This Site Will Never Be Andrew Sullivan or Balloon Juice
A reader writes:
What I think Jeff G. and some of your more vocal (and acknowledgedly unrestrained) detractors are concerned with is that you’ll take your desire for moderateness, a good and necessary quality, and you’ll hold back in calling Obama’s policies honestly for what they are. That you’ll not harp on his failures as a leader because it’s not nice to do that to a nice guy. There’s principled ground to be had in the middle, and it’s easier to attack from the middle than from the other side, but the danger is that you might forget which side you started on.
I have never held back in describing any Democrat’s policies honestly for what they are (or any Republican’s, for that matter), and I assure you that I won’t in the future. I’ve had a lot of people criticizing me recently, and that’s fine. Most of you have been civil about it, and that’s all I ask. I’ve also had some people who agree with me, and that’s fine too.
I get turned off by knee-jerk conservatives (or liberals), but I also get very annoyed with the people who praise themselves as Courageous Martyrs for saying things that buck the party line.
On the Internet, when you say things that people disagree with, people are sometimes nasty. It’s a fact of life. Usually, it’s the “other side” that gets nasty, but if you say things that your own side intensely disagrees with, your own side can get nasty too.
When that happens, some people flip out. And the way a lot of them react is to sprain their shoulder patting themselves on the back for their own Incredible Courage. Andrew Sullivan is the quintessential example of this sort of blogger.
To me, that’s a lot of self-aggrandizing nonsense.
Sullivan has tried to rope me into this mindset. He wrote that I was “courageous” when I opposed Proposition 8. A small handful of people have reacted similarly to things I have said in recent days about Obama. A (very) small group said the same thing when I had some mild criticism of Sarah Palin during the campaign.
While it’s very seductive to have people call you brave, and I don’t mean to be rude to people who are trying to compliment me, I utterly reject any such notion as ridiculous. If you’re going to regularly spout opinions, you have to be ready to have people disagree, from whatever side. That just comes with the territory.
The worst is when these self-described paragons of integrity abandon all their principles out of pique, and run to the other side. I do not respect Sullivan because I think he has no core principles. To me, he seems to crave adulation, and when he didn’t get it from the right, he ran to the left and positioned himself as a supposedly “courageous” conservative — a Fearless Man unafraid to Speak the Truth.
That’s not going to happen here. This is not a Balloon Juice or an Andrew Sullivan style site. I’m never going to become a Democrat just because I’ve been offended by some of the things Republicans have done, because Republicans still share more of my core principles (at least in theory).
I’ve always appreciated the thought you put into your posts – though I disagree with you from time to time. In times like these there’s a tendency for the losing party to withdraw into a tight circle and reassess who their friends and enemies are. Being an outspoken blogger will put you in the crosshairs of both friends and enemies – the best reaction is to remain true to your principles and lay out your arguments cogently. You do that, and I appreciate the advantage it gives me to profit from your insight.
Shane from PV (94e46a) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:14 pmI always liked this site. Interesting topics. Interesting points of view and civil discussion (for the most part). The host here is fair.
Andrew Sullivan is a one issue voter. He will demonize anyone opposed to gay marriage. He will twist himself into a pretzel to justify the most ridiculous nonsense from anyone who supports gay marriage. If you look at Sullivan with this in mind, you can predict 99% of what he will say. It’s boring.
Mark_0454 (48edfc) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:16 pm“This Site Will Never Be Andrew Sullivan or Balloon Juice”
Patterico – Heh! So you’ve got that going for you. That’s a good thing a reason why regulars hang around. Disagreement is fine as well. Unhinged demonization from your own side is not useful, but that’s the way some people roll.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:17 pmSullivan does have a core principle: “Gay marriage must be legal.”
Aside from that, though, nada.
I fully agree with you that bloggers, or their sycophants, who trumpet “bravery” about their writing are pretentious twits. There’s no bravery involved in what we do. It’s just civic duty, mixed with some varying degree of narcissism. (In some cases e.g. Sullivan, the narcissism can come to dominate.)
Steven Den Beste (99cfa1) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:18 pmHear! Hear! Sullivan’s “I didn’t leave the Party, the Party left me,” crap is the weakest excuse for the change in his positions that one could possibly come up with. I don’t always agree with Patterico (Prop 8, for example) but I still like the cut of his jib, so to speak.
Icy Truth (0466e6) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:20 pmDude did you just say Balloon Juice? AWESOME! I stopped reading him a while back. A mess, and a loss, but the void’s been filled.
Jay C. (e52c98) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:22 pmWell…..Sully is tres amusant at least.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:24 pmWhat about honesty in bloggers?
Like callin’ Palin out as a text book demagogue?
Buckley, Parker, Noonan, Brooks, Powell, Adelman….fulfilled their civc duty.
You guyz, not so much.
Good for you and an excellent post.
I think (hope?) that some of the more harsh opposition (on all sides, on any issue) comes more from the nature of the medium than it does from real heartfelt animosity.
That is, posting and blogs tend to engender less thoughtful and substantive exchanges. Bombs away; hit enter.
Either that or everyone except Patterico and me and few others are just jerks (tongue in cheek).
SteveMG (50b76f) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:25 pmAnd semapai-sama, I didn’t see where you did your “civic duty”.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:25 pmYeah nishi, that’s right. Start in with the burning books meme. No one ever tire of that!
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:28 pmSullivan and Cole switched sides when the Republicans were at their peak of power (and their behavor at its worst).
Switching now would just be like kicking a dead cat.
snuffles (677ec2) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:29 pmYeah nishi, that’s right. Start in with the burning books meme. No one ever tires of that!
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:29 pmHe wrote that I was “courageous” when I opposed Proposition 8.
I wonder how many people, conservative or liberal, back in the era of a movie like the late 1960s “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” (with actor Sidney Portier portraying a character who’s under pressure for wanting to marry a white woman) or certainly in the years well before then — when, for example, Lucy and Ricky weren’t allowed to be shown in their make-believe TV bedroom if it had only one bed — ever would have thought the issue of altering existing laws involving personal relationships would come down to males marrying males, females marrying females?
Now the question is with Barack Obama soon to enter the White House, will our society begin its descent down the proverbial slippery slope at a noticeably faster pace?
As to the future in general?
I fear us becoming a cross between Mexico (with its never-ending dysfunctions and continuous embrace of Obama-type ideas and politicians) and France (with its never-ending elitist-left socialism).
Truly the worst of both worlds.
Mark (411533) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:29 pmFUCK OFF NISHI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Burkha Burkha Burkha
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:29 pmYou are demonstrating the real issue, the “elephant” in the room, so to speak:
To be sure, most Democrats were dancing in the pixie dust voting for Obama. Many Republicans held their nose and voted for McCain (like Anne Coulter’s site: get drunk and vote for McCain).
That approach will never work, nor will shrieking and searching for ideological purity (and excommunicating political apostates). And the “grudging” support for McCain was not lost on the electorate. I mean, look at Hugh Hewitt, who spent a lot of time telling us how awful the man was, and then supported him very aggressively. As if the “R” means everything.
It’s time to formulate what “we” stand for, and take our case to the American people. Sure, hard core “progressive Leftists” will caper and say nasty things. But then, that is all they have: emotionality, the triumph of feelings over fact. But we need to fight for the middle (which does not necessarily mean being moderate) in order to win elections.
The press has finally shown its hand to be nearly wholly partisan, and most people know it. We cannot count on them to properly transmit our philosophies and ideas. The WP article outright states (and correctly so) that they had a “gap” in coverage between Palin and Biden. And why? Partisanship, pure and simple.
Look at Chris Mathews.
Your post—and the reactions of some to it—just underscores how important that “Grand New Party” approach will need to be for future elections. And rather than act, frankly, like KosKids post 2004, we should be working to participate in that process of restatement, renewal, and getting that message out to voters. It’s going to be a long, tough slog uphill. We are going to have to work together on this one.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:29 pmAs the Greeks say:
All things in moderation. Including moderation.
–
I think Jeff’s essentially correct in his characterization of Obama’s nature. As to Patrick’s desire to say that the guy that’s been taking thug-like actions for his entire political life is not a thug himself, well … great.
Marquess of Queensbury and all that.
Eventually sufficient correlation results in an awareness of causation. Some just realize it sooner than others.
BumperStickerist (54b3a3) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:30 pmoh. Well you should have just said that first off. Also, Baracky is not a nice man.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:31 pmPeggy’s hot flashes are not the same as civic duty, poor dear. Too old for junior league, too young for gravitas.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:33 pmfeets!
also, nishi is not a nice pop fashionista griefer.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:34 pmIf this country is any good at all, and expects to remain so, it is due to folks like you, Pat.
I have a more cynical view than you of BHO the man, but on his avowed principles, we will fight against him together across all theaters and fronts.
Ed (04ae8e) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:35 pmEric Blair…just how do you propose to do that?
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:35 pmI’ve been reading at Ruffini’s rebuild site.
Personally I think you should toss the reins to Palin and her supporters and let the House burn.
Quicker and much less painful.
😉
Hence my continued readership.
I honestly don’t understand where you’re coming from with this “He’s a nice guy” stuff, after what we’ve seen in this campaign. But I don’t think you’re a liar. People need to calm the heck down.
Jim Treacher (592cb4) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:36 pmI sense a disturbance in the force.
darwin (2a33b8) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:37 pmHow many times is Patteirco going to say he is not going to be Andrew Sullivan. Me think old Pattyboy is protesting just a bit too much.
Your manlove for Obama in the last few days has been disgusting. If you want to turn conservatives against each other thats fine Patterico, but don’t expect me (or like-minded readers) to visit your site EVER AGAIN.
Minty Mintzer (744f76) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:38 pmWell….my sempai would know me from another older, name.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:38 pmWabisabi, perhaps.
“This Site Will Never Be Andrew Sullivan or Balloon Juice”
Good.
David Blue (685d1b) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:39 pmkate lurvs her some b-smoove. she must have creamed when O! announced the family was getting a hypoallergenic dog. that’s what I feel is an important detail in a president-elect’s first press conference.
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:40 pmMinty – I’ll miss your many insightful comments.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:40 pmMr. Treacher, you rock. Glad to see you post here, and I enjoy your site.
Who the heck is this cat of wheeler’s?
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:40 pmYour manlove for Obama in the last few days has been disgusting. If you want to turn conservatives against each other thats fine Patterico, but don’t expect me (or like-minded readers) to visit your site EVER AGAIN.
See? What COURAGE must I possess to endure such a wall of invective!!!
🙂
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:41 pmObama is who he was trained to be. He’ll govern as he was trained to govern and his agenda and goals will be the same as the people who trained him.
darwin (2a33b8) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:41 pmPat has a perspective, a worldview…and he shares it on his blog…and gives everyone a fair chance to share theirs. (he gets points from me for being participative, as opposed to royally aloof).
Jeff G has a perspective, a worldview…and he shares it on his blog…and is participative.
Pajamas Media has several by-lines, ranging across the spectrum of worldviews, with VDH, Roger Simon, Roger Kimball, Claudia Rosett, Phyllis Chesler, etc.
They also have frequent guest articles.
I consider this a tremendous positive, because it broadens the discussion. If I wanted to live in an echo chamber the size of a phone booth, I would turn on MSNBC and turn off every firing synapse.
We all seem to have a common bond in seeing leftism for what it is, the entrenched media for what they are, and a need to give oxygen to their attempts to strangle and choke out dissent from their goosestepping cultism.
Every criticism of Pat’s graciousness, is misplaced and unfair. One can critique a tactic, or find a distinction in how to phrase a sentiment, but VDH said the same thing, Bill Whittle said the same thing, I said the same thing, …we all expressed it in our own words.
Jeff G even said that graciousness was in order.
We are all pulling on the same end of the rope…giving oxygen to a point of view that gets its windpipe crushed by the entrenched media.
Andrew forgot that quite a while ago, unfortunately. Pat has not…and I suspect, he never will. Give him a break here…he’s one of the good guys.
cfbleachers (1f4df1) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:41 pmMossberg500 – I’m not up on the kate nick. On which blog was she using that. She’s typical of schizoid lefties who have to change screen names frequently because they get banned or discover new ones that hold more meaning for themselves.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:44 pmEric, I dig Grand New Party.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:45 pmReihan is IQl33t.
But what does GNP do for the youth vote?
Ruffini says the youth demographic gave Obama 72 electoral college votes.
And that doesn’t count our working GOTV, facebooking and twittering.
IPOF, last summer me and a bunch of friends and 3000 other young people volunteered to do a crowd scene for the Flobots music video, Rise. I just heard on local 93.3 that Rise is in contention for the inaugral song in January.
How do you compete with that?
“Who the heck is this cat of wheeler’s?”
Eric – Sci Fi reference. Nishi doesn’t live in this world.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:46 pmdaleyrocks, she has gone by jenn, kate, quellcrest falconer, nishi, etc. No matter, her revolving memes are the same – tedious. Pretty soon it will be two-digits, forty percenters, and far too many other memes to list. Be thankful she doesn’t threadjack every post here.
