Patterico's Pontifications

7/12/2006

The Difference Between Me and Glenn Greenwald

Filed under: General,Morons — Patterico @ 8:03 pm



Well, there are a few. But here’s one that leaps to mind.

To whom do I turn for authoritative news and commentary? Well, I look to a mixture of media outlets and reputable blogs.

And to whom does Constitutional Scholar Glenn Greenwald turn?

Well, if this post is any indication, that would be a guy calling himself “Retardo Montalban.”

So that’s a difference right there.

UPDATE: A commenter asks: “Lastly, what makes your pseudonym so much better than Retardo’s?” Hmmm. There may be similarities there. My pseudonym is a nickname my Dad used to call me when I was a kid. True story.

44 Responses to “The Difference Between Me and Glenn Greenwald”

  1. LOL. Give ‘im hell, Patterico :)

    Sister Toldjah (7ce608)

  2. You’re kidding right? You actually think Greenwald treats a blog post as a “news source.” Can we keep the disingenuity to a minimum please?

    Also, can you point me to an article in the traditional media – say WSJ, NYT, WaPo, Wash Times, LA Times – that has covered the presence of threatening language used by prominent right wing bloggers or obscure leftist bloggers that Greenwald might have recourse to in leui of Sadly, No! ?

    Lastly, what makes your pseudonym so much better than Retardo’s? It’s a pseudonym, not a prison record. A pseudonym has nothing to do with the blogger’s qualities as a writer or humorist – I’m sure you would recognize that if you were being intellectually honest here.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  3. whoops, should read: **lieu**

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  4. Lastly, what makes your pseudonym so much better than Retardo’s? It’s a pseudonym, not a prison record. A pseudonym has nothing to do with the blogger’s qualities as a writer or humorist – I’m sure you would recognize that if you were being intellectually honest here.

    Wow, even I can answer that one. What makes a derivative nonsense word better than “retardo” as a handle?

    Maybe, Matt Browner-Hamlin, you were born after the PCites made schoolkids stop using a relative of that word to describe those in special education. I can’t type it here; the thought police might get me.

    Anwyn (c5b81b)

  5. You’re kidding right? You actually think Greenwald treats a blog post as a “news source.”

    No, no. He treats it as evidence. And he’s a lawyer, so he should know.

    *ahem*

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  6. Pablo – Patterico used the term “authoritative news and commentary”. The fact that Greenwald or Patterico are lawyers is irrelevant to their thoughts on what constitutes a *news* source.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  7. How about commentary?

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  8. Another big difference between you and Glenn is that he is basically honest whereas you are not. Why did you remove Sev’s 2:10 pm comment from your douchebag post? (BTW, when you did so, you screwed up the comment numbering something awful)

    Was it because Sev posted a link to Misha making another of those “kill the judges” comments…on YOUR blog? Following which you welcomed Misha as a commenter.

    Well, over at Glenn’s blog, Sev linked a screen capture of the comment with link before you removed it.

    You are the king of faux outraged demands for retractions and apologies…Everywhere you go you leave a trail of prissy demands for retractions and apologies. Looks like you owe a retraction and apology to Glenn.

    [“I tried to post this on Patterico’s blog, but the comment mysteriously vanished with nary a trace.

    Luckily, I saved a screenshot.

    Patterico is a fraud.”

    [Uh, the comment is there. Twice. So I think Sev is a fraud.

    But I think I know what happened.

    Sev’s comments go into moderation, because he uses the word “fuckwit” and I tend to find that people like that are generally useless. (Proof here.) I am not generally against profanity, but that word and the word “fucktard” are almost always used by people who are venal, nasty, and useless. Just something I have noticed.

    So yesterday, as Sev well knows, I announced that people who say “fuckwit” all the time will be banned — but their comments go into moderation. When I got home I saw that he had a point that deserved to be heard. So I approved the comment.

    Then, later, I saw that he had accused me of taking it down.

    He knew he was banned. How do you think he knew to take a screenshot? But I approved it anyway, as I have many other comments accusing me of hypocrisy. See croche’s for example (he is on probation for having lied about me in the past).

    But I will deep-six any comment with that word. — Patterico]

    Nash (d7a00f)

  9. No, no. He treats it as evidence. And he’s a lawyer, so he should know.

    Should know what?

    actus (6234ee)

  10. Lastly, what makes your pseudonym so much better than Retardo’s?

    You mean besides not having the word “retard” in it?

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  11. What an exquisite battle of ideology – so much better than the Frisch fiasco.

    Greenwald, smacked around like an obstinate mule, recognizes the intellectual coin given him by the BDS blogosphere is not really based upon the truth standard, scampers from the battlefield of ideas.

