I shouldn't be surprised, but the couple of conversations I overheard Thursday in the newsroom regarding the assassination of the head of al Qaeda in Iraq were along the lines those going int the more conspiratorial and insane parts of the left-wing Internet.

I heard one comment that Bush had known where Zarqawi was for months and just decided to knock him off on June 8 for polical purposes. Huh? I can see June 6 to try to swing the Bilbray election. Or maybe October 31, to try to swing the general election, but June 8?

One minute Bush is an idiot, the next minute he's a nefarious genius.

The fact that Zarqawi is currently well-done is a good thing, and the vast majority of Americans realize that.

Unfortunately one of that completely nuts, whacked-out minority is Michael Berg, the father of Nicholas Berg. The younger Berg was personally beheaded by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi on videotape a couple of years back. I forced myself to watch the thankfully low-resolution video so that I could really see what evil looks like. Michael Berg probably didn't watch his son's murder -- understandable really -- but it might have helped him recognize what evil is and what it isn't.

Berg was interviewed, briefly, on Fox News Radio's "The John Gibson Show" yesterday, (audio here) and he expressed sadness that Zarqawi had been killed and opined that the man who beheaded his son was no worse a human being than George W. Bush. In fact, Berg gave the impression that he believes that Bush is far more culpable for the daily terrorist attacks in Iraq than Zarqawi ever was.

Michael Berg is a nut. Michael Berg is a moron. Michael Berg is an idiot. Those last two statements may be unfair slams against morons and idiots.

Yes, he lost his son, but that loss doesn't give him carte blanche to spew his evil views. I don't use the term "evil" lightly. This man seriously believes that blowing up innocent men, women and children is a perfectly acceptable response to U.S. foreign policy. There's a line where amorality passes into unadulterated evil, and Berg has crossed it.

And this is where the latest Coulter brouhaha comes into play. (How many times do I have to say that I strongly dislike the woman, that she's a bomb-thrower and I don't necessarily endorse anything she says and especially don't endorse the way she says it?) Most of the major media outlets fawn over the likes Berg and Cindy Sheehan and are unwilling to challenge their silly statements because of the "absolute moral authority" that they have had bestowed upon them.

Interviewed on MSNBC’s News Live program, which aired at 9:25AM EDT, anchor Randy Maier asked if Zarqawi’s death was significant in the fight against terrorism. Over on CNN, Soledad O’Brien wondered, "Are you concerned that he becomes a martyr and a hero and, in fact, in- invigorates the insurgency in Iraq?" O’Brien even allowed Mr. Berg to frame the discussion. She started a question by asserting, "There's a theory that a struggle for democracy- "

Berg interrupted, incredulous:

Berg: "Democracy? Come on. You can't really believe that's a democracy there when the people who are running the elections are holding guns. That's not democracy."

Properly chastised, O’Brien rephrased her query:

O’Brien: "There is a theory that as they try to form some kind of government..."

A responsible media would recognize that the man has lost his mind and just ignore him for the rest of his life. It would be good for Berg and good for the media's credibility.

However, when the Bergs and Sheehans of the American left are invited on the air to vent their insanity, it is not out of bounds to criticize what they say. The deaths of their loved ones are not a shield to substantive criticism of the political positions that they promote.