Now I’ve been down this road so many times I could navigate it blindfolded and covered in peanut butter.

It goes like this: for the media, anger is only okay if its targets meet their stereotypical, romanticized criteria. Meaning: the corporation, the conservative, the daddy who never loved them.

Here’s a list of people doing angry things the media is okay with:

-People calling Bush a Nazi
-Students and non students rioting on college campuses
-Animal rights freaks dousing rich folks with paint
-Actors wishing average folks would get rectal cancer
-Bureaucrats labeling military vets as potential violent right wing extremists
-Radical environmentalists advocating violence against loggers
-Pranksters throwing pies at conservative commentators (you know, somehow they never pie Michael Moore, which makes him sad; he likes pie)

But this health care bill anger is different from all that – not just because it’s right, but because it involves Obama. And being angry at Obama is like being mad at Santa Claus. How can you be mad at Santa, when he brings us so many gifts?

And so, this anger is scary! It’s a mark of incivility! It’s deadly!

But you have a right to be angry. Unlike the entitlements we’re saddled with until death, being angry is free and actually works! But we need to define why we’re angry – instead of letting our adversaries do it for us.

We are angry not because we lost, but that we lost to losers. I’m not talking about Obama, or the Dems. They’re winners, sadly. I’m talking about progressivism. The reason why I’m angry, my friends are angry, and my imaginary unicorn Captain Sparkles is angry – is because the greatest, most winningest country in the history of the world, just embraced the loser’s doctrine.

For two hundred plus years we’ve kicked ass, and we’re now choosing the belief system of the idiots whose asses we’ve kicked.

So that’s why I’m angry. And why you’re angry too.

And when jackasses try to take away your right to be angry – by calling it racist or extremist – tell them they’re the racists. Because it’s those tools who assume that anger can only be about race. And if they disagree with you, then clearly they’re not just racists – but probably homophobic cannibals, too.

Tonight we’ve got the great Tucker Carlson, the lovely Imogen Lloyd Webber, the mysterious Mark Joseph, and the brains behind Autotune news, the Gregory Brothers!

A week into Barack Obama’s presidency comparisons abound concerning his personal and political gifts. Is he a rock star, or too cerebral for the sort of crowd-diving, one-with-the-audience intimacy that riles fans to amplified hysteria? Or is he a musician, yes, but more of a cool jazz artist who maintains an appropriate distance from his listeners while at the same providing a (false) sense of comfort for his admirers to absorb? Or is he a messianic figure who elevates our better instincts and unites the races, forever banishing the tragedy of human nature – its affairs with cowardice, its comfort with indifference, its passivity before evil – allowing us to march forward to paradise on earth? Or, finally, is he all of these things, a post-partisan president – a man who refuses to let eloquence devolve into mere rhetoric – and brings so many Clintons and conservatives into his ever expanding arms so we can make the world sing in perfect harmony?

The short answer is: No. Barack Obama is neither a rocker nor a cult leader, though his supporters treat him like the latter while giving him all the adulation (and then some) of the former.

He is, instead, Spock, the famed “Star Trek” character who makes supreme intellect a virtue and emotion both a terrible weakness and vestige of his human lineage - a handicap in the pursuit of reason. How else to explain President Obama’s inaugural address and his belief that “the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself.” This sentiment is the very essence of Spock, the equivalent of a private journal entry read aloud for billions in real time, the resignation of a logician who must abandon the purity of his laboratory to rescue an ungrateful citizenry.

And yet, Spock is not the captain of “Star Trek’s” fabled vessel, the USS Enterprise. Why? Because a Captain, even a melodramatic hero like the kind given voice (and pauses, and . . . pauses) by William Shatner, is emotional — sometimes incredibly so. Spock can assess a situation, tabulate the odds of enemy retreat, surmise an adversary’s weakness and discuss the most suitable terms of surrender, but he permanently remains unable to detect a sense of spirit and soul and righteous anger that makes, say, a Kansan oppose slavery or a Kenyan fight a military coup. For these heroes are erratic and thus the dangerous people Spock must render harmless with his Vulcan nerve pinch. (A few words to all single women: I am not a “Trekkie,” do not live with my mother and have never tried – and will never seek – to build a female companion out of spare parts and old circuit boards.)

Because we are human, a concession President Obama indulges with his megawatt smile, we can experience both extraordinary tragedy and Hope© (The One, All Rights Reserved). The two are impossible without even an ember of anger or from allowing emotion to overcome reason and summon defiance. For there is no transcending human nature – there is no spiritual awakening from the lines of tribe – without first feeling the gamut of human nature. 

We now have Spock in the White House, his oversized captain’s chair within reach of issuing every order except one: presidential anger. Until President Obama discovers his own sincere but controlled fury, he will remain the professor-as-president, a rationalist without an ounce of necessary emotion. To further mix sci-fi metaphors and earn the enmity of millions worldwide, we can’t afford a president who is Spock in a world where Darth Vader lives.