    Her hero bloodied, ever servile Mona attempts to lay down increasingly ineffectual cover remarks all the while exposing more and more the vacuity of her mental arsenal.

    Clueless foot soldiers from the echo camps sensing something is amiss plunge into the battle, throwing themselves as rhetorical stink bombs.

    bains (3f9c1c)

  12. UPDATE: A commenter asks: “Lastly, what makes your pseudonym so much better than Retardo’s?” Hmmm. There may be similarities there. My pseudonym is a nickname my Dad used to call me when I was a kid. True story.

    And you assume that “Retardo” isn’t also a nickname his father called him when he was a kid, possibly before the politically correct era to which Anwyn (#4) refers.

    The problem I have with your point about Greenwald linking to Retardo Montalban is that you assume someone using a handle like that is necessarily an illegitimate commentator. You disqualify Montalban’s commentary, and thus Glen’s capacity to find solid sources for *commentary*, on the basis of his name alone.

    You should know as well as any that a pseudonym, or even a legally changed name, are not representative of anything other than what a person goes by. This entire post is premised on your disqualification of Greenwald because of Retaldo Montalban’s pseudonym.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  13. What makes you so certain that Retardo Montalban’s Dad didn’t call him by that name when he was a kid, smarty-pants?

    Dave (5977b0)

  14. I said in the post that there may be similarities!

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  15. And that was what I meant.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  16. You should know as well as any that a pseudonym, or even a legally changed name, are not representative of anything other than what a person goes by. This entire post is premised on your disqualification of Greenwald because of Retaldo Montalban’s pseudonym.

    Truly, no name could inspire more confidence. Well, maybe “Hervé Littlecheese.”

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  17. Patterico – Should I assume that by saying “There may be similarities there” you are renouncing the content of this post, which as I’ve already said is based entirely on your discount of Greenwald for referencing a blogger with a silly pseudonym?

    Jim – it’s not about a name inspiring confidence. Blogging isn’t the same as Homer Simpson changing his name to Max Power. Granted, “Herve Littlecheese” would be something.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  18. Jim – it’s not about a name inspiring confidence.

    Whew!

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  19. Patterico:

    I’d like to reiterate what I said in a previous thread. Glenn Greenwald is obviously, blaringly not interested in advancing a serious argument, so what is the point in trying to engage him in serious discussion? What is the point?

    mh (5b638c)

  20. What makes you so certain that Retardo Montalban’s Dad didn’t call him by that name when he was a kid, smarty-pants?

    I don’t know if his dad ( shud I capitalize that)called him Retardo or not however, I suspect he had a very good reason to call him that.

    tom scott (e91ab8)

  21. The point is that the Snakepitters were so hospitible when he was there, he felt bound by etiquette to invite them all by to his place when he had an open house in honor of Mendouchebag.

    Dan Collins (7afef3)

  22. Matt Browner-Hamlin,

    What are you talking about? Really.

    mh (5b638c)

  23. Or Mendoucheous. It’s up to you.

    Dan Collins (7afef3)

  24. Patterico – Should I assume that by saying “There may be similarities there” you are renouncing the content of this post, which as I’ve already said is based entirely on your discount of Greenwald for referencing a blogger with a silly pseudonym?

    You’re a little thick, but this is fun, so I won’t spell it out.

    But here’s a hint.

    The issue is what each blogger’s real-life dad called him when he was a kid.

    I’m suggesting that may be the critical link between me and “Retardo.”

    OK, I pretty much did spell it out.

    Do you get it?

    I thought not.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  25. Matt Browner-Hamlin,

    I just read the link you provided a little more thoroughly (in, you say, an effort “to save [me] the trouble”, whatever that means) and I found this:

    “Greenwald’s penetrating words should inspire a nation to defend the Constitution from a president who secretly bestowed upon himself the powers of a monarch. If we are to remain a constitutional republic, Greenwald writes, we cannot abide radical theories of executive power, which are transforming the very core of our national character, and moving us from democracy toward despotism.”

    Okay, now I’m convinced that Greenwald is a serious commentator. Bush is a “monarch” and we’re heading towards despotism. All riiiiggghty, then!

    mh (5b638c)

  26. The issue is what each blogger’s real-life dad called him when he was a kid.

    Way to move the goalposts nice and close for yourself there Patterico.

    The issue I’m raising is that in this post you discount a blogger (Greenwald) for the pseudonym another blogger he links to uses (Retardo). Discounting someone because the name of the person they link to is a bold step to take. The origins of your handle are not what this is about.

    You write pseudononymously, though as you point out in your FAQs FUQs it’s possible for someone to find out who you actually are. I don’t know if I can find out that information about Retardo Montalban and he’s not here to answer whether he goes by that handle to honor his father or not. But frankly his choice of that name and the reasons he uses it are so beyond irrelevant to the discussion of what makes a source valid.