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:50 pmI, for one, will never forgive you for suggesting a political opponent has basic humanity.
Frank J. (23ffa3) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:51 pm“man love for Obama”?
Sheesh …..
I think you’re showing a proper amount of generosity to the President Elect.
There’s plenty to be concerned about. Obama’s roots are in the “hard left” camp – Alinsky, Wright, Ayers, Father “flooger” – so now we have to see where he tries to go.
IMO, the role of the opposition – that’s us now – is to argue ideas, not personalities.
Granted, that’s not the way the “opposition” played it the past 8 years.
So be it.
BD57 (2fdd30) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:54 pmLife is complicated. I voted against Prop 8 but fear its impact. I voted for the lesser socialist but am…was joyous on election night (for several reasons).
I like your site. I appreciate your insights and your reasons for your positions.
A famous writer once told me the basic test all art must pass: is it interesting? Your site is interesting!
Patricia (ee5c9d) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:56 pmFrank – Are you still doing those Blood Oath ceremonies on your site? If it’s not too late, I’d like to sign up for the next initiation.
Thnx.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:56 pmPatterico, we critize ya because we like you, you gullible bastard. It may be for the best as it will be so much sweeter when people like you start turning on Obama.
Roy Mustang (2f688e) — 11/8/2008 @ 12:58 pmThere are many who take pride in going down with the ship (The Republican Party), as long as they are captain.
In California, $26 billion in spending (including interest) is in just two bonds – StemCell and the new Prop 1A Train project. This is way too much for such worthless projects. The state and the US are headed directly towards an Iceland style financial meltdown in 18 months if withdrawals and deleveraging continue at today’s rate. But where are the fiscal conservatives? They’re busy obsessing over gay marriage, abortion and creationism. Republicans have lost credibility.
A good thing would be a single Proposition which repeals several bond Propositions passed in previous elections. It could be sold as a “let’s get real about debt” move. An effective TV ad could ridicule the many stars like Brad Pitt who peddle $6 billion bonds to California voters, then move to France to live in luxury. Rob Reiner, Jamie Lee Curtis, and all those other clowns damage California too.
Wesson (f6c982) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:03 pmPatterico
This is my favorite site, its not an echo camber.
I see a bright future ahead for this site.
ML (14488c) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:04 pmBut wasn’t it Incredibly Courageous for Sully to publicly compliment Patterico, after the later so enthusiastically circulated a link tending to show that Sully is, um, “loads” of fun?
Brian (b4ed74) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:06 pm“I honestly don’t understand where you’re coming from with this “He’s a nice guy” stuff, after what we’ve seen in this campaign.”–JT
Well, he is a nice guy.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/random_act.htm
And, Hitler loved dogs (or so the story goes).
And, no all you lefty loons out there, I’m not saying that Obama = Hitler. I’m saying that just because a person has one desirable feature it doesn’t follow that the person is entirely desirable.
And, Obama ain’t entirely desirable.
Dave Surls (00087b) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:09 pm“It may be for the best as it will be so much sweeter when people like you start turning on Obama.”
That is precisely the point. If Pat avoids personal invective it will make his inevitable policy criticism more effective. Plus, we don’t really know what BO will do until he takes office. My suspicion is that the governing-from-the-center image he presented during the campaign was just a hoax on the electorate, but it’s not as if he has as much of a substantive record to judge on as, say, Palin.
Gary Rosen (4134a9) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:10 pmWas the good man lying to the coal miners or the SF environmentalists?
SteveG (71dc6f) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:12 pmBecause if he was lying to the working class, that’d be a flaw.
Nice people don’t cleverly “shoot the bird” to their opponents like some mentally challenged 12-year old. Peggy Noonan must have missed that little quirk.
TexasJew (94c811) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:15 pmWe’ve elected an unaccomplished political hack with a big race checkmark who sounds like he knows what he’s talking about, when he really doesn’t.
He’s surrounding himself with old Clintonoids because he really doesn’t have an original thought in his head, and they’re specialists in gilding crap for the MSM.
While I admire Jeff’s posts, he went a little too far off the deep end for me awhile ago – but his “sister” site is still a regular read for me. I found this site via the sadly defunct “Cathy’s World,” and consider it an admirable replacement (although quite different in tone and content, of course).
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:15 pmTJ – hey, how the heck are ya! Wahoo!
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:16 pm“Because if he was lying to the working class, that’d be a flaw.”
SteveG – Come on, with Democrats that’s not a flaw, that’s a feature. If they told their base what they really thought they would never get elected.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:16 pmUmm…no. That’s not what Jeff G is saying.
What he’s saying, in short, is “words mean things”.
You have to stretch the meaning of the word “good” out of any former meaning it could have had to describe someone who makes eager common cause with the likes of William Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, Jeremiah Wright, and Michael Pfleger (just to name a few). You diminish the definition of “a good man” when you apply it to someone who stood idly by while his supporters very publicly attacked Sarah Palin’s family in the most scurrilous manners and rifled through Joe Wurzelbacher’s life. You have to nearly invent a new meaning of the phrase “a decent man” to decribe someone who very deliberately killed a bill that would have at made it so that newborn babies who managed to survive abortion attempts didn’t die alone in a hospital broom closet.
These things all happened. I’m not making them up. Add them together with the cheap so-called slips of the tongue that in other people we would have taken as a below the belt insult and you’re not showing me a very good man at all. To say that he sullies what used to be a very powerful complement. It’s also simply incorrect.
What we say is important. We should not throw words around like Mardi Gras beads. That is Jeff’s main point.
Jimmie (7b8555) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:17 pmJimmie-
Exactly. It’s like a Deomocratic dictionary is being used at this site. Where whats up is down , whats east is west, and what is good and decent is lying and abortion-loving.
Words have meanings. I thought this used to be a conservative principle.
Minty Mintzer (744f76) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:29 pmSee? What COURAGE must I possess to endure such a wall of invective!!!
Comment by Patterico — 11/8/2008 @ 12:41 pm
LOL
You’ve got Andrew Sullivan down pat. Even his “dissents of the day” praise his courage lately.
Adulation whore? TOTALLY.
Keith Olbermann is the paragon of courage though. He says so himself; it must be true!!
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/countdown-with-keith-olbermann/805561/
no one you know (1f5ddb) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:30 pmMichelle Catalano:
Click the link. It’s all good stuff.
UPDATE: I include this because I think Michelle has some credibility as a former Bush supporter. That was how I remembered her, and in her post she says she was. I have admittedly not followed her writing closely for some time.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:30 pmJimmie,
I agree. To bastardize “good” or “decent” to the extent which Patterico has done is far too close an approach to Arendt’s “banality of evil” for my comfort. It is a shade of Duranty’s reflections upon the “greatness” of the USSR under Stalin.
I’ve never read an account of Stalin actually killing a particular person. Does he achieve the status of “good” for not having done so? I find the explanation for the pieces logically unconvincing.
Tomorrow is another day and I’ll be back to read something better.
Rick Ballard (14757e) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:33 pmIt was a for real cat what you could pet and subject to stuff.
It can’t hurt I don’t think to say that nishi was more right than wrong about how this fiasco what pitched our little country into an endless dirty socialist night came to pass as it did. I suspect she’s right that Governor Palin may not be able to come back from this. I hope that’s not what happens but she’s a very not unclever one, our nishi.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:34 pmNow he’s quoting liberal blogs to BACK UP his own arguments. I’ve seen enough. Off to protein wisdom for me where at least words have MEANINGS.
Minty Mintzer (744f76) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:38 pmEric, do you know what the top idea at Ruffini’s rebuildtheparty site is?
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:39 pmLearn how to use the interwebs from Ron Paul.
hahaha
you guyz are so doomed.
😉
Pardon me for being crass, but Andrew Sullivan is a pantload. Has there been any position he has not taken (except being for traditional marriage)?
Robert O'Brien (58d9a8) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:39 pmhe went a little too far off the deep end for me while ago … well that would be you cause meanwhile Mr. Goldstein carries on in brilliant noble stalwart and true fashion and this isn’t even a for real argument they’re having. We’ll see soon enough how good this dirty socialist is and if you don’t have a sense of foreboding then no one can help you anyway.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:40 pmMinty,
You’re welcome to go off to Protein Wisdom, which is a fine blog. I don’t see any evidence that you ever read this site before anyway, so you’ll have to pardon me if I don’t tear up over losing you.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:47 pmWrong, A Reader. What some of his more vocal critics are concerned with is that Patterico, et al, lack the moral clarity to look at a politician who is a pathological liar and campaign finance scoundrel who associates almost exclusively with people who famously hate this country, and see a bad man.
Worse, they look at this person and declare that he is, in fact, a “good man”. That makes Patterico little different than the politicians themselves.
I have often thought that the most conservative Senator has much more in common with the most liberal Senator, than with his most conservative constituent. And maybe Patterico has much more in common with Markos Mulitsas than he does with his conservative readers. The brotherhood.
Jaibones (468585) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:47 pm“moral clarity” is a religious concept, Jai.
It’s where you divide the world into “good” and “evil” camps (you’re always in the good camp, of course).
Patterico already admitted to not being religious.
snuffles (677ec2) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:50 pmI live in a state with a governor patrick that pretended to be “moderate”. His campaign was so moderate that people could not tell what his platform was, so we elected him and have come to rue the day (although we voted AGAIN for a fake moderate obama). The problem I have with being moderate, unbiased and fair is that the person often comes off as unprincipled and unable to take a side, make a stand, differentiate between good and bad policy. Please do not go down that route. It is fun to pile on republicans, because afterall, they are losers. And they stand for “old” America, which I guess we all spurn now. By the way, my heart is still broken.
Judith (76ca0a) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:55 pmPatterico is just making notes in the margins of the revised style guide I think. We never put a dirty socialist and his woman in the White House before. There’s no wrong way to oppose them and Baracky might prove to be teh goodest dirty socialist we see in our lifetimes, miserable, brutish and short as they are likely to become.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:56 pm“moral clarity” is a religious concept, Jai.
I disagree snuffles. One’s morality does not have to be derived specifically from religion. Over time religion may inform morality, but to claim as you did merely displays typical progressive hostility toward followers of a religion, including atheism.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:57 pmDaley,
The primary function of religion is to tell its followers who to hate.
That’s why the right is sooooo nasty.
snuffles (677ec2) — 11/8/2008 @ 1:59 pmAnd maybe Patterico has much more in common with Markos Mulitsas than he does with his conservative readers. The brotherhood.
That’s a really stupid thing to say.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:00 pmThe primary function of religion is to tell its followers who to hate.
That’s why the right is sooooo nasty.
See, I’m not religious, but I’m not utterly ignorant of what religion is all about, like snuffles apparently is.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:01 pm“The primary function of religion is to tell its followers who to hate.”
snuffles – Please provide examples, apart from Islam.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:03 pmI mean, like alphie apparently is.
You were right, JD. Snuffles is alphie.
Snuffles is banned.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:04 pmSorry, snuffles won’t be providing any examples.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:05 pmLike I said Patterico, toss the reins to Palin and her supporters.
It will be so much easier to rebuild after the vamphyre house burns to the ground.
You know you want to.
😉
PALIN 2012 FTW!
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:05 pmI knew it. Hi, alphie. The whole Baracky large and in charge thing hasn’t really made you a happier person I don’t think. I will pray for you.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:06 pmThe premise of this post is that Patterico said Obama’s a “nice guy” and has caught flak.
For my two cents … I just don’t see the “nice guy” in Obama. He’s simply an illusionist and manipulative. Look at how well he hid his past. We can’t even see his birth certificate for goodness sake, or his school records. That’s a nice guy?
darwin (2a33b8) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:06 pmPatterico wrote:
I was afraid you were going to be a male Kathleen Parker when you accepted the invitation from Air America lunatic Mike Malloy to comment on the VP debate after you slammed Palin’s answers (understandably) in her Couric interview.
Here’s a part of what I wrote about Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker, and Peggy Noonan in my blog post Christo Buckley’s “Yada Yada Yada”: Why Elaine from Seinfeld Makes More Sense:
L.N. Smithee (abed3f) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:10 pmI guess now I am allowed to say that snuffles is an ignorant asshat troll. Before, I was going to ask if that was OK on the internet.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:15 pmHere, here! I appreciate all you say, particularly because you are rational and civil. Thanks!
Jane (2ad532) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:15 pmWhat the hell is wrong with some people on this site?
If this election proved anything, it proved that Andrew Sullivan is out of his mind.
We have extremists on the libertarian end who think they can win nationally as the party of lightly regulated selfishness, and extremists on the socon end who still think O-man is a muslim.
Tom (332829) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:18 pmI was afraid you were going to be a male Kathleen Parker when you accepted the invitation from Air America lunatic Mike Malloy to comment on the VP debate after you slammed Palin’s answers (understandably) in her Couric interview.
Well, look, L.N. What I did was accept an invitation from my friend Marc Danziger to go on the show. I knew that it was a hotbed of leftist thought but I enjoyed meeting the folks who ran it.
