Commenting at Daily Kos

Give him credit, the partisan attack dog pictured at left has built one of the most successful blog sites in American politics, left, right or otherwise. I am referring of course, to Markos Moulitsas, proprietor of Daily Kos. I periodically read his blog and occasionally comment, but more as a social experiment than in the expectation of changing hearts and minds. I keep ratcheting up the extremism of my comments in the hopes that they will recognize the parody, so far to no avail. My latest comments actually earned me ratings as an excellent commenter from the Daily Kos crowd.

So I need some help. Read my comments and some replies below and let me know if the Daily Kos commenters have such a lack of irony that I will never get through or should I change tactics.

First the context. Kos (Markos Moulitsas) posted as how Obama's desire for bipartisanship had been a PR disaster on the stimulus package:

Yeah, I know there were those who thought that Obama's obsession with "bipartisanship" was some sort of clever master plan to outflank Republicans or something, but in reality, the obsession with getting Republican votes ended up detracting from the selling of the stimulus itself to the American people.

My comments follow. (You can read the whole thing in context at the link above. You can find my left wing doppleganger by clicking "View Comments" and page searching for BDaddyL. Not very original, but when I picked it, I was in a hurry to comment, kind of like Pop's Datsun joke.)

Why Can't We Just Start Jailing Republicans? by BDaddyL

How does the Republican party differ from a criminal conspiracy under the RICO act? They just act to repay key donors and have a revolving door between government, lobbyists and recipients of their favors. They have lost all rights to have a voice in government. If that doesn't qualify as a criminal syndicate, I don't know what does. With leading rethugs in jail (let's start with Rush Limbug) we can enforce the policies this country needs without all this crap about bipartisanship.

In fairness, despite my good ratings for this post, I think I may have finally hit a nerve. Here is jqb's response:

This is still a democracy, not a fascistic state. People aren't guilty just because some label applies to them -- you can only convict individuals who have been proven to have participated in an illegal conspiracy.

However, one commenter (Troubador) had no moral issue. His response:

Because it would look bad by Troubador.
Sorry, reality is a lot of work.

But I note that no one ever challenges my premise that Republicans are basically criminals. So what do you think, is it worthwhile to influence the debate on the other side by parodying their extremism or should I let it go? (Some days it's too much fun.) I look forward to your comments.