Lindsay Bayerstein summarizes right wing attempts to debunk Lancet study

[BurtWorm]

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Majikthise/~3/36507366/innumerate_cowa.html

The right wing noise machine is clanking and shuddering. They're outraged about this study, published in the Lancet. The study estimated that 665,000 more Iraqis have died after the US invasion than would have been expected based on pre-invasion death rates.

Here are today's popular bleats:

1. 665,000 is an awfully big number. That would mean that this war killed a whole lot of people. (Jane Galt)

2. If 770 extra people were dying in Iraq every day, why don't we hear about them on the news? (Gateway Pundit)

3. The study was published before the election. (Instapundit) (Political Pitbull)

4. The peer-reviewed paper must be bogus because the editor of the Lancet goes to anti-war rallies. (Anti-Idiotarian Rotweiler)

5. The pre-invasion death rates are too low. Surely, Saddam was filling mass graves two months before the invasion. (Chuck Simmins)

...


Cowards, all of them. They own this war, but they won't face up to the fact that their little adventure helped kill over half a million people.

<more at link above>

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. holocaust deniers.

[poverlay]

3. OMG WELL PLAYed! I just about fell out of my chair just then! Forgive my

outburst, but I just got done spending several hours defending Chomsky against that ridiculous charge and now you've given me the perfect way to sit them down and shut them up...

I say again to you Sir: Well Played!

thanks

[HereSince1628]

4. oow, good one, that!

[kenny blankenship]

6. I'm not a grammarian but in this case I think it's a "W"holocaust

not a holocaust:

The W is silent, alas so are most in both parties.

[wryter2000]

2. My favorite

7. I just know the study's wrong, but I can't figure out how. Math people? (Michelle Malkin)

[BurtWorm]

5. That was a good one!

:thumbsup:

[applegrove]

7. Have they no shame!

[BurtWorm]

8. kick