On that show, I was critical of Palin because she dropped the ball, in particular on the Fannie/Freddie stuff. I later learned that she’d been cautioned to drop the ball by McCain’s incompetent campaign, and I was appropriately apologetic for having criticized her on that point, if you recall.
Kathleen Parker is a moron. At first I could respect her, but when she called for Palin to step down as the VP nominee “for the good of the country” — an act that would have doomed McCain’s candidacy more than it already was doomed — I determined that Ms. Parker had placed a higher priority on her exciting new status as Courageous Conservative than she did on winning the election.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:30 pmOh yessssssss, Patterico, I so approve.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:40 pmSo seductive, so delicious.
Palin 2012. It’s a lock. 😉
Ron Paul will teach Patrick Ruffini to use the interwebs and you will roar back to crush the oppo in 2012.
I can’t wait.
😉
Then President Palin can meet the real Nicholas Sarkozy, and they can sing Du rouge à lèvres sur une cochonne.
lol.
OK, I think the Hitler and the not my president thing is stupid, but if (and when) they said Bush is a bad man, I think that is a legitimate concern, one I disagree with and could debate over.
Are people supposed to never contemplate their own gut feeling, and never politically react to their conclusions to that question?
Is it really the noble thing to automatically grant your opponent equally pure motivations based on who won the election rather than your lying eyes over the past year?
Same goes with the cowboy thing. That is a perfectly legitimate concern that people had a right to consider. As is Obamas foreign policy.
I understand your position Pat, but this is were I think you are misguided. You have fallen for the bi-partisan clap-trap. We (I) don’t want to work in a bi-partisan fashion to “get the change we need”, as defined by the party in power. I want to preserve this Republic under our Constitution, and defeat those I believe will not do that effectively.
It’s a constant battle, and you are free to play by some chivalrous set of rules if it makes you feel better, but notice while you are giving Obama a wink and a nod, Sarah Palin is being hounded all the way back to Alaska. You can sanctimoniously tell be two wrongs don’t make a right, and I tell you we just got our asses handed to us, you better get in the game. It most certainly isn’t a new playing field.
lee (c46ba5) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:45 pmPatterico quoted Michelle Catalano: (who?)
(who?)
He did cheat. He conspired to accept illegal contributions online and did nothing to stop it when it was published. That’s a fact.
He did lie. He’s lied about McCain’s stance on the Iraq war (that “100 years” business, which Obama corrected on the fly when finally challenged in a town hall meeting, showing he knew it was deceptive). He’s lied about McCain’s plans for Medicaid and Social Security while campaigning in Florida, something even in-the-tank so-called fact-checkers said was unconscionable. He’s constantly lied about the true nature of his relationship with William Ayers, at first defining their contacts as being no different as those between a legislator and a resident in his district, and then playing Clintonesque weasel words to deny that his State Senate campaign was kicked off in Ayers and Dohrn’s home. Hours after saying “tiny” Iran wasn’t a threat to the U.S., he told a rally audience that he had always said before that Iran is a threat.
Did he ‘buy his way into the White House’? Nah. But he did take millions in unsolicited contributions from the “news” media. They bought it for him.
Oh, sorry. Let me correct that.
Slimy, corrupt,
devil, Antichrist,communist, evil, Stalin, Lenin,Hitler.That the people who voted for Obama are ignorant,idiots,stupid,corrupt, racist, Jew haters, the enemy.There. All accurate now!
L.N. Smithee (abed3f) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:47 pmSmithee, actually Rahm Emanuel is a jew, and he was a civilian voluteer for the IDF.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:50 pmIs he a Jew Hater?
Do you know le double entrendre for cochonne?
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:53 pmIt means both sow in french and slut, in l’argot, or slang.
Poor John Wheeler, who just passed away. I don’t know if he would like that gedankenspiel of his used for snarkish trolling.
Better that the person just be “Wigner’s Friend.” PETA wouldn’t complain, that way.
I just wish that folks only interested in trolling would…well….decohere to a universe where they rule.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 2:58 pmYou have fallen for the bi-partisan clap-trap. We (I) don’t want to work in a bi-partisan fashion to “get the change we need”, as defined by the party in power. I want to preserve this Republic under our Constitution, and defeat those I believe will not do that effectively.
And what, precisely, have I said that causes you to believe that I disagree? Was it when I said “I’m sure as hell not going to say that I’m supporting his policies”?
If you think you have to call the other guy a bad guy to vigorously attack his policies, I feel sorry for you.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:00 pmWhy choose though really? It will be hardest on those who remember how America used to be I think. The children won’t know any different and the dvds they see of that time will seem simply fantastical.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:05 pmBut, you see, Patterico, that is precisely how politics has become debased: one’s opponent is a devil, and one’s “favored” politician is a saint. That is what the DNC and RNC both want, so that each side votes completely party ticket.
In fact, it was impressive (though counterproductive) that so many Republicans were at best lukewarm for McCain.
Dancing in the pixie dust for your candidate leads to very strange places. Seriously, Patterico, go re-read (since I’ll bet you read it a long time ago) Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer.”
Relevant over fifty years after publication. Especially for the challenges that we face.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:08 pmSnuffles is right, My religion has taught me who to hate.
“Lover your neighbor as yourself”.
When I find my non-neighbor, I will know who to hate!
ML (14488c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:10 pmLol Eric, I only want to help.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:10 pmHow can I be trolling when I only speak the truth?
Truly Palin will be such a great president.
So intelligent, so knowlegable.
So…..presidential.
😉
how good this dirty socialist is and if you don’t have a sense of foreboding then no one can help you anyway.
Please don’t misinterpret what I wrote, Happy Baby. Use strawmen to argue with other posters, if you wish – I wasn’t referring to the political content of Protein Wisdom, rather the increasingly personal nature of it. Much more emotion over there in the past year, so I decided it wasn’t my cup of tea anymore.
Clear enough for you, or do I have to diagram my post in order to help you out?
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:13 pmWheelers-cat
You say that in light of Obama and the 60 states of the USA?
OK.
ML (14488c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:14 pmOnce again, I agree with Jeff’s assessment of Obama: he’s a douchebag, because I’m an evil Catholic absolutist Dante fan who believes that frauds, especially pious ones, are generally Bad Men. On the other hand, I’ve been reading Pat long enough that I disagree with the idea that Pat’s being disingenuous in his own assessment.
Pat’s a great investigative blogger, of which there are not many. Jeff’s a great synthesist. Treacher excels at satire, Burge at parody. Ace weilds a hefty lampoon against c*nts. Insty’s a very clever assembly language. Wuzzie’s MIA. There’s room for everyone.
But PJM doesn’t seem to have a place for Jeff anymore. Too bad.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:15 pmWell … could I at least call The Him “Jugears O’Daley”? Or “Juggy” for short?
And, yes, I think Jeff Goldstein went way overboard starting this. We should all just take a deep breath, keep it loose and light among ourselves, and look for what works in the real world and not what makes us feel good.
nk (95bfab) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:20 pmJeez DMAC. The you in the second sentence is not the same you as the you in the first sentence. I switched them! The second you is a y’all you. Cause all yous is talking about is him nice? is him good? while the dark clouds gather and you are helpless before the dirty socialist ravaging of all you hold dear.
Sorry though… I shouldn’t have been all confusing like that, I just wanted to get to the sense of foreboding part.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:21 pmA decoherent troll writes:
That’s two lies in two sentences. Progress. Actually, I don’t think you do want to help anyone or anything, including yourself. You are just taking a break from pulling the wings off flies.
I’ll avoid the obvious comment about “double slit experiments” in this context.
JD, feel free to denounce me. But then, I would enjoy it. So please don’t.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:21 pmMB,
President-elect Obama is mentally deficient in a very different way from all other people and attempts to portray his stupidity without referencing its special nature will be rejected by nishi. You will find that there is no greater expert on the internet wrt special stupidity than Predent-elect Obama Supporter nishi.
Rick Ballard (14757e) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:22 pmIf you feel you have to call a con man a good guy all your friends are going to get ripped off.
lee (c46ba5) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:23 pmAnd I am coherent in all universes.
I even rule in the metaverse.
Wanna see?
/begin transmission
Greetings, Past People, from the Sub-Citizens of the New Conferated Republic of the level III Branching Path Multiverse.
We initiate this tachyon beam transmission in a desperate plea for your aid.
In your year of 2008 the once great Republican Party underwent a disasterous schism during the campaign of Barak Hussein Obama, when President Obama was freely elected as president of the United States of America.
On November 5 the Republican Party fractured into the Palinites and the Powellians, in a reaction to a crushing and humiliating defeat at the polls.
The Palinites staged a revolt and a coup, which has been termed in our history books as The Culture of LIFE! Revolution.
The Palinites then formed a secessionist party and declared themselves the New Confederated Republic, headed by God’s Counsel, a triumvirate consisting of Sarah Palin, Joe-the-Plumber, and the cryogenically preserved talking head of Jerry Falwell. The Counsel immediately authorized national wiretapping and Witch-testing for party loyalty, and has instituted a Department of Torture to carry on with the work of the Holy George W Bush. Immediately all forms of public school and birth control were outlawed. The resulting population burden has swamped our resources…the New Conferated Republic, also know as Jesusland, has become a third world country.
The nations surrounding us have built a giant Fence, to keep Republicans, or “illegals” as we are now known, from seeking employment in the more technologically advanced world outside our borders.
It is now 2208.
We have been forced to purchase the tachyon beam device that we are using to communicate with you past-peple from the more technologically advanced Canadians, one of the few nations that will still take our credit cards.
We beg you, please reconsider.
We, your political descendents, are suffering mightily.
Rededicate yourselves to the principles of tolerance and liberty while you still can.
Yours in LIFE!,
the Sub-Citizens of the New Confederated Republic of the Level III Branching Path Multiverse
/end transmission
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:25 pmPat, I hope that you don’t do another final post on this subject. Douchey is as douchey does. We’ll have plenty of evidence to go on, going forward.
I think he’s a douchebag, but I don’t think I’m a bitter clinger. You think he’s not, but you don’t think you’re being naive. Nobody ever thinks he’s a bitter clinger or naive. Who cares.
You’re a good blogger and a stand-up guy in my book.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:27 pmWhoops. That wasn’t the multiverse.
I”m guessing that was mescaline.
Same first letter, though.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:29 pmIt’s good that nishi can endlessly amuse herself.
For the other people that she subjects to her bullshit, not so much good.
She knows that you’re never alone when you’re a schizophrenic.
Watch for the aspergers excuse.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:31 pmA good blogger and a stand-up guy is right I think. When did we all start thinking in epitaphs though? I think on some level, we just know.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:32 pmI want my epitaph to read: “Was It Something I Said?”
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:34 pmhehe, this is sort of an insider Science Joke….you see, Dr. Wheeler was Max Tegmark’s patron, and I am a Tegamarkian.
Thus the Level III Multiverse.
😉
hahaha, enough fly wings for one day.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:34 pmThis isn’t just random sport for me, though.
The last thing my grandfather ever said to me was always vote republican.
What you have made of made of my grandfather’s party is disgusting.
Pat, I hope that you don’t do another final post on this subject.
I didn’t really mean this to be a re-hash of the “Is Obama good?” issue. I was just responding to a reader who e-mailed, concerned that I was going to run left. I wanted to reassure him that I won’t.
I do thank you for the kind words, though, Dan.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:34 pmHey, Dan, re your 3:15 PM post:
“..Insty’s a very clever assembly language…..”
How does one write “Heh” in hexadecimal format?
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:35 pmPat, I’m teasing. It’s led to some good debate, and that’s always justification enough, blogwise.
Eric, I’ve no idea, but candelabra are on sale at Amazon at 50% off!
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:37 pmAnd free shipping with Amazon Prime.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:38 pmnishi – 70% of single women voted for Obama. I don’t want to believe that 70% of single women are stupid, but the evidence is tough to ignore.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:38 pmIs that the one he sent the instakid when she was away at mortuary camp? 🙂
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:39 pmIt’s true. Words come to mean what they are used to describe.
SarahW (a6e80b) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:40 pm——–
oh. I didn’t know this blog made for real faces. That looks stupid.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:40 pmYes, that one, haps.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:41 pmOkay, I know how to make the trollbot vanish. I’ll dust off my “Star Trek” chops from the original series and movie, combining a couple of themes:
“Nomad, listen carefully: I always tell the truth, and everything I say is a lie.”
Too much trollery. Not enough physics. And I think you have spent too much time in Everett’s domain.
I’m glad you like Max Shapiro, though. He does tend toward the pretentious, but you obviously have little difficulty with that characteristic.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:41 pmDan, I am still amazed you’re still with Jeff.
