Patterico's Pontifications

9/6/2006

According to Lefty Bloggers, “Obscure Right-Wing Blogger Patterico” Got an Advance Copy of “The Path to 9/11″

Filed under: Blogging Matters,General — Patterico @ 8:34 pm

Think Progress states:

ABC has been aggressively advancing its inaccurate and politically slanted miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” to the right wing. Big players like Rush Limbaugh have been provided copies, as have obscure right-wing bloggers like Patterico.

I’ll cop to being obscure, right-wing, and a blogger. But if I’ve been given a copy of “The Path to 9/11,” it’s news to me. I have my TiVo set like everyone else — and I’m wondering what will be deleted from the version I’m allowed to watch.

But the left-wing bloggers are insisting that I’ve seen the film. Sheldon Rampton at FireDogLake writes:

Even relatively obscure right-wing blogs such as Patterico’s Pontifications, written by Los Angeles County attorney Justin Levine, have been favored with advance screenings. Levine reciprocated by declaring that the film is “free of political spin, politically correct whitewashing and partisan wrangling” and “one of the best made-for-televison movies seen in decades. … The Clinton administration will likely go ballistic over this film.” In its politically-spin-free way, Patterico pontificates, the film also “lays out viscerally powerful arguments in favor of the Patriot Act and airport profiling.”

I appreciate your using the word “relatively,” Sheldon. Very kind of you — not like that Think Progress bastard who just called me flat-out obscure!

But aside from that, there are a few problems:

1. I am Patterico, but I am not Justin Levine.

2. I have not been favored with an advance screening.

3. Despite the implication that the filmmakers are seeking the approval of right-wing bloggers — wayyyy down to the obscure ones like me — Justin probably got to see the film because he produces the most popular morning talk radio show in Los Angeles. It’s just a guess, but I bet I’m right. Justin? [UPDATE: Justin confirms this in the comments.]

These are just errors; no big deal. I’ve made similar errors in the past. No matter how many times you tell the guest bloggers to say: “Posted by guest blogger [whoever],” someone always misses it. It’s no big thing.

But I hope these folks will quickly make corrections.

UPDATE: The meme is spreading, baby!

40 Responses to “According to Lefty Bloggers, “Obscure Right-Wing Blogger Patterico” Got an Advance Copy of “The Path to 9/11″”

  1. ROFLMAO. WTG, Patterico. I read this yesterday on FAIR’s website and thought about sending them a correction. Not that they would correct anything, since I’ve yet to see them correct any factual errors on their site.

    sharon (dfeb10)

  2. “ABC has been aggressively advancing its inaccurate and politically slanted miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” to the right wing.”

    When I read stuff like that, I’ve got to blink and read it again. It sort of throws you off. ABC slanting towards the right? WTF, is all.

    PC14 (98b75e)

  3. I sure hope Rush got an advance copy (he says he did) and can compare the advance to the one the chicken sh** ABC shows to the world. One thing for sure, Rush will compare it frame for frame. Are ABC and Disney really that stupid? Wasn’t that a stupid question, of course they are, that stupid. It does bring to question ‘what does old Slick have on these suckers’? Evidently the rumors that the Klington’s used the FBI and CIA to spy on americans for political gain weren’t rumors. They have a lot of powerful people by the short hair.

    Scrapiron (a90377)

  4. Patterico is Justin Levine. I think they switched identities in a mid-air transfer during 9-11. Mrs. Patterico deserves to be told the truth.

    ras, a reliable source always available to the press (a646fc)

  5. Oh, by the way, sorry you wasn’t high enough on the democratic chain to get a copy. A joke man, a joke.

    Scrapiron (a90377)

  6. They have a lot of powerful people by the short hair

    Powerful people only have one?

    ras (a646fc)

  7. If DU says you are Justine Levine; you ARE Justine Levine. I don’t want any argument about this. Just stay outside the yellow tape and let those whose job this is handle the details. If DU wanted you to be anyone else, you would be.

    Nothing to see here, folks. Just move along.

    Mike K (416363)

  8. Wow, that was really worth an entire post, wasn’t it? You have a wingnut part-time “open-source” lawyer who has seen the film post about it on your blog, and then you get bent out a shape when the whole world doesn’t realize that “Patterico” is Patrick Frey, obscure DA and even more obscure blogger, and not Justin Levine, obscure pretend lawyer and shout radio producer. If I were ThinkProgress or FireDogLake I would just die of shame not knowing who the f*(K you are. Honestly.

    Not Patterico (fc3c0f)

  9. Sheesh, if I were ThinkProgress or FireDogLake I would just die of shame for being ThinkProgress or FireDogLake. Shitheel. (That’s you #8).

    nk (32c481)

  10. Yeah, when I say it is no big deal and no big thing, and joke about being called “obscure” . . . I am clearly bent out of shape.

    It is called “accuracy.” I do not blame them for making a mistake, but I blame people people like you who do not care if a mistake is made.

