Miss Michael Medved?

We didn't, but Tina B. must've thought we might, were we to be reminded of him, so suddenly Medved has a spot at Tina B.'s Daily Beast. He opens thusly:

As conservatives suffer endless repetitions of the solemn, soggy Democratic mantra of “shared sacrifice,” they need to resist the powerful temptation to snarl back, “I’m already sacrificing more than enough, thank you very much!”

Of course it’s only natural to feel righteous indignation toward some smug lefty who wants to take money out of your pocket, but it’s more important in this situation to win the substantive argument by underlining the core distinction between what government gives and what government takes. As the euphoria fades following Osama bin Laden’s demise and the nation gets back to the bitter business of coping with a looming fiscal catastrophe, Republicans need to fight back against cunning liberal attempts to equate a reduction in benefits distributed by the bureaucracy with an increase in taxes collected by that same bureaucracy.

Oh how clever & daring. "I gave at the office, losers." Refreshingly non-PC, thank you very much!

How do I project on thee? Let me count the ways: Solemn, soggy, mantra, smug, lefty & cunning.

Then (even) more name-calling, & vaguely Randian argle-bargle. Our eyes glazed over at "the true shirkers aren’t wealth producers and job creators," & by the time "In responding to such toxic us-versus-them rhetoric, Republicans face the daunting task of reassuring the public that the Ryan budget plan actually calls for corporations and wealthy Americans ultimately to pay more to the government, not less," came along, our eyes just rolled back in our head.

Really, Tina Brown? Fucking really?