No sooner did we expose one outrage from screwball Kremlin bagman Edward Lozansky on Russia Blog than he plumbed even more repugnant depths. It's genuinely difficult to keep up with the torrent of frenzied lies spewing out of Russia Blog now that Putin is in full crackdown mode. Covering him with propaganda has become a 24/7 job for these filthy rats. Again, Russia Blog is simply now an embarrassment to the blogosphere, a laughing stock, but its publisher Discovery Institute appears to be so insular and aloof it hasn't even realized it.

In his latest innsane treatise, Lozansky gives entirely new shades of meaning to the term "hypocrisy." It's real through-the-looking-glass stuff.

Lozansky says that he, of all people, was hired as part of team (he names only one of the other members) to defend American policy on Russian TV in a debate. He gives no details whatsoever as to what specific "policy" he defended or how, and doesn't say one single positive word about the United States, and then states that he was "beaten badly! Eighty-six percent of the audience voted for our opponents and only 14 percent took our side. Of course, one could write it off by citing our incompetence. In all modesty, however, I do not believe that this was the main reason but rather the policy itself that we were trying to defend."

In other words, he appeared on Russian TV to defend an unnamed U.S. policy that he himself doesn't believe in! He goes on to prove his commitment to defending America by complimenting his opponents, stating: "There were many other examples of U.S. 'bad behavior' towards Russia, quite eloquently described by TV commentator Alexei Pushkov who was also one of our opponents." He doesn't give one single example of any "bad behavior" by Russia towards the United States, nor does he say a single complimentary word about any of his own teammates.

With defenders like Lozansky, does America need any attackers? For the record, let's just remind this raving psychopath about some of the "bad behavior" he could have mentioned:

• selling weapons to arch American foe Hugo Chavez
• providing nuclear technology to archer American foe Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
• giving financial and diplomatic support to terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah
• buzzing NATO countries with nuclear bombers
• obstructing the Litvinenko investigation
  
• shutting down the British Council (only Burma and Iran have done so)
• electing a proud career KGB spy president
  

Rather than actually defending American policy in his article, he instead "defends" America by saying that there are people in America who don't agree with American policy, and who get published in the press. In other words, not every person in America is a total idiot who dares to disagree with Russia, so don't hate them all.

As if high on dope, he admits that the Wall Street Journal has published pro-Russia commentary -- apparently unaware of the relentless one-sided bashing that the paper is given on Russia Blog. He admits that "the Russian media does not reciprocate: it is practically impossible to find anything positive about U.S. at all." Yet, he makes no attempt to specifically criticize any institution of journalism in Russia, much less does he point out that Russia Blog itself has never once published a post defending the United States against the Kremlin, taking America's side -- much less has Lozansky himself ever done so.

He rounds things out by claiming that Americans should elect wacko extremist Pat Buchanan president, because of his wise desire to make friends with neo-Soviet Russia.

It's "friends" like these that drove the USSR to implosion. Lozansky is hot on the trail of doing the same for Russia.