He shit all over your brother after your brother offered some webtech work for free but was late getting back to ol’ skinhead Jeff with the free work offered.
lez see? Jeff asked for volunteer(s) to help support the ever entertaining “Pussy Whip” site (or Protein Wisdom) back when I frequented it for it’s ever-entertaining values offered mostly by Karl, Thor and various ‘trolls’ and Yourself with Jeff as a infrequent host. Your bro. bought the pitch as he was a “believer”…. and the pitch was an evident Bait and Switch as Jeff really wanted help on a commerical project for his catch-wresting buddy which still has lousy writing which Jeff is responsible for. Your brother, I guess, went along with it but slowly delivered a freebie…and when Jeff got all caught up in his panties over you brother’s slowness…Jeff Smeared your brother all over his website instead of being a ‘businessman’ about it and merely foreseeing “you get what you pay for”.
over and over again, Jeff attacks friends and foes similarly, with over-the-top whineing, with creepy martial arts threats, even tracking down employers of critics, etc. An Asshole of enormous Pretentions. I don’t agree with Patterico but he at least ‘debates’.
And you owe your family, college-employer and students better than wasteing your time at PW. Think about it!
good luck, buddy
datadave (9d0bdb) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:43 pmYou are a deceiver, datadave person.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:45 pmI just wanted to get to the sense of foreboding part.
Oh sure, I hear that – believe me, I’ve already suffered the cult of The One for a few years now, yet no one I know (who lives outside of Chicago) seemed interested in my stories of Obama’s indoctrination at the hands of The Machine here. Nor was there any interest in the corrupt state Senate Leader’s (Emil Jones) admonitions of “I’m going to make me a President!” And don’t get me started on his support for the corrupt head of Cook County (John Stroger, both Senior and later Junior), which led to the narrow loss of the only true reformer of the board (Forrest Claypool, Democrat). The result? We have the second highest county and city taxes in the country. Socialist, indeed.
Once again, I agree with Jeff’s assessment of Obama: he’s a douchebag,
I agree as well – just ask my wife (she voted for him), who’s already sick of hearing my Chicago – style/ slangy scream of “douchebag!” (think of Dennis Franz) every time he appears on our TV. Going to have to control those urges in the future, or at least when she’s not around.
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:46 pmHigh taxes and not a Wal-Mart one.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:48 pmPrtty damn well spot on, Dan.
Bill at ejectejecteject, VDH, Glenn…have all gone the graciousness route. I think it’s far and away the best strategy.
Michelle wrote an article about it, and I have written comments in various spots advocating for it.
However, a couple of folks have asked me if they could use some of my prior analyses prior to the election, and I agreed. Very soon we will have some issues upon which to reflect and comment that are fair game.
Pat will be right there in the heart of it, I would bet heavy money. I think the attacks on him for his graciousness are imbecilic.
The focus on him “allowing” that Senator Obama may be a “good person” at his core leaves room for honest disagreement, but not full out attack, imo.
From my personal stance, I didn’t agree with Pat…I simply said we can’t know that yet…at best. There are enough signs and signals indicating otherwise to reserve judgment, even if one was inclined to wait for more evidence or proof.
Pat’s a fine trial attorney. He knows that evidence is evidence and argument is argument…and one must precede the other, and they should not be confused as the same thing.
He knows that. He was being gracious. And…if it comes to pass that the evidence mounts to the conrrary…how powerful would it be for Pat to point to the day he stood up and gave every benefit of the doubt…only to now have to say that his beneficent stand was misplaced?
MUCH more powerful. The entrenched media refused to dig an inch deep on Senator Obama. Some say he was a cipher. A blank slate.
Jeff took all the signs and signals and said the slate is not blank. (btw, I don’t know why there would be no room at PJM for him, that’s not true, is it?)
There…we see three starting points for President-elect Obama. A)blank slate, neither positive or negative…let’s find out and keep an eye out since the entrenched media is asleep at the wheel; b)he starts as a negative based on all these signs and signals, not vetted by the media…who is asleep at the wheel; c)He says some nice things, is misguided but seems decent enough at heart and starts with a slight positive based upon demeanor and temperament…but we will watch closely what he does, because the entrenched media didn’t vet him and have been asleep at the wheel.
The differences between the three are minimal, because all roads lead in the same direction…we watch what he does to gauge who he is based upon his actions, deeds not words. Because the entrenched media was asleep at the wheel and didn’t give us a clue.
This internal scrap is about nothing more than that starting point and will evaporate as acts and deeds occur.
I am most closely aligned perhaps with Jeff politically, Pat as constructionist of argument and VDH or Glenn personality wise. But they all serve a great purpose.
We need to defend them all…and appreciate what they bring to the table. Bill W as well.
cfbleachers (1f4df1) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:48 pmHow about Politburo Diktat?
h0mi (d2c7b6) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:49 pmStar trek….???
that is so old, man. stoneage stuff.
enoungh time among the extramuros and slines for me.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:50 pmi’ll be back to give you more upsight later.
Bon Apert.
Thanks, dave. I agree that Jeff over-reacted about that. Jeff and I don’t have to agree about everything.
I was there as lieutenant, with other people, to keep things rolling till he returned. He finally did.
Mind you, I benefitted, too. I got to meet a lot of cool people and I got a little bit of profile as a blogger, and I made some hilarious enemies, like Wolcott, and people whom I’m happy to have dislike me, such as TBogg.
I think he’s been abandoned by PJM, which sucks. You may not think he merits my loyalty, but any conversation about Jeff with you is likely to turn out to be a bit like a debate over whether or not Obama’s a Good or Bad Man.
Also, in truth, I’m not always the easiest person to get along with.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:51 pmI watched Bill W on Pajamavision. He reminded me of Bruce Campbell before Bruce kind of let himself go. The eyes, mostly.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 3:53 pmoh….i almost forgot.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:01 pmHere feets. 😉
genki rocketz
i miss sharing music with you at PW.
the lead singer for the rocketz is totally synth.
a silicon voice.
can silicon intelligence be far behind?
Decoherent Troll (DT) writes:
I told you all it would work.
Bring out the velour; it seems to act like garlic to vampires on DT. On the other hand… you know that DT has her/his/its own tailored Start Trek uniforms at home, right?
Or perhaps is wearing one right now!
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:04 pmWe’re in resolution… that’s brilliant. It’s on the list. You will have to find your way back to PW soon. Things will be moving fast so don’t forget us over there.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:09 pmand I made some hilarious enemies, like Wolcott
No doubt Jamesy is sitting up all night thinking about you – while stroking his…cat. Or is it a Lynx? Ferret? Hedgehog? Trouser Mouse?
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:09 pmThings went downhill fast over at VF, once Tina Brown left the helm. She was a big Lib, but was always more interested in the mag being…well, interesting, and not dogmatic.
Dmac (e30284) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:11 pmi don’t know, feets….Manzi promised me a good surprise but i guess bringing Reihan back was enough.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:13 pmI shouldn’t be greedy.
ok, I hope to see you when and where I see you still. There will be many new things what will need to be explained. I listen.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:19 pmTaking too much heat from your base, Patterico? Just be true to yourself. It’s getting confusing.
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:20 pm“But, you see, Patterico, that is precisely how politics has become debased: one’s opponent is a devil, and one’s “favored” politician is a saint.”
Not really. Bush and McCain are wankers, but Gore and Obama are wankers squared.
I just go with the lesser of two wankers, whenever possible.
Dave Surls (00087b) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:21 pmI wonder if Andrew felt courageous when he spent most of the last couple of months floating slander about the parentage of a Down syndrome baby. Yeah. Regular Victoria Cross winner, that one. After this election, I am (putting it kindly) disappointed and unhappy with a wide spectrum of reporters and commentators, left to right. And will be more than happy to tell them so in very blunt (not to mention profane) terms, should I ever meet them in person. Andrew Sullivan is the one guy who I may have to restrain myself from doing that if I get that chance, because I’m afraid I’ll end up trying to use him as a Rudy Tomjanovich bobo doll. And that filth is not worth getting locked up for.
Rich Fader (405bab) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:27 pmDave, I agree with you. All politicians lie. It’s how they get elected. My point was that the partisans insist on demonizing or sanctifying candidates.
That is why I have no problem voting for the “least bad” candidate.
We’re stuck with this new one. Let’s see how he does, and insist that President Obama is given just exactly as much of a chance as the MSM gave…oh, I don’t know….GW Bush?
I loved the delusional poster earlier who claimed that the MSM had been on Bush’s side. Truly another dimension.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:27 pmSelf hating Jews are not exactly an unknown phenomenon. I’m not saying that Emanuel is such, but a measurable number of Jews express antagonism to Jews and Judaism. Rahm’s extended family seems to be dedicated to Judaism, but I’d be willing to bet that if he had to chose between 1)the well being of the United States, 2) the well being of Jews and/or Israel and 3) the Democrats (and himself) being in power, he’d pick #3.
Bozoer Rebbe (6e42d2) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:40 pmWell, till she runs out of batteries.
Bozoer Rebbe (6e42d2) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:42 pmfeets – You think Obama is a bad man and a dirty socialist. You think nishi is a clever girl and want to talk to her, but you forget she is also a clever eugenicist who supports infanticide. She is a bad person too. I think you just say nice things to her to be a good person, sort of like why Patterico is getting ripped for his posts about Obama.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:48 pm“Everything in excess! To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks.” –The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
Horatio (55069c) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:50 pmDamn – what a Heinleinian quote fest
Sorry, I didn’t back to you sooner, Dan, as I actually have a social life (ha! amazing). I like your brother, in our few conversations, he and I. Agree to disagree. I think Jeff shows a bit of humanity after he blows….but that blowing can be a bit much. And Thor is an excellent ‘troll’. Jeff should pay you, thor, and happy! for all the free work there.
Happy, I remember the Bait and Switch. You call it what you want. Happyfeet, you explain it all to me. Okay. You give Jeff too much too. Obama’s got the Presidency but you’ve given more loyalty to Jeff than 99 percent of Obama’s voters. I am already grousing about these Harvard Boys congratulating themselves over yet another regime they can mismanage. I hope Obama can push back from the likes of Larry Summers, Rahm Emmanual and do something unique. (That he’s reading Lincoln is a good idea.) Maybe I am seeming to ‘deceive’ you as a ‘concern troll’…I go to “progressive” blogs. There are less messy and more ‘closed’ and a little less creative than Jeff’s in many ways. I’ll give you and jeff that. I got Google Reader , thx to my son. So many blogs, so little time.
(back to Dan), I wasn’t nice to Jeff in my last post. Too personal perhaps as I received a lot of weird entertainment at Jeff’s place for my twenty buck donation. I guess I am a thick-skinned masochist.
Really, recruit thor and a few others and get a blog going, Dan. You have a unique and interesting view of things. But I understand Jeff gives a few people a more or less free soapbox so “there you go”. Sorry, I missed ‘Wolcott’.
good luck in the family life and job. We’ll All need luck next year.
datadave (9d0bdb) — 11/8/2008 @ 4:57 pmComment by L.N. Smithee — 11/8/2008 @ 2:47 pm
love2008 (1b037c) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:00 pmHe did cheat. He conspired to accept illegal contributions online and did nothing to stop it when it was published. That’s a fact.
LN, you are a big embarrassment on yourself. Is this how you want to play this? You are lying. Yes there were cases of illegal contributions made to the Obama campaign. Just as to McCain’s campaign. These monies have been reported and some of them returned. BTW, they make up a tiny fraction of the money he got. About a million or less. Take that out of the money raised from millions of legitimate donors and it is like a drop of water in an ocean. To sit there and act like he got all his contributions illegally shows just how mendaciouos you are becoming. Face it, Obama ran an excellent campaign. The best in the history of campaigns. He beat McCain fair and square.
And then this: He did lie. He’s lied about McCain’s stance on the Iraq war (that “100 years” business, which Obama corrected on the fly when finally challenged in a town hall meeting,
Yes Obama did misrepresent McCain’s words and later corrected himself. What about McCain? Is he the saint? Did he not also misrepresent Obama’s words, knowingly about sex education to kids and so forth? Listen, I wonder if you are really a man of color like you claim. No true African American can on the same week of the greatest event of black history in America, open his mouth to speak evil of the first black President elect. It is either you are lying about your true identity or you are just trying to please your masters. How could you? Take courage and step up and say “I am proud of Barack Obama. I may not agree with all his policies but I am proud for what he has achieved for the black race..” Do so in the spirit of bipartisanship and maturity. This I think is the tone Patterico is trying to strike here. Stop with the attacks on one of your own! Atleast for this week.
For the record, just visited PW and saw three ads for PJTV. So it looks like PJM is still there at PW, as it was for the 18 months or so that Jeff was largely absent. So “abandonment” probably depends on where one is sitting in that equation.
Karl (eacece) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:06 pmSo, you’re not planning on being a hypersensitive diva who loves the look of her own words or someone who cuts & pastes Sullivan (or, whatever’s getting traffic on memeorandum)?
Or, in short: you’re planning on using independent thought.
Good.
RW (96ec19) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:10 pmAgreed, Karl. But more importantly, why does nobody promote Jeff’s posts? Why wasn’t he asked to go cover the Democratic Convention, considering he lives just outside Denver?
You’d think that they’d find better use for him. It’s not as though he’s John Cole.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:10 pmI don’t understand the need to violently disagree with Patterico and convince him he’s sold out to the devil because he thinks Bambi might have a good heart even though he has flawed policies.