    Patterico (de0616)

  11. That comment is directed at Not Me, not at nk.

    Patterico (de0616)

  12. Yup. Got the preview copy because of the KFI connection. If this guest-blogger thing continues to cause embarassment and/or confusion, I’d be happy to lay low for a while. Though I am smitten with the idea of being promoted to the D.A.’s office….

    Justin Levine (4398af)

  13. Hack Draws Ack-Ack for Hiring Flack…

    I read the other day that big-time lefty blog ManBearPig FireDogLake, run by former Hollywood producer and Ned Lamont groupie Jane Hamsher, had hired a press secretary to promote her scary-important blog. Didn’t think anything about it at the tim…

    JunkYardBlog (621918)

  14. Certainly accuracy about things that count is important. It’s just that knowing whether “Patterico” is Glenn or Justin isn’t one of them.

    What’s ironic, here, is that an inaccuracy regarding this little bit of ephemera (“Who IS Patterico??”) has you “bent out of shape,” but none of the more significant mistakes in the “Road to 9/11″ even appear on your radar screen, which appears to be directed entirely at your own navel.

    Not Patterico (fc3c0f)

  15. Actually, not knowing who wrote the original post goes to the heart of their accuracy. The rest of the arguments made (which are being repeated ad nauseam by all moonbats on the Internet) are suspect because Sheldon couldn’t be bothered to get the author right.

    sharon (dfeb10)

  16. Not Patterico,

    none of the more significant mistakes in the “Road to 9/11″ even appear on your radar screen

    Oh, by all means, let’s see that list. Maybe Justin was watching an NBC movie about 9/16. We’ll have to fuss with those pesky little obscure unimportant details, I’m sure. But let’s start with the list of significant mistakes on your radar screen.

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  17. Darn. If you’re “obscure,” or even “relatively obscure,” what does that make me with my 84 hits a day? :(

    Wallowing in the muck, lower than pig feces,
    I am, Sincerely yours,

    Dana (3e4784)

  18. Certainly accuracy about things that count is important. It’s just that knowing whether “Patterico” is Glenn or Justin isn’t one of them.

    Yeah, tell that to Patrick. Heh.

    Moonbats are funny! :)

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  19. And once again, we see in encapsulated form the concept of “fake, but accurate.”

    If you can’t even get the name of the person who’s doing the review right, but you get the right blog, it’s still accurate.

    One wonders, then, why any “inaccuracies” in a docudrama are worthy of “Not Patterico’s” ire. After all, could it not be “fake, but accurate”?

    But then, he is no doubt of the same ilk that sat quietly while “Bowling for Columbine” and “Fahrenheit 9/11″ played with the truth, bent it, distorted it, and ultimately broke it.

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  20. If this guest-blogger thing continues to cause embarassment and/or confusion, I’d be happy to lay low for a while. Though I am smitten with the idea of being promoted to the D.A.’s office….

    No need to lay low. This is amusing.

    And according to some doofus, it has me bent out of shape!

    Patterico (de0616)

  21. “And according to some doofus, it has me bent out of shape!”

    Hey, Glenn, no need to be so hard on yourself. Just because you say in comment #10 that you are “clearly bent out of shape,” there’s no need to call yourself a doofus in comment #20.

    Not Patterico (fc3c0f)

  22. I hope that comment was worth it. See ya.

    Patterico (de0616)

  23. Bannings are more summary nowadays. You got a comment designed only to insult? One bite rule.

    Patterico (de0616)

  24. How does it feel . . ….

    now that the shoe is on the other foot? Our Democratic friends loved the fanciful drama of a Clintonesque president dramatized in The West Wing. They knew and we knew that that show could only help the Democrats and hurt the GOP. And the short-live…

    Common Sense Political Thought (819604)

  25. I don’t mean to engage in conspiracy theories but is it possible that Not… is really Bill Clinton ? I mean you are obscure and all but Clinton was at his best dealing with minutiae. It was the big stuff that escaped him. Just a thought.

    Mike K (416363)

  26. The right wing ABC network is ignoring, along with the other networks except Fox, a terrific speech by Bush. Why he hasn’t been doing this before is a mystery. The speech is good enough that I would recommend reading a transcript. No rhetoric; just a detailed explanation that we have needed for years.

    Mike K (416363)

  27. Could “Sealed v Sealed” actually be “Levine v Patterico”?

    We should know within 24 business hours.

    jwest (86d455)

  28. Not Paterico, in #21
    “Hey, Glenn, no need to be so hard on yourself. Just because you say in comment #10 that you are “clearly bent out of shape,” there’s no need to call yourself a doofus in comment #20.”

    Clearly, irony is just wasted on some people…

    Bugz (bbd0d0)

  29. i didn’t get an advance copy either!
    what is this all about? as far as i know, “the path to 9/11″ hasn’t even aired yet. you people are parsing shadowy ephemera. does slick willie have anyone by a short hair? does he call studio execs, corleone-style, “i have video of your gay indiscretion in 1994, yes, the one with the kool whip, grand marnier and rubber duckie, you **will** remove all references to my culpability in your film!”

    assistant devil's advocate (33fa32)

  30. It is called “accuracy.” I do not blame them for making a mistake, but I blame people people like you who do not care if a mistake is made.