    It’s all about content. I’m sure you can write thousands of words about why you think Retardo Montalban is a horrible blogger based solely on what he’s written. But this post isn’t about that, but rather superficial disqualifiers that ignore the possibility for actual debate.

    Oh and thanks for the ad hominem Patterico. Real classy.

    mh – I was referring to the fact that Greenwald has published a thorough analysis of the Bush administration’s expansion of executive powers. I imagine that if you don’t think Greenwald is “advancing a serious argument” you won’t be interested in his book.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  27. By going off on the sanctity of your banned word list, you conveniently elide the fact that you yourself hosted Misha’s eliminationist rhetoric and did not say anything to renounce him, rather you welcomed him to the fold.

    Nash (d7a00f)

  28. Matt Browner-Hamlin:

    “I was referring to the fact that Greenwald has published a thorough analysis of the Bush administration’s expansion of executive powers. I imagine that if you don’t think Greenwald is “advancing a serious argument” you won’t be interested in his book.”

    While I haven’t read Greenwald’s book (and therefore cannot comment on its contents), if his blog postings and comments to other blogs (including this one) are any indication of the way he approaches problems or those with whom he disagrees, you are correct that I probably will not be interested in hearing what he has to say about Bush the “monarch.”

    mh (5b638c)

  29. By going off on the sanctity of your banned word list, you conveniently elide the fact that you yourself hosted Misha’s eliminationist rhetoric and did not say anything to renounce him, rather you welcomed him to the fold.

    I agree with Instapundit:

    I quit reading Misha, the ostensible root cause of this latest kerfuffle, because, although his schtick amused his audience it got old for me fast.

    That says it for me almost exactly.

    In January 2004 it amused. Because it was clearly schtick.

    Now it’s just old. And it sounds bad to people who aren’t used to him. So I’m happy to condemn. Which I have.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  30. Oh Patterico, any chance of getting an answer to one of my original questions?

    Also, can you point me to an article in the traditional media – say WSJ, NYT, WaPo, Wash Times, LA Times – that has covered the presence of threatening language used by prominent right wing bloggers or obscure leftist bloggers that Greenwald might have recourse to in leui of Sadly, No! ?

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  31. P.S.: Maybe I wasn’t clear before. Greenwald’s approach, as so hilariously documented by Patterico re: Ann Coulter, is to smear and run — Greenwald doesn’t care if the smear is true or not. He only cares about hurling the insult. Why in the world should anyone take Glenn Greenwald seriously?

    mh (5b638c)

  32. But frankly his choice of that name and the reasons he uses it are so beyond irrelevant to the discussion of what makes a source valid.

    I hope you’ll stop by my new restaurant, Rotten Hog Guts for Morons Like You. We could use the business!

    Just kidding. I’m enjoying your stirring defense of Retardo Montalban. Please keep talking about Retardo Montalban. It’s just a fun name to say.

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  33. It’s a fantastic name to say. I have no clue why he uses it or what, if anything it refers to.

    I don’t consider myself defending him. None of his content has been referenced or criticized in this thread or the original post, so I have nothing to defend him against. A post premised solely on the dislike or distrust of a name is about as vapid as it gets, which is what I have a problem with.

    Matt Browner-Hamlin (5fa5e9)

  34. A post premised solely on the dislike or distrust of a name is about as vapid as it gets, which is what I have a problem with.

    A similar concern was raised by my good friend, Dr. Christina Giggledick.

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  35. Dear Christ, MB-H . . . Do you know Mario George Nutrini?

    Dan Collins (7afef3)

  36. [The following Glenn Greenwald comment, which Greenwald has been spamming all over the place, contains yet another lie. He says Patterico deleted a comment that pointed out his former praise for Misha back in January 2004. (Patterico used to watch Bill O’Reilly, too. Tastes change.) Greenwald’s accusation is flatly untrue. Patterico did not delete the comment. He approved the comment from moderation. Patterico explains more fully in an update to this post. Greenwald has no apology for his misstatement about Patterico, choosing to rely on this distraction to evade responsibility for his misstatement, which Patterico now believes was a knowing lie and not just irresponsible. — Xrlq, with permission from Patterico]

    As I learned from my comments section yesterday, it turns out that — while denying the central point of my post: that you condemned the Deb Frisch comments with such melodrama and flamboyance, you ignore equally bad rhetoric coming from people like Misha — you knew of evidence which proved that point completely, but you concealed it. Namely, Misha came to your little blog here and, right here, in front of your anti-bad-discourse nose, he advocated the summary execution of judges. And, of course, you attacked him for it the way you attacked Deb Frisch, because – as you’ve been screaming for the last two days everywhere you can go – you are not guilty of the inconsistency and double standards of which I’ve accused you, which makes me a “liar.”