How does demonizing Bambi help the conservatives? I don’t think Bambi’s the right choice for America, but 52% of the voters did, and so he’s the President of the United States.
Doesn’t mean I can’t criticize him (Bambi) at full throttle. But I don’t have to think of him as pure evil.
That’s a part of the world I can’t participate in.
I think Bambi’s a lightweight who will make a number of leftist mistakes. And I think he’ll grow in office. But I think on the whole he’ll be a bad person to lead the Republic, because I think he’s a leftist at heart, and doesn’t appreciate the American experiment; instead, I think he sees this as a chance to change America to become more like Fwance.
And if you think Patterico is so wrong, why are you hanging around? Aren’t there more undercover apostates you should be uncovering, rather than picking on Patterico who’s admitted he’s not going to play “burn the witch” with you?
steve miller (41e5fd) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:10 pmDarn, sorry, “his” own words. Not an attempted smear, an honest mistake.
RW (96ec19) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:10 pm“We never put a dirty socialist and his woman in the White House before.”
Happy, I forgot to show ‘concern’ over your devolution into some Southern Gothic character shuttered up in a dark room mumbling dire curses on the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt, that damn Lesbo Commie Bitch! With a Truman Capote soft patter infused with cheap whisky and water.
god, Twenty years ago I met an old southern woman in Vermont still cursing out Eleanor Roosevelt being a commie lesbo. You sound just like that old woman.
betcha yo momma taught you such trash.
Tennessee Williams wouldn’t approve of your politics.
datadave (9d0bdb) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:16 pmMaybe Tennessee wouldn’t approve of happy’s politics, but then again he’d enjoy the writing. I think his greatest work is the homosexual ghost story, “Mystery of the Joy Rio.” The first version.
NTTAWWT.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:20 pmOh, here’s Mysteries of the Joy Rio.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:23 pmAnd al this time I just thought he was Irish
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:51 pmEric,
Who the heck is this cat of wheeler’s?
Wheelers_cat is The Troll Formerly Known as Nishizonoshinji.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/8/2008 @ 5:58 pm“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven…” Matthew 5:43-45
Is that an example of my religion “teaching” me whom to hate? Just wondering…
stickety (59019e) — 11/8/2008 @ 6:18 pmLovey – You need to do your research or syop pulling information out of your ass to defend Obama.
“These monies have been reported and some of them returned. BTW, they make up a tiny fraction of the money he got. About a million or less.”
-Lovey, Obama refuses to report detail on contributions below $200 and with his intentional disabling of the AVS safeguards the ability to detect illegal contributions after the facy is severely impaired. Your assertions about amount are premature, incomplete, based on campaign spin and therefore complewte and total bullshit.
“Did he not also misrepresent Obama’s words, knowingly about sex education to kids and so forth?”
No he did not lie. We’ve been over this before on this blog. Read Obama’s words at the time of the passage of the Illinois bill and review the suggested curriculum by grade. Do your work.
LN can slash you if he feels like for being a coward and playing the race card.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 6:19 pmI never cease to be amazed at how love2008 can keep repeating stuff that we’ve debunked over and over again.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/8/2008 @ 6:21 pmWell, that’s overstating things for me.
Let’s just say, unlike Obama, I think Patterico is a good man (not that I know him as well as Obama) and I’m disagreeing with his policy’s.
I don’t happen to think this is like a baseball game, where it’s immaterial entertainment, and after the game we shake hands and say” good game”. Large things are at stake. Economies and wars, and sovereignty’s.
Contrary to the belief Patterico will have more weight when it comes to his “legitimate” criticisms” of Obama when the time comes, because he has, “given him a chance”, he has already discredited himself to the left by now saying Obama is a good guy.
“What, you mean all those accusations you made about hanging with terrorist types, criminals, and racists weren’t true? How do I believe you now?”
lee (7d0f75) — 11/8/2008 @ 6:21 pmI meant smash not slash, but LN should do it on principle anyway for the way Lovey presumed to tell him what to think.
Perhaps it’s time for Lovey to go the way of snuffles?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 6:33 pmWell, I’m not buying into the ‘give peace a chance’ meme.
If it’s just a matter of time before O! takes the U.S.of A. down a path from which there is little hope for recovery (better than even odds for that, I think), then why wait to oppose him? Why ‘give him a chance’? You risk encouraging him, allowing him to buy time to dig in. Rham Emanuel, attack dog; that should give you a reason to start worrying immediately. I for one will fight every inch that I’m dragged, kicking and screaming, until the fight is done.
Why wait until the damned house is on fire?
serr8d (c1b679) — 11/8/2008 @ 7:34 pm“Well, I’m not buying into the ‘give peace a chance’ meme.”
serr8d – Who is suggesting that?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 7:38 pmDan,
I imagine that JeffG and folks at PJM might give different answers to your question, as reflected in my first comment. And that imagining does not require much imagination.
Karl (eacece) — 11/8/2008 @ 7:53 pmPatterico, if you believe this, please provide links to all the upstanding prominent right-side people saying this.
bains (114bc0) — 11/8/2008 @ 7:58 pmSorry, but the reaction of the Right is not even in the ball park as the Left.
Come on — you hear anyone say they are leaving the country? Or saying entire swaths of this nation are crazed religous nut jobs?
Heck, I think most libs are mentally diseased personally but no prominent right is saying similar like the Demoncraps and their Enablers did in 2000 and 2004.
Robert Rodriguez (54247e) — 11/8/2008 @ 8:01 pmNo one likes criticism, which seems to explain this entire thread. As to my point, which you refute only by imperiously declaring it “stupid”, your appearance with bizarre lib/freak Mike Molloy would seem to support my hypothesis.
Most of your readers would not think to honor Molloy with our presence. So, if Mulitsas invited a column from you on his fevered site, to trumpet your well wishes for this good man Obama, would you do it?
I’m thinking yes, you would.
Aside from this comment, which you seem so offended by, let me say that I generally respect your writing, if not always your postions. But also, the fact that you remain engaged in a post thread and respond to comments. It’s a good blog.
Shame Allah only links to you when he thinks your comment will piss off his readers.
Jaibones (468585) — 11/8/2008 @ 8:24 pmKarl,
My compliments on your excellent pieces concerning ’08 being a “change” year. You were right and right for the right reasons. I certainly hope to see more of your work in the future.
Perhaps less of people’s who don’t respect their property enough to perform maintenance when the sewer backs up.
Rick Ballard (14757e) — 11/8/2008 @ 8:31 pmMaybe I missed it – who can tell me where Patt explains why he ignores Obama’s repeated lies (no, not the “George Bush lied about wmds!” kind of lies – actual lies) in his “Obama is a good man” analysis?
Ex. – infanticide votes that he repeatedly lied through his teeth about for two years,
– his relationship with Ayers,
– the amounts of money raised by, and his quid pro quo for Tony Rezko.
– his long-term support for public financing and his party’s quadrennial whining about it, his public declaration to commit to public financing, and his subsequent refusal to be limited to public financing, which guarantees that public financing will never, ever be used again by either party if they are raising enough to run.
(And this leaves aside his astonishing BS flip-flopping on nearly every issue discussed in the campaign).
How do these lies leave him as a “good man”?
Jaibones (468585) — 11/8/2008 @ 8:40 pmCan we not say that Obama is as good as Mark Antony considered Brutus to be honorable? I have no idea whether it was Patterico’s intent to damn so horribly with such faint praise but I believe that I shall give the matter some thought.
Rick Ballard (14757e) — 11/8/2008 @ 8:59 pm” . . . your appearance with bizarre lib/freak Mike Molloy would seem to support my hypothesis . . .”
I did not appear with Mike Malloy.
And I already explained why I went on his show: my friend Marc Danziger asked me to. And I’m glad I did it.
“Maybe I missed it – who can tell me where Patt explains why he ignores Obamas repeated lies (no, not the George Bush lied about wmds! kind of lies – actual lies) in his Obama is a good man analysis?”
You did miss it. I don’t think you would like my answer, and I didn’t address every point you make, but if you scroll through the past few days you’ll see it.
See, you’re not a regular reader, and that’s clear. And that’s fine;I appreciate occasional readers as well as regular ones. But occasional readers shouldn’t presume to know as much about me as regular readers know.
This is the problem with parachuting in on occasion and them presuming to make sweeping pronouncements about me. You end up saying things that are stupid, like “maybe Patterico has much more in common with Markos Mulitsas than he does with his conservative readers.” To any regular reader, you sound really clueless when you say something like that. Ask them if you don’t believe me.
Patterico (b2cfe2) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:03 pmLove 2008 wrote: “What about McCain? Is he the saint? Did he not also misrepresent Obama’s words, knowingly about sex education to kids and so forth? ”
No, as a Man, McCain is not a saint. (FWIW it was only that Obama that had me pulling the lever for McCain.)
But no, McCain did not misreprent the sex-ed bill O supported with his vote. O misrepresented what he voted for, knowingly or unknowingly.
SarahW (a6e80b) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:12 pmwheelers_pussy(cat) wrote:
Direct me to where I said either Baracko Marx or Rahm The Finger was “a Jew Hater.”
Apology accepted.
L.N. Smithee (abed3f) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:14 pmJailbones isn’t a regular commenter at Protein Wisdom either unless he’s appeared in the past couple of months. He’s got his facts wrong on Malloy, no historical basis on which to judge Patterico, so who knows, he may just be another moby. Fuck ’em where he breathes if he makes arrogant ignorant comments like a lib.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:25 pmLN – Lovey doen’t believe you are a black man because you didn’t vote for Obama. Why do they call Republicans racist again?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:29 pmdaleyrocks, it burns, the years of BDS. Burns both that Bush was so..imperfect, and that the storms of vitriolic hate for him were directed at everyone around and supportive of him. Including those who serve, and those who lost life and limb. Baracky was principle among those who propagated that hate. And he wants a honeymoon, does he?
On wheelers_cat, and why she is here.
serr8d (c1b679) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:42 pmdaleyrocks,
Jaibones is a regular commenter at Hot Air. I think he follows the links over here from Allah.
Jaibones is one of those conservatives who demands purity. Oddly, however, he’s saying kind things about me currently in the Hot Air headlines thread (including caling me a conservative). I’m not sure why his comments there seem so different from his comments here, but while we have had run-ins in the past, I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt — and assume that maybe he’s reconsidering his comparison of me to Kos.
Patterico (0b77a2) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:50 pmPurity?
Demanding Purity in the Blogesphere is like expecting a Union to give its dues back……
Anyone who demands purity is a bomb thrower… left or right
(Of course now everyone will claim they are ambidextous)
EricPWJohnson (cc9286) — 11/8/2008 @ 9:58 pmBear with me now …
If Obama hadn’t won the election, then Patterico would not have posted on moving forward from the position that Obama is a good man,
If Patterico did not posted on moving forward from the position that Obama is a good man, snuffles would not have left his/her/its/their comment,
If snuffles did not leave his/her/its/their comment, Patterico would not have determined it was alphie and ban him/her/it/them,
Therefore, the election of Obama is a good thing!
QED.
Adriane (b8ecd8) — 11/8/2008 @ 10:51 pmserr8d – Thanks for the link to Jeff finally banning nishi. I was hoping he’d do it and since I haven’t seen her over there my last few visits, I assumed it had happened. It probably did coincide with her appearance here. Her threadjacking, lying and ceaseless repetition of same tired memes are one of the reasons I stopped being a daily reader and commenter over there a couple of months ago.
I took your earlier comment to suggest Patterico was recommending a give peace a chance approach. I’m not sure that’s a correct read of his position in spite of what Jeff says. Jeff has a problem with disengaging or looking at his positions objectively once he’s dug in. He gets too personally invested, probably because he’s typically arguing against progressives. That’s also why it’s not usually a problem.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/8/2008 @ 11:05 pm“On the Internet, when you say things that people disagree with, people are sometimes nasty.”
This is the most ridiculous statement I’ve ever read, you lying sack of #$%^ heaped on a pile of #%^& stuffed inside a giant 3%^&$%%#. Patterico wouldn’t know his #@$% from a hole in his butt. He makes Gephardt look smart.
Hmm, on second thought, you make a very legitimate point, Patterico. 😉
Kevin (5ac156) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:15 amAnd if you think Patterico is so wrong, why are you hanging around? Aren’t there more undercover apostates you should be uncovering, rather than picking on Patterico who’s admitted he’s not going to play “burn the witch” with you?
If I’m missing your sarcasm, I apologize. otherwise that’s an absurd and insulting strawman. Lefties burn the heretic, and ban the dissenter, neither of which I see happening on this site.
I, like some others do think Patterico is wrong. Obama is not a good man. I question Patterico assessment, and in this matter I question his judgement.
Ultimately time will tell. If Obama proves himself worthy Patterico will be vindicated. Should Obama prove himself less than good I will not be surprised and will be interested to see Patterico’s future re-assessment should he choose to offer one. Myriad iterations of this process occur daily, they tell us more than just what is spoken, often they are what lead to trust or lack of trust.
