Sometimes a Kick in the Nads is Just a Kick in the Nads

It's amazing how Michelle Malkin can take a simple faux-kick to the 'nads and turn it into a rant on how Franken (and by proxy, "the Left") needs professional help.  But she does it with deception and dishonesty, largely by failing to provide any context for the skit and culling up other bits of dubious evidence supporting Franken's so-called "derangement".

Amazon.com has a skit up by Franken promoting his new book, The Truth: With Jokes.  In the skit, three people act as Amazon.com reviewers.  The first two gave Franken's book five stars, and say so enthusiastically.  The acting in the skit is clearly and purposely uber-hokey, with an unnatural delivery that one would usually see in infomercials.  The third reviewer then says that he didn't read the book and gave it one star because he's a right-wing jerk.  So Franken then kicks him in the gonads, breaks a chair over his head, and then a reviewer breaks a bottle over his head. 

The stilted, info-mercial delivery of the start of the skit is meant to contrast with the cartoon violence at the end of the skit (in a hey, that's funny because it's unexpected sort of way).  It would be different if Franken and the other reviewers seemed completely serious before the violence.  But the infomercial-style delivery makes it clear that the ad is a farce, setting up the cartoon violence as the punch line. 

Also note that he wasn't kicked in the nads for being a conservative.  He was kicked in the 'nads for not reading the book and giving it one star, obviously an attack on people that criticize Franken's books without actually reading them.  It's not like the third reviewer found a major factual inaccuracy on page 57 and then Franken decided to rip his limbs off.  That would be a little much.

Now personally, the commercial wasn't that funny (as it would have worked better with a little more absurdity and better timing).  But only someone that either has no grasp of a joke or is deliberately obscuring the context in order to push an anti-Franken agenda could say that this skit "blurs truth and fiction" or that Franken "needs professional help". 

Malkin continues with the "Franken needs help" theme by incorrectly stating that Franken attempted to deflect questions about Air America's finances on the David Letterman show (he answered the question fully), and failed to provide any context regarding jokes about executing GOP officials (it was a series of jokes based on George H.W. Bush's comments that anyone who outs a CIA agent is guilty of treason, where he specifically states that he's against the death penalty and is against executing presidents). 

These omissions are clearly done to paint Franken as some sort of deranged lunatic.  But Malkin can only do this by omitting context and evidence repeatedly.  It's dishonest, deceptive, and far worse than any faux kick to the gonads could ever be.