    Oh, wait – no, you didn’t condemn him. In fact, you did the opposite. When you saw Misha advocating the murder of judges on your blog, you wrote a whole separate post in order to expressly welcome him to your blog.

    And now that this behavior of yours has been revealed (by a commenter whose comment you shamefully, though understandably, deleted), you suddenly decide that you want to end your obsession with writing posts about me, calling me a liar and douchebag, and other assorted high-level and oh-so-piercing attacks.

    I think it’s clear who the liar was all along — that would be person who claimed it was a “lie” to apply the point of my post to him, even though there probably is no blogger to whom that point applies more thoroughly, and then suddenly decided he didn’t want to talk about it anymore once conclusive evidence of his dishonesty emerged.

    If I had the power to invent a fact to rebut your hysterical obsession over the last couple days, I don’t think I could have invented anything better than the fact that Misha spewed his violence-inciting rhetoric right here, in front of your face, and you then WELCOMED him to your blog. Isn’t it time to hear again about how much you hate Deb Frisch and her horrible comments, about how much you lament attacks of that sort? You’re in a perfect position to dole out those lectures. Your history definitely entitles you to lead the charge against hateful rhetoric — obsequiously welcoming those who urge the execution of judges is a great qualification to lead the charge against Bad Rhetoric.

    Yeah, great – you write posts about how you don’t like Ann Coulter. Congratulations. Even Michelle Malkin does that. My point never was, as was painfully clear, that every single blogger to whom I linked never once, in their lifetime, condemned someone on the Right for excessive rhetoric. Most people on the Right love to do exactly that with, for instance, Fred Phelps or Ann Coulter to show how very fair-minded they are.

    The point was that those who engaged in the condemnation rituals aimed at Deb Frisch overlook and even condone far worse behavior from the opinion leaders in their party. The primary, but not only, example I cited was Misha. And despite your petulant and shrieking denials that this applies to you, it turns out that you are the Poster Child for the very hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty which I was highlighting.

    Apology and retraction, indeed. I wouldn’t hold my breath for those if I were you. But I will give you credit for one thing – you picked an excellent time to declare your obsessive battle to be at an end. And a rather ignominous end it is.

    Glenn Greenwald (7a0fe5)

  37. It’s all about content. I’m sure you can write thousands of words about why you think Retardo Montalban is a horrible blogger based solely on what he’s written. But this post isn’t about that, but rather superficial disqualifiers that ignore the possibility for actual debate.

    Allllllrighty, then. In Retardo’s post, he’s ostensibly taking Mr. Goldstein to task for threatening to hurt people with his penis, yes? On to context, then:

    His sex and violence issues I’ll deal with first; if by the end you’re not also convinced that Goldstein is certifably crazy and that, therefore, he ought to be straitjacketed and shot-up with elephant tranquilizers, then you should be drubbed to death with a giant dildo

    Let that roll around your brainpan for a moment or two, Matt.

    Now then, what was that you were saying? About Greenwald’s use of this guy as, well anything other than ineffective comic relief?

    Pablo (efa871)

  38. […] Patterico has been suckered by this dishonest liberal wet smack into a flurry of posts (and there are several more — just scroll around a bit), but the nuisance was worth it for this headline: Is Glenn Greenwald a Liar? Or Is He Just Someone Who Makes Confident Assertions of Fact without Having the Slightest Clue Whether They Are True? […]

    Cold Fury » Blog Archive » What it’s really all about (6f4592)

  39. If you guys have read even a smidgen of “Retardo” and his work you will know that he is aptly named.

    Crank (3fed2a)

  40. Have I been banned yet?

    Retardo Montalban is a pun of Ricardo Montalban, aka Mr.Rourke from Fantasy Island.

    Sev (7f9b63)

  41. My daughter joined the band and asked me what “poco ritard” meant. She was horrified when I poked her. Apparently that’s not funny any more.

    Teri (4e5088)

  42. Apology and retraction, indeed. I wouldn’t hold my breath for those if I were you. But I will give you credit for one thing – you picked an excellent time to declare your obsessive battle to be at an end. And a rather ignominous end it is.

    Where’s the harrumph? I didn’t get a harrumph outta that guy!

    Jim Treacher (c3be1b)

  43. therefore, he ought to be straitjacketed and shot-up with elephant tranquilizers, then you should be drubbed to death with a giant dildo…

    Wait, that’s “Retardo”? It sounded so much like Jeff Goldstein.

    jade (21ca70)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2611 secs.