None of which is a reason to tune Patterico out. Mr. Frey allows comments on his blog, I suspect this is because he has a real desire to hear challenging comments. Again, those of us who are not lefties an open give and take of ideas. Perhaps it is your expectation of close mindedness and conformity that might be better off elsewhere?
ThomasD (1659da) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:34 amHas snuffles been banned? Why?
love2008 (1b037c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:31 am“Has snuffles been banned? Why?”
Lovey – He was acting like you and bringing up previously debunked talking points, lying and being generally mendoucheous in restating the positions of others.
It also turns out he was alphie.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:47 amnishi wasn’t banned that I can remember and I would remember cause nishi is the one you fight for her right to say it. She’s mine one like that anyway and not cause I’m a good person… thor can fight for himself mostly I think, but cause I learn from her and from how exactly she makes me for real mad and also there’s a more for real person behind her commentings than your alphies or your semanticleos and it’s not a bad person. It’s an engaged and vibrant and curious person. And maybe along the way she teaches the tedious regurgitator not even close to being player trolls a thing or two.
datadave person … you think you are exempt from reading posts before you comment on them. That is a lot degradey of the medium I think. Other than that it’s not unmeaningful I guess that you bother to visit at all. You’re right about next year. Your dirty socialist president has lots of people closing up and filing away business plans for later and nobody has any idea just how viciously he will rape free enterprise. A for real good American president elect would be trying to allay fears and give certitude to the economy with respect to taxes and regulation and trade. Baracky wants to inherit a depressiony economy I think. Him and his media like that narrative a lot I think.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:49 amAlso there’s an awful lot of good things what our nishi has provoked. Ric Locke comes to mind especially. dicentra, too. It’s always a good thing when Ric Locke gets provoked. He brings the clarity like few others I think.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:02 amDaley, you are next. You are needing a real a$$-kicking on this site.
BTW, you lied.
“LN – Lovey doen’t believe you are a black man because you didn’t vote for Obama. Why do they call Republicans racist again?
Comment by daleyrocks — 11/8/2008 @ 9:29 pm
love2008 (1b037c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:11 amI never implied that. Read my comment and be truthful about what it says. Of course I respect the fact that some black people did not vote for Obama. That’s not in contention. My point was that as a black man, LN needs to acknowledge the historic meaning of this victory for African Americans. It’s just natural. Look around you and see the emotion displayed by blacks here in America and around the world and tell me you don’t feel a little sense of pride if you are colored or belong to the minority. To keep sounding vindictive and hateful even on the heels of this great event looks really suspect.
I never said he was not black because he did not vote for Obama. Your lying habit is becoming annoying, Daley.
You have the temerity to tell someone else how they NEED to THINK based on their skin color?
JD (831256) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:14 amfeets – Check out the link from serr8d in #173.
You may not think clever little eugenicists who want to use ESCR to breed a master race are bad people while thinning the herd elsewhere. Oue mileage obviously differs. She needs psychological help not encouragement.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:22 amNot to toot my own horn, but I called this one from the get-go. Excuse me while I dislocte my shoulder while trying to pat myself on the back.
😉
JD (831256) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:25 amJeff asked me to leave.
I respect his wishes.
I have been back 2x, once to point out that I am not “pd-buttons”, and once to show Jeff that NRO linked PW.
And I gave the tithe I historically give to Jeff to the Obama campaign.
/shrug
I don’t think young people belong on these conservative blogs anymore. except for feets maybe. 😉
I don’t much care for dKos, it is a giant echo chamber.
Patterico is, atleast, An Honest Man.
And I see my sempai here sometimes….I miss him.
here, feets.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:26 amI love Hadouken!, lately.
Declaration of War
I looked at that but I didn’t see where she was expressly banned. nishi was set off a lot mostly by that vegetable woman in Florida, and I think there are a lot of conservatives that were put off too. Me I thought it was mostly a made-for-Fox News teleplay more than anything meaningful, but a lot of somebody stayed home on election day is all I know for sure.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:28 amEric Blair @ #98 – I will not denounce you for that one. It was too funny. Now that I think about it, I do not see me denouncing anyone for making fun of nishit.
JD (831256) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:31 amLovey – I apologize. I was going from memory instead of rereading your comment. You said the following:
“Listen, I wonder if you are really a man of color like you claim.”
In response to LN’s reaction to the election and subsequent election and not necessarily his vote.
Apologize for your other lies now.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:31 ambuttons is fun and clever and definitely new. sempai = SDB right? I bookmarked his blog the other day. I’ll have to listen when I get home cause they block the youtubes here at the office.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:32 amComment by daleyrocks — 11/9/2008 @ 8:31 am
love2008 (1b037c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:42 amApology accepted.
This was one of her light days …
This thread seems to have become a home for the trolls banned from PW. Nishit, dataless dave, alphtard. We just need timmah to drop by and moon everyone.
JD (831256) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:48 amlovie – I just ran across this one. Why do you insist on beclowning yourself?
This is just breathtaking …
JD (831256) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:50 amStill waiting on the apologies for your lies about the McCain campaign Lovey.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:04 amComment by daleyrocks — 11/9/2008 @ 9:04 am
love2008 (1b037c) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:37 amAnother big lie.
“Another big lie.”
Bullshit Lovey – Why don’t you provide some support for your baseless allegations here for a change. You basically have about zero credibility here when you bring up previously debunked points. Are you pretending to be stupid or are you actually retarded?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:04 amThis isn’t that complicated, really: Jeff’s into ideological purity now, and Patterico’s bucked Jeff’s idea of the party line. To say you disagree with Obama but he believes he’s doing what’s best for the country isn’t enough–you have to denounce him, claim he’s a super-double-secret-communist agent, when everyone with eyes can see he’s about three inches to the left of the DLC (if even). But people like Jeff became comfortable and complacent–they became accustomed to being the party in power, and panicked when realized that they wouldn’t be able to project their beliefs onto the new President. (How they’d been able to do so onto Bush is beyond me, as Reagan he ain’t.)
Jeff’s frightened no one’ll listen to him any more, so he comforts himself by starting a blog-spat with a higher-traffic blog. It’s a cry for attention sublimated through political discourse, and it’s rather a sad spectacle for someone as genuinely bright as Jeff.
To be honest, the researcher in me wants to keep tabs on all the horrors Jeff and his ilk think Obama’ll unleash in the next four years, so I can pull it in 2012 and show him how stupid it is to fall under the spell of one’s own panicked rhetoric. The country won’t be any more socialist/communist/Muslim in four years than it is now, and anyone who thinks a gravitational centrist will install a caliphate is a Chicken Little.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:18 pmSEK,
I don’t read Protein Wisdom very much but then I don’t know Barack Obama either. However, it amuses me to see you expect commenters to give Obama the benefit of the doubt (i.e., that he is basically a good man with good intentions who happens to have a different world view), while you demonize Jeff G.’s motives and character.
I think you have a literary background and education so I’m sure you appreciate the irony.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:25 pmWhat’s Jeff’s ideology, Scott?
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:28 pmDRJ, there is little that is dumber than accusing Jeff G. of demanding ideological purity. It shows a rather … complete … ignorance of Jeff and his writings.
Oh, by the way, SEK, I do know Jeff. He likes Guiness and I’ve bought more than a few of his.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:28 pmPatterico…..you will never be Balloon Juice, tis true.
You aren’t that funnie.
I am intellectualy curious, unlike other people I could mention.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:34 pmThe party purists are witch-testing for Palin-loyalty…and I think you and Allah already failed.
What is the GOP going to do with Palin?
She can’t win a national election.
The GOP burned her up as a culture war shock troop.
In 2020 caucasian will become a minority.
How does the party go forward?
SEK,
Your comment strikes me as similar to the kind of mind-reading that Jeff G. purported to do about me — and it’s just as off-base. Perhaps you have a specific reason to be suspicious of his motives, but I think you’re really reaching, just as he was in describing my intentions.
Patterico (5cdc70) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:35 pmDRJ, see my other post for this political phenomenon….
Does it sound accurate?
I don’t have a good name for the “syndrome” involved.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:35 pmScott and Jeff quarreled a little while back, and there’s apparently still animus.
As for me, I just hate everyone.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:42 pmI think SEK describes a version of the syndrome I posted about earlier. But the ironic part is that most of the Left (and I honestly don’t know how extreme SEK has been in the past leftward, politically) did precisely the same thing that SEK is describing…toward GW Bush. And they often seem unaware of the fact that they are doing so.
Instapundit makes jokes about this often, with some justice.
And it isn’t a new joke/observation. From the 1960s, the joke was “They said if I voted for Goldwater, the Vietnam war would escalate…and they were right.”
Everyone needs to remember that the first casualty of partisanship is a sense of humor.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:42 pmwhile you demonize Jeff G.’s motives and character.
There’s no demonization there, DRJ, just observation. I liked and respected Jeff for years–guest-posted there, even–but of late he’s been unable to brook dissent, as this series of threads so aptly demonstrates. I’d read and participated at Protein Wisdom for years, but as the election wound to a close, Jeff became incapable of rational reflection. He banned me–not officially, only effectively–because I thought the claim that Ayers wrote Obama’s book was absurd on its face, and that given the fact that he’s got the training and the smarts to do the sort of comparison required to make that determination, he instead reprinted Cahill’s nonsense. Doesn’t matter what the reason for his intellectual laziness was, it just signaled the dawn of a new, dumber era at PW. (Dan and I exchanged a few emails, and he made a damn fine point: when you’re overrun with trolls, you tend to take the hard line. I understand that, but as a public intellectual, you can’t let the lowest common denominator define the opposing party.)
What’s Jeff’s ideology, Scott?
You know I can answer this in patient detail, Dan, so I don’t feel the need to.
DRJ, there is little that is dumber than accusing Jeff G. of demanding ideological purity. It shows a rather … complete … ignorance of Jeff and his writings.
As I acknowledged, that used to be the case. Used to be a liberal could have a conversation with a classical liberal–but that time ended when Jeff became an Obama Truther and started railing against the Coming Socialism. When I said I want to keep a list of claims being made now for comparison in 2012, I’m dead earnest. Know why? Because Obama’s a shaky-boat centrist–he’s trying to stay upright, even if the boat lists left every so often.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:44 pmI liked your cognitive dissonance comment, Eric. Moliere would describe it as “a fashionable vice, and all fashionable vices pass for virtue.” That vice, of course, is hypocrisy.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:45 pmOh, snap, as the students put it, DRJ! Well done!
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:47 pmWhat a convenient definition, SEK, whatever Obama does you will find a way to fit it into your definition.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:51 pmSEK:
No demonization there? I guess that means you clearly have no problem with me if I say Obama is incapable of rational reflection regarding conservative ideas, right?
After all, at the end of his campaign, Obama was unable to brook dissent as evidenced by the fact he banned from his plane reporters from the only three major newspapers that endorsed McCain … and that was both an effective and official ban.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:52 pmI think SEK describes a version of the syndrome I posted about earlier. But the ironic part is that most of the Left (and I honestly don’t know how extreme SEK has been in the past leftward, politically) did precisely the same thing that SEK is describing…toward GW Bush. And they often seem unaware of the fact that they are doing so.
Eric, we’re talking about politics here, so it’s easy as pie to point to hypocrisy. Consider the number of posts we’ve had here imploring Obama to choose a bi-partisan cabinet or govern as a bipartisan. I understand why conservatives would want him to do so, but really, where’s the precedent? Which Democrat did Bush put on his cabinet? Which Democrat did he turn to for advice? Seriously, after eight years of extremely partisan rule from the executive branch, calls for Obama to reach across the aisle are little short of hilarious.
Not that I don’t understand the motive, mind you. Conservatives honestly believe they have the best answers, so it’s no surprise they want Obama to embrace bipartisanship so he doesn’t ram the Democratic agenda down our throats. But if I suggested Bush install Democrats in his cabinet, what do you think the reaction would’ve been? (The polite version would read: “Why? They’re wrong about everything. Better to have our people in there.”
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:55 pmThe very civil SEK writes, about President-elect Obama:
Um. Maybe on the basis of some things said during the latter part of the Presidential race.
But based on voting records, and recorded statements? Not so much. I don’t know at what point listing leftward is equivalent to metaphorical political capsizing…
The problem with critiquing others with the seemingly reasonable “…I should keep records to show how wrong a person will be in the future…” is this:
It might or should be done to the person who believes that they are being so reasonable.
So, without rancor, I suggest that SEK write his own statement down, and post it on his bathroom mirror. And then ask himself to evaluate the essential truth of that statement during Obama’s short tenure in the US Senate, the Illinois statehouse…and in the coming months and years.
And I write that without snark or criticism. I think all politicians—and commenters—would be better served by such an approach.
I’m hoping for a centrist approach, yes. But I don’t think I am going to see it. But unlike many political commentators these days, I am delighted when I wrong on a subject like this one.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:55 pmThat vice, of course, is hypocrisy.
Some would maintain, as did La Rochefoucauld, that hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:56 pmTouche’.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:57 pmWhich Democrat did Bush put on his cabinet? Which Democrat did he turn to for advice?
Just off the top of my head, Norman Mineta and Joseph Lieberman.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:58 pmUm. But Obama ran on the platform of being post-partisan.
