New York Times article on the resurgence of Latin gives impetus to weird half-Latin op-ep on Obama, McCain and Palin

I think this is about the strangest op-ed I've read all year. It starts out with a comparison of the United States to the crumbling Roman Empire, and then turns into a weird Latin and English hybrid near the end that is quite entertaining to read. I see it's gotten over 700 comments where the original article on the resurgence of Latin only got just above 120. Here's part of it:

Cum Quirites Americani ad rallias Republicanas audiunt nomen Baraci Husseini Obamae, clamant “Mortem!” “Amator terroris!” “Socialiste!” “Bomba Obamam!” “Obama est Arabus!” “Caput excidi!” tempus sit rabble-rouseribus desistere “Smear Talk Express,” ut Stephanus Colbertus dixit. Obama demonatus est tamquam Musulmanus-Manchurianus candidatus — civis “collo-cerviciliaris” ad ralliam Floridianam Palinae exhabet mascum Obamae ut Luciferis.

and:

Gubernatrix (prope Russia) Palina, spectans candidaciam MMXII, post multam educationem cum Kissingro et post multam parodiam de Sabbatis Nocte Vivo atque de Tina Feia, ferociter vituperat Obamam, ut supralupocidit (aerial shooting of wolves) in Hyperborea.

So what do the comments say? Most of them are one of the following:

-WTF does all that Latin mean? Translation please!
-Grr we hate Democrats
-A response written in Latin
-Hilarious/silly/brilliant! This one for example: This is hysterical. I had to trot out my Latin dictionary for half of it but it is soooo good that the effort is well worth it. Maureen Dowd est puella sapienta.




As for me, I'm happy with whatever gets the language attention. New York Times = daily readership of 1 million and 14 unique visitors per month. Awesome.