not just happening in the primaries. In a recent wave of invective, Mark Levin is talking about his fellow conservatives like a latter day Michael Moore. Here's what he has to say about The Weekly Standard's John McCormick, who had the audacity to report information that reflected badly on a female candidate backed by Palin and the Tea Party:

"Have you obsessed over women before?  Have you ever been married?  Have you dated?  I hate to ask you personal questions, but they do seem to be your specialty."

Weigel pukes.

Then there are the staunch neocon bloggers at Powerline, where Levin again opts for ad hominem, saying they're dissemblers, arrogant, shallow and incoherent thinkers, and small-minded. When the blogger Patterico, a Los Angeles area prosecutor, dared to point out the manifold factual inaccuracies in Levin's attacks, the talk radio host couldn't persuasively respond on the merits, but he did call his critic a jackass. Days earlier, attacking Professor Stephen Bainbridge, Levin began,

"I'm sure he's accomplished at something beyond securing tenure and blogging.  But his rambling post doesn't seem all that impressive, does it?"

And on his radio show Tuesday he disparaged National Review and The Weekly Standard, complaining that they're elites who condescend to the Tea Party.

Is there pushback? Yes, and no. Here's John Hinderaker of Powerline in an otherwise cogent critique of Levin:

"Many of us go off on intemperate screeds from time to time, but is it too much to ask that such diatribes be directed against liberals, rather than against our fellow conservatives?"

He still hasn't figured it out. If more conservatives had challenged Levin back during his similarly intemperate, intellectually bankrupt attacks on Jim Manzi, David Frum, and so many others, he might not be upping the populist ante some more.

Instead they kept silent for a fellow movement conservative, or even defended him. And big surprise, he's persisting in intellectually bankrupt attacks that egregiously mislead his audience. There is some karmic justice in all this, isn't there?