Or is this bait and switch?
Finally, “..he did it first…” is hardly Hope and Change™.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:58 pmSEK, you’ve already forgotten Bush’s selection of Norman Manetta for Secretary of Transportation?
And your claim of “extreme partisan rule” is just another example of rewriting history. George W. Bush tried hard to start with bipartisan action with Congress at the beginning of his administration – it was what he campaigned on.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 6:58 pmBut Obama ran on the platform of being post-partisan.
Heh. Americans will soon be reminded that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:04 pmNo demonization there?
None at all. For the years Bush was in office, Jeff could brook dissent. When it became clear to him that Obama’d win, he was suddenly unable to argue anything but worst case scenarios. Obama is a socialist. America is over. ALL IS DOOM.
That’s not rational reflection. It’s fear-casting, plain and simple.
After all, at the end of his campaign, Obama was unable to brook dissent as evidenced by the fact he banned from his plane reporters from the only three major newspapers that endorsed McCain … and that was both an effective and official ban.
Political machinations in the closing days of a tight presidential campaign aren’t quite the same thing as back-and-forth on a blog and you know it. To claim equivalence is plain silly.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:05 pmWho can forget “Mineta’s Morons”?
Another Drew (c881b0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:06 pmThe perfect segue from “Ridge’s Retards”.
Alas, Jeff and I parted over Palin.
I said from the start, that Palin would fracture the GOP along the IQfaultline.
And I was right.
😉
And now Jeff is punching himself in the face just like the rest of the Palinbots. His only mental refuge is to delude himself about Ayers ghostwriting Obama’s book. PW has become conspiracy theory Central.
He can’t bear to think about Palin.
Neither can you, Patterico.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:13 pmIt is unbearable, isn’t it?
Break the hearts of your party’s base, or let the other side keep the ball forevah.
😉
You know, Nishi, you’re awfully arrogant for a moron, not that it’s an unusual combination. It’s just unseemly.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:15 pmIt might or should be done to the person who believes that they are being so reasonable.
Damn fine point there. I’m all for accountability on all sides. To be frank, I said the same thing in the wake Bush’s election and I turned out to be wrong, wrong, wrong. But I don’t think there’s any need to tit for Nostradamus’ tat here. We can revisit this in four years and see where (or “IF!?!” as Jeff would say) we’re at.
I’m hoping for a centrist approach, yes. But I don’t think I am going to see it. But unlike many political commentators these days, I am delighted when I wrong on a subject like this one.
Prepare to be delighted then, Eric. No Democrat can effectively run from the left the way Bush’s run from the right because the Democrats don’t have judiciary the way the Republicans do. (Again, not a judgment. Brilliant job in the ’80s by Reagan’s team to focus on the ground game. Credit given where due.)
But Obama ran on the platform of being post-partisan.
So did Bush, and we’ve seen how that’s worked out. As SPQR wrote:
George W. Bush tried hard to start with bipartisan action with Congress at the beginning of his administration–it was what he campaigned on.
Yes, I forgot about Panetta and maybe Summers. (I think he was kept on for a few months, wasn’t he?) Point being, Bush ain’t governed like a bipartisan. Not even remotely. He’s been hard-right–maybe not hard-right enough in some people’s eyes, but from the perspective of a liberal, it’s been mortifying–and as I wrote a few weeks back, I think this may be why Jeff et al have wet drawers: they think fours years from now Obama’s promise of bipartisanship will ring as hollow as Bush’s. I don’t think it will, but I can see why they’d worry someone would smear just desserts on their faces.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:18 pmIt’s deserts, Scott. From deserves.
But Obama’s set a record for prevarication already, I think.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:20 pmSEK, your “point” was wrong on the facts, and you’ve not improved it any. You are either rewriting or ignoring past history.
As for a promise of bipartisanship from Obama, his choice of the most rabid Democrat partisan in Congress as his chief of staff put paid to your fantasy last week.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:23 pmI think…..it is transference and cognitive dissonance…Jeff can’t bear to acknowledge what Palin actually is, so he has to demonize Obama.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:25 pmNot like he can defend her.
Not like any of you can.
😉
Evidently, Nishi/wheeler’s_cat believes that arrogance is the homage ignorance pays to intelligence.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:25 pmYes, it’s always someone else’s transference and cognitive dissonance, isn’t it? And one is always the only person who’s unafflicted by philauty.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:27 pmSay, I’m from CA, just where is that IQ-faultline anyway, and when it fractures, how does that measure on the Richter-Scale?
Another Drew (c881b0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:29 pmMike, is that what that was? I just thought it was another troll.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:30 pmWeak Dan.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:30 pmCan’t you craft a better insult than that?
Do morons read Heidegger? Or Stephenson, or Zamietien?
Does Palin read at all?
The only book I can find that she has read is little house on the prairie.
😉
Conspiracy theory central? No. Baracky was not vetted by his supine media and what’s left to do but peer questioningly into the dark spaces, the many many dark spaces. That’s uncharitable is all. I am ilk, you see. All is doom, if things go as planned I think, and so far teh trains are all running on time. But whatever with all the drama … you should still come say hi, Scott. These are interesting times. Everybody starts with a clean slate I think.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:32 pmMike, is that what that was? I just thought it was another troll.
Well, she is an entertaining troll. I’ll give her that.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:33 pmEvery time you do that asinine dance, Nishi, you reinforce your bathyspheric moronicity.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:33 pmDo morons read Heidegger? Or Stephenson, or Zamietien?
If you do, then yes.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:34 pmI don’t care if you’re a genius, Nish, because you behave like a dumbf*ck.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:35 pm“Jeff became incapable of rational reflection.”
“he’s been unable to brook dissent”
SEK – I’ve witnessed many of your more recent forays onto Protein Wisdom and I would have to say that you appear to suffer from the same qualities you describe in JeffG. They have also hardened in you over the course of the election cycle. You also display them on your visits here.
I agree that Jeff sometimes has a problem backing away from positions, but that is an issue for you as well. I don’t see him as having a problem with brooking dissent with people who can rationally explain and defend their positions, something you have been unable to do on your recent visits there. You, on the other hand, are always certain and sometimes right.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:37 pmIt’s deserts, Scott. From deserves.
Not in my pun, it ain’t.
You are either rewriting or ignoring past history.
If you deny that Bush 1) ran as a compassionate conservative, on the strength of his bipartisan record in Texas but 2) governed as an extreme partisan, there’s no ground for conversation here. Bush may’ve disappointed the far right in some respects, but from this side of the aisle, there’s neither hide nor hair (nor hare, Dan) of bipartisanship. It’s been eight years of the right imposing its will–its definition of the grounds for war–on the roughly equal half of the population that voted for Gore and Kerry. Should Bush have acted as if he didn’t have a mandate, as people are insisting Obama should? Of course. Did he? Would the right have been satisfied with him if he had?
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:38 pmTo the winners go the spoils. I’m sure you’ll write just as much about our rhetorical excesses regarding Obama as you did about the left’s regarding Bush, Scott.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:40 pmBTW, that pun’s really crap.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:41 pmBut whatever with all the drama … you should still come say hi, Scott.
Sorry, feets, but Jeff told me to fuck off and said he’d be deleting my posts from now on, so I don’t much see the point of hanging out there anymore. (He’s even deleted the automatic trackbacks WordPress generates and attacked me for having the nerve, post the fuck off, of sending them.) Seems sort of pointless, frankly.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:41 pmObama is our first black president.
This is a huge acheivement for our country.
He is a gracious man, and never stooped to the McCain/Palin/Schmidt/Rove identity politics and racism/classism vote scamming.
I am so proud of my state. We voted for Obama and against affirmative action. So future. 😉
Patterico is entitled to his opinion.
Jeff is entitled to his.
But Jeff is not entitled to practice Erick-the-redstate-palinbot loyalty testing on Patterico.
I read CS Lewis too.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:41 pmDo you know who you are Jeff?
I do.
It is like the banquet in Narnia at the worlds end, with conservatives as the bitter angry dwarves complaining that the finest meats were foul and rotten garbage in their mouths.
Remember, conservatives, even if you use Aslan’s Name…if your actions serve Tash………..then you are a Servant of Tash.
SEK, “the right imposing its will-its definition of the grounds of war” …
Is it that you don’t bother to read what you write, or that you don’t care that it is risible?
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:42 pm“Jeff can’t bear to acknowledge what Palin actually is, so he has to demonize Obama.”
“Jeff will not say that Palin is the dumbfuck chillbilly godbothering breeder who is prolife that I believe. He also does not worship Obama with every waking breath. I can’t figure out what is wrong with the man. I once thought he was smart.”
nishi – Fixed that for you.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:43 pmYou’re a nut, Nishi. Go on and tell us what the rest of us aren’t entitled to do, please.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:43 pmHe [Obama] is a gracious man, and never stooped to the McCain/Palin/Schmidt/Rove identity politics and racism/classism vote scamming.
You cannot be serious.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:43 pmScott, social security reform, remember that? Bush had a plan, he asked the Democrats hey what’s you guys’s plan? He wanted to negotiate. Your Democrats, they said there was no need to reform anything. NPR said that a lot. No crisis here. Nope. Now they want to take away my 401k. I don’t get it.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:44 pm“never stooped to the McCain/Palin/Schmidt/Rove identity politics and racism/classism vote scamming.”
Liar, liar, pants on fire!
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:46 pmNo Child Left Behind was, at one time, the apple of Ted Kennedy’s eye.
MayBee (136bac) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:46 pmThe Iraq war resolution passed 250-183 in the House and 52-47 in the Senate. The Senate MAJORITY leader at the time was Tom Daschle, Democrat.
I think immigration reform was a bi-partisan effort on President Bush’s part.
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:47 pmSPQR – Beware the walls of polysyllabic profundity to come.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:48 pmMe, I’m going for the theory that SEK never reads what comes off the keyboard.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:48 pmoh. I didn’t know about all that deleting and stuff. A lot of times when things get tense I’m either all in or I bail if I can’t find the time to follow along. This is me sighing sort of but not a full blown Peggy Noonan one. It’s a naught for it but to make a cup of tea kind of sigh. Very British.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:49 pmI think SEKs problems with Jeff go back to when Tony Snow died.
Jeff linked to many comments by the loony left hoping Tony was burning in hell, and SEK tried to sell the idea Jeff was the same as them because he showed what they were doing.
But we are hypocrites for not forgetting all that from our left leaning friends. Right.
lee (1fd2ef) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:49 pmYou, on the other hand, are always certain and sometimes right.
daleyrocks, you’ve annoyed me in the past, but this seems a good faith effort, so I’ll respond in kind: there’s a difference between commenting in a hostile environment and hosting it. When you have 40 people picking apart your every careful-but-still-too-casual word, you end up being digressed by the 40 tangents people have brought up (and this ain’t counting the equal number of idiot cheerleaders misspelling Jeff’s name to the beat of the Miami Sound Machine). So yes, I have to put my foot down sometimes because the conversation won’t work otherwise–that’s what happens when you post in hostile forums. Most people don’t do that. Jeff certainly doesn’t. (Dan actually does, which is why I liked the open PW a bit better.) With him it’s hit, run, then link and set the counter-trolls loose. I’ve actually tried–devoted far too much time and energy, frankly, to creating a space and voice with which I could speak to people I disagree with in a medium that breeds rank stupidity. Yes, I’ve failed more than I succeeded, and yes, sometimes I fall prey to the pitfalls inherent to the comment box. But until you’ve tried to do the same–earnestly, for an extended period of time, because you believe in a health body politic the left hand communicates with the right and vice versa–I don’t think you should knock those of us who have.
I’m sure you’ll write just as much about our rhetorical excesses regarding Obama as you did about the left’s regarding Bush, Scott.
Probably not, since with Bush I was less concerned with the rhetoric and more with the action.
BTW, that pun’s really crap.
It’s a pun, Dan. That’s a feature, not a bug.
SEK (072055) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:51 pmSelective memory is a feature for the left. SEK became more hyperpartisan after he was embarrassed by that Beauchamp fraud.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:51 pmOkay, look, I know it is just an annoying troll, but this:
is simply insulting, inaccurate, and (despite your supposed gender) sexist as all hell. Knock it off.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:53 pmComment by SEK — 11/9/2008 @ 7:05 pm:
I thought it was an effective analogy but I guess not since you skewered my analysis with your “plain silly” rebuttal.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:53 pmDRJ, I guess that detailed, factual analytical rebuttal stung, huh?
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:55 pmIf Jeff had any nads he’d comment at Culture 11, with the Pomocons. But they would surely rip up his goofball consipiracy theories, just like TNC and the Atlantic did.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:55 pmSEK, your world must be in series with Big Rock Candy Mountain, because this part of the planet is getting to be decidedly feary right now. We’re skirting a greater-than depression; Iran and Israel may trade nuclear strikes; and you’re happy to see a vacuous orator who’s mesmerized the ‘Dancing with the Stars’-set take his throne.