    It’s scary how little they care.

    Yesterday I saw a diary on DailyKos which was defending Dan Rather while attacking ABC.

    Here’s the first Kos Kultist to comment: And we still don’t even know if the Rather documents were forged or not, and where they came from. It’s like nobody cares. The intended affect was apparently achieved.

    And this is how a Kultist replied to that: the rather docs were obvious forgeries, and i think they were MADE obvious so as to be easily discovered. let us not forget that karl rove bugged his OWN office so he could reveal that bugs were found there; it would take a lot to convince me he wasn’t behind this.

    And here’s what a Kultist wants ABC to do: ABC should cancel the first night of “the path to 9/11″ Since the first night is about Clinton administration failures, which they had to make up out of right-wing fantasies, they should cancel that. The second night is about Bush Administration failures, which have to be combined together since they made so many.

    That’s what they’re mad about: That ABC didn’t make a docudrama where the only message to the people was that Bush is the most vile person to ever live.

    I’ve not seen ABC’s docudrama, but I can only laugh when the Michael-Moore-supporting Kultists tell me they care about truth.

    LoafingOaf (a90377)

  31. Oh, they’re apoplectic, no doubt about that.

    It’s amusing how many things conservatives were told to just shut up and take: Fahrenheit 911 and all of that sort of rot, and we’ve kind of gotten used to seeing the GOP and conservatives trashed by Hollywood and the MSM.

    But now, the left has been hit with the fact that it was Richard Armitage, not The Evil One who spilled the beans on Valerie Wilson, The Washington Post and The New York Times suddenly seeing that “Plamegate” wasn’t going anywhere that the left wanted, and now this. Had this happened to us, we’d call it a bad week; with no real experience at it, our friends on the left are having a seizure; they’re like the guy in Deliverance who’s told to squeal like a pig.

    Dana (3e4784)

  32. Dana:

    Amusingly, on other blogs, you’re hearing outraged libs claiming that “well, you have to pay to go to movies, but there’s no way to control what’s showing on TV.”

    Heh.

    So, it’s not okay for conservatives to be outraged by what’s on TV (b/c, after all, you can simply change the channel). But if a lib’s sensibilities are impinged, you’ll by God change that program or else!

    Free speech for me, but not for thee. The motto of the “liberal” Left.

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  33. Sorry Patterico

    but if your going to let guest bloggers like Justin Levine post on your site with an obviously contraditive review of 9/11, Aug. 31st, than it is a big deal because you are responible for this site!

    Linden (c5d150)

  34. The Lurking Observer wrote:

    Amusingly, on other blogs, you’re hearing outraged libs claiming that “well, you have to pay to go to movies, but there’s no way to control what’s showing on TV.”

    If you’ve got a link to that one, you really ought to share it; there’s little I find more amusing than finding someone who says something that stupid.

    And yes, I do have a sick sense of humor; don’t get me started on Steve Irwin jokes.

    Dana (1d5902)

  35. ” it is a big deal because you are responible for this site!”

    Now don’t be blaming him for dippy comments like yours ! That only works for LGF.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  36. Dana,

    Here’s one example. Momof3’s subsequent comment, echoing this point while claiming no politics in “The Day After” is especially amusing to someone who lived through the mid-1980s’ “Freeze Now!” marches.

    Earlier threads at Wizbangblog also had “Guy from OH” claiming that the key issue is that TV is different from movies.

    So much for simply turning off the TV or changing the channel.

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  37. […] Despite what some lefty bloggers think, I haven’t seen the film, so I must rely on descriptions from people who have, like my guest blogger Justin Levine. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » ABC Agrees to Edit “The Path to 9/11″ After Complaints from Clinton (421107)

  38. […] Even though we are NOT the same person, I heartily endorse Pattreico’s take on this controversy (including the notion that having more historical accuarcy is never a bad thing, and that Richard Clarke doesn’t have a whole lot of credibility – despite being depicted as a hero in this film). He has provided some useful links to this debate, so “Thanks P!” […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » The Path To 9/11 – A Response Thus Far (421107)

  39. […] This is either disingenuous bilge, or lack of familiarity with the facts. I have already explained, and Justin has confirmed, that Justin received his advance screening, not because the publicists knew he would be writing guest posts on an “obscure” blog with a “tiny” audience — but because he produces the highest-rated morning talk radio show in Los Angeles. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Greenwald Propagates the Myth that “Path to 9/11″ Publicists Gave Advance Screenings to Obscure Right-Wing Blogs Like This One (421107)

  40. […] As an aside, I appreciate Mr. Crittenden’s description of my call for Calame’s resignation as “principled.” However, I chuckled at Mr. Crittenden’s description of this blog as “prominent.” Doesn’t he read Think Progress? Just last month, they said I am “obscure” — and we all know that if Think Progress said it, it must be true. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Boston Herald’s Crittenden Cites Prominent Obscure Blogger on Calame (421107)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3036 secs.