The truth of that essay doesn't stand or fall based on your ability to dredge up an old campaign quote from FDR. The truth of that essay is validated every time you post one of your trophy links to some left-wing whackjob and imply it that reveals some important insight about the Left. You validate the existence of the right-wing betrayal myth every time you repeat a flaming rant from a right-wing demagogoblog.

It's not fair to make you carry the full burden, of course, because you're not the only one. If you were, it might be attributable to your personal psychosis alone. But, for example, remember "treason!"? (Ain't it great how after all these years we can argue in shorthand?) Charges of disloyalty and anti-Americanism and sedition and general moral turpitude have become the carrier wave of everything else you (all) have to say; everything else is just modulation of your baseline myth.

The betrayal fable is an integral part of right-wing mythology, but I think that Baker lets you guys off easy by ascribing it to a desire to make excuses for your failures. I think it runs deeper, and taps into a self-aggrandizing (or perhaps compensatory) David-and-Goliath mythology. It's a classic story arc: The noble, brave yet beleagured little band of heroes surrounded by enemies in an implacably-hostile world, battling against impossible odds, yet prevailing through pluck and strength of spirit and moral purity as much as strengh of arms; invincible against everything but betrayal.

And when you're not surrounded by enemies, you create them. Without an enemy to distract attention from yourselves, you're afraid the world might notice that you're a pretty loathesome lot. "Republicans suck, but Democrats suck worse" is such an inspiring rallying cry, don't ya think?

You wingers ought to invest in a little counseling.