I remind you that the USSR fell in a short time with little advance notice; there’s nothing written in stone that we inhabiting the U.S. of A. are guaranteed a never-ending repeat-cycle of the same government what brung us. The leftists we are seeing controlling today’s Democratic party hate the very concepts that made U.S. strong, and Baracky’s promised to CHANGE everything to what? Something many of us won’t like, I’m willing to bet. And all you expect to see is status quo, and all you can do is play down a proper reaction, labeling it ‘fear’? Fear is a warning, dude, a basic human response to a known danger.
Finger, ears, LALALALA, much?
serr8d (dfa420) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:56 pmThe Atlantic?! With Sully, The Atlantic is all about conspiracy theories these days.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:57 pmNow I’ve got that Conga song stuck in my head.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:57 pmGay gossip and anti-Semitic tabloid The Atlantic, which hosted Andrew’s bizarre vaginal speculations regarding Palin? Please.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:57 pmEric, lol…..
Noonan, Powell, Adelamn, Brooks, Will, Poulos, Salam, Parker…..
shall i continue?
Poor Ross is still barely hanging on.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:59 pmThe authors of No Child Left Behind were Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and George Miller(D-CA) and Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA).
Bush’s “failure” to act in a bipartisan manner seems to follow a pattern. Both parties voted for something, then when it became unpopular, the Democrats ditched.
MayBee (136bac) — 11/9/2008 @ 7:59 pmEric, lol…..
Noonan, Powell, Adelamn, Brooks, Will, Poulos, Salam, Parker…..
shall i continue?
Elitist RINOs all. Next.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:01 pmwheelers-cudlips, you brag on your ‘three-digit’ intellect.
I’ll remind you that intelligence is just a fractional part of the set that includes wisdom and charisma. You may have a few points up in intelligence (I’m still waiting for proof of that) but your wisdom is in the negative, and your charisma is that of a mule’s ass.
serr8d (dfa420) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:02 pmRemember, nishi, that everything you know is fiction.
Can’t you find a nice Sci-Fi blog to annoy people at?
Pablo (99243e) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:03 pmThe leftists we are seeing controlling today’s Democratic party also control the media and they’re allied with extra-national whatnot too. It all adds up to ohnoes in a big way.
MayBee is right though. Democrats did the same on Medicare drugs… they were all in and then they tried to trash it and scare old peoples but the old peoples thought it was a good deal so then the Democrats and their media changed the subject.
happyfeet (5836ae) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:04 pmKENNEDY RESPONSE TO BUSH’S CALL FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:04 pmSEK – I spent a couple of years as one of the handful of conservative commenters in Greenwald’s miasma if that is what you are talking about. I know what that feels like. As usual, you make untrue assumptions denigrating the experiences of others. Your attitude of superiority is really one of the reasons I don’t care whether or not I’ve annoyed you in the past. I know the new liberal illuminati have taken over and we’re supposed to give them a chance, but SEK, it’s people like you who give them a bad name. You do have a hard time with self reflection, brooking dissent and admitting you are wrong.
OWN IT BABEE!!!!!11!1!
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:04 pmComment by MayBee — 11/9/2008 @ 7:59 pm
The Democrats have never advanced a program that they couldn’t walk away from when it became politically expedient.
Another Drew (c881b0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:04 pmAnd here is the thing, from folks like SEK (with all due respect).
Stage #1: Obama will govern in a bipartisan fashion, and you are politically naive for thinking otherwise.
Stage #2: GW Bush never governed—even in the slightest way— in a bipartisan fashion.
Stage #3: It’s okay for Obama to govern in a highly partisan fashion.
My point is that I don’t believe there is anything in Obama’s voting record or public statements prior to his running for President to make anyone think him to be centrist. Just “…it makes sense” and “..surely he is smart enough…”
Telepathy is a wonderful thing. Voting records (say, for SCOTUS) are more illustrative. But smart doesn’t mean bipartisan.
Hey, Newt Gingrich is smart, too. And very, very partisan.
But if I am wrong, that is good news for the nation, and I have no trouble with that. What bothers me are the folks who go through Stages 1 – 3 above….and don’t admit to the shifting standards and intellectual inconsistency.
It’s kind of like the folks who kept calling McCain racist. Who played the race card, first, again (according to Bill Clinton, I mean)? But the Left loves Obama so much that they do an amazing limbo mixed with pretzel style acrobatics and hopeful psychological projection to explain how what he does and says is not actually in opposition to what he said and did before.
I just want to see punditry treat BO with precisely the same level of “give him a chance” as GWB received in 2000 and 2004.
Right.
And again, the “…Bush did it first…” only works if you agree that this is NOT a post-partisan situation. And being post-partisan is the centerpiece of what Obama claims.
So we’ll see who is correct soon enough. No need to argue until we have the data. Which may indeed be completely different from the earlier data collected. But that isn’t how poker is played, you know?
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:04 pmWell, that’s settled, then. Nice talking to you, Scott.
Pablo (99243e) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:06 pmYou boys play nice now or I’ll send you both to bed without any supper.
Ya Hear?
😉
-Pat
Paleo Pat (67719c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:07 pmHey Pablo:
Don’t be cruel to folks like me in the propeller beanies, okay?
Still, you are right: the elitist snarkishness is very, very irritating.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:08 pmManzi
😉
we talk.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:09 pm/yawn
bedtime…..but one question for the Honest Man….
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:15 pmwhat do you do Patterico?
break the hearts of the base, or let the otherside keep the ball forever?
You boys play nice now or I’ll send you both to bed without any supper.
Ya Hear?
😉
-Pat
Paleo Pat,
You just left that same comment on Jeff’s blog, leading me to think you’re addressing him and me with this comment.
I’ll “play nice” if you can explain to me how I’m not already.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:16 pmJeffrey is Goldberg is anti-semetic?
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:18 pmwow, dan, I’ll tell him you said so.
bedtime…
Far past yours, kid.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:18 pm“I thought it was an effective analogy but I guess not since you skewered my analysis with your “plain silly” rebuttal.”
DRJ – I recommend trying to work the word “doodad” into your next comment to SEK. You and O both know what an attention getter that is, plus it’s fun to use.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:22 pmSEK,
You’ve addressed a lot of other comments but you didn’t address mine, where I said: “Your comment strikes me as similar to the kind of mind-reading that Jeff G. purported to do about me — and it’s just as off-base. Perhaps you have a specific reason to be suspicious of his motives, but I think you’re really reaching, just as he was in describing my intentions.”
I was talking about where you said: “Jeff’s frightened no one’ll listen to him any more, so he comforts himself by starting a blog-spat with a higher-traffic blog. It’s a cry for attention sublimated through political discourse, and it’s rather a sad spectacle for someone as genuinely bright as Jeff.”
You’re quite a mind-reader there. If Jeff’s only idea was to comfort himself by starting a spat with a higher-traffic blog, dontcha think he’d start a spat with one that’s higher-traffic than mine? (For what it’s worth, historically Jeff has done far better than I have traffic-wise, and now that he’s writing regularly for his own site again, I expect that to happen again. But even as things stand right now there’s hardly any difference to speak of.)
What about the idea that maybe he’s just saying what he thinks?
I have no problem if you want to argue that he inappropriately and inaccurately tried to read my mind. I do have a problem with your doing the same thing to him.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:24 pmI wrote about it on my Blog… you should have trackback to it… I don’t mean any harm, but come on people… we’re adults… please. act like it… the both of ya. 😀
Paleo Pat (67719c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:26 pmWell Patterico, I don’t have to read minds…..I can just sample the comments here.
wheelers_cat (98fa0c) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:27 pmI see you guyz are going to continue punching yourselves in the face.
Good luck with that.
See you after you finish your 40 years in the wilderness.
I’m talking Sullivan, Nishi. He believes in the vast Zionist conspiracy.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:27 pmI wrote about it on my Blog… you should have trackback to it… I don’t mean any harm, but come on people… we’re adults… please. act like it… the both of ya.
Yeah, I saw that post. You linked this post as evidence that I am not playing nice. Now you’re also describing this post as evidence that I am not acting like an adult.
I’d like to see you explain, with specifics, how this post is evidence of either.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:29 pmHere’s an example of bipartisanship:
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:31 pm“I guess that means you clearly have no problem with me if I say Obama is incapable of rational reflection regarding conservative ideas, right?”
This doesn’t seem correct. He was recommended to the Chicago faculty by a conservative scholar whose work he edited, and his classroom demeanor, exams and answer memos showed someone able to discuss all sides of an issue.
imdw (8a983a) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:35 pmMike, Re: #284…
You write:
I think the problem isn’t being past anyone’s bedtime. Sure reads like too many Jager shooters in too short of a period. Or a larger number of Mickey Big Mouths.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:36 pmDan,
Do you think they will allow her to testify from behind her wall at the confirmation hearings?
I’m sure that’s a Change for which she has Hope.
Too bad all those hijackers died in the crashes – she lost 19 character witnesses in one day.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:36 pmI think the problem isn’t being past anyone’s bedtime. Sure reads like too many Jager shooters in too short of a period. Or a larger number of Mickey Big Mouths.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see some Harvey Wallbangers involved, too.
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:41 pmI don’t see Jamie Gorelick or Rahm Emanuel scheduled to testify at the Committee to Hold Hearing on Collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:42 pmOuch, Mike. That’s going to leave a mark. I tip my hat.
And I refuse to stoop to finding more double entendre drink names.
I leave that JD. I also denounce that about him.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:43 pmHey, Mossberg500, not to be self-referential, but I have this strong, strong feeling that we will need to re-read “Animal Farm” to understand the changing narrative and nuance.
It’s not really croneyism. It just appears that way.
It’s Hope and Change, as we dance in the pixie dust.
How much money did the aptly named Ms. Gorelick run through so far?
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:46 pmPshaw, Obama has no connection to these people who made millions driving Fannie and Freddie into the ground.
You know. Such as Rahm Emanuel. I feel a new day dawning.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:49 pmOuch, Mike. That’s going to leave a mark. I tip my hat.
Thank you, sir! 🙂
Mike LaRoche (6a9875) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:52 pmYou’re right, Dan. Goody is far too honorable to ever have anything to do with common felons. That would be almost as bad as spending time with blatant racists or domestic terrorists.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:52 pmI like the nickname “Sunshine.”
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:53 pmYeah, it’s the age of Aquarius. Cue the music, bi-partisanship, transparency, unicorns, rainbows, chamomile tea and potpourri.
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:55 pmI will now share some charming correspondence I had with Paleo Pat, paralleling the conversation here and at his post, where he similarly exhorted Jeff and me to “play nice”:
To which I replied:
To which I got this reply:
Hooray for playing nice and acting like adults!
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:55 pmGoodman Sunshine – hero of the people.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:55 pmPalinbot, schmalinbot. I know I was never swept away by Palin and much as I came to respect her, after uch reservation, I think her choice diluted McCain’s brand, and did in fact lose him votes in the middle that could have been had with the likes of Eric Cantor.
(Who is my local rep, btw, and a total schmarm, who will go further than he ought to).
The awful thing about Obama is that the “trutherism” ( including observations on the philosophy he’s been steeped in since earliest childhood, and which was coddled and fed by his education, instead of challenged) is largely and shockingly, astoundingly plausible or even flatly correct, once examined with clear eyes. But, I can’t make you look. All I can do it warn. You’ll see.
SarahW (a6e80b) — 11/9/2008 @ 8:57 pmAnybody who thinks that commenting on a blog is about effective communication should try reading this thread.
BTW, people need to remember that Patterico is an attorney. Which is like a politician, only with standards.
Alan Kellogg (e4d258) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:04 pmDear Patterico…
Ever get the feeling that projection is a growing problem in these troubled times?
Honestly, why on Earth did that fellow respond to you the way he did…after making a condescending series of comments to you about “playing nice,” inferring immaturity?
Sheesh.
Some of this seems like a weird faux-macho where some bloggers feel that they need to act super tough and butch. And then they attack people who–like you–try to be a bit more cautious in responses.
Playground stuff, really.
I’m sorry you had to wade through it—even though I know you need to wade through far worse at your day job!
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:05 pmBlah, blah, blah. Whatever. ;-P
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:06 pmSorry if I irked you, Dan. I just thought that the PaleoPat stuff was ironic, if sad. Maybe everyone is having a bad day or two.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:08 pmI’m sorry you had to wade through it—even though I know you need to wade through far worse at your day job!
I sometimes wonder if I have a different perspective on “evil” and “bad” because of that job. When you spend your day trying to prove the guilt of people who shoot and stab other people, often for the stupidest of reasons — well, it makes it harder to call a guy evil or bad because he does some unsavory things in the pursuit of political power.
I’m quite sure some people would see that as defining deviancy down, and maybe it is. But I probably do have a different perspective on people from some.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:11 pmDan may have been referring to Paleo Pat, Eric.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:12 pmI have a maximum security pen for my goat. Getting it would require an Oceans 12-style plot.
Also, I pen nasty comments while listening to the Archies, so there’s that.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:13 pmActually, I was responding to Alan.
Dan Collins (4dc2da) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:13 pmPatterico – I believe that Paleo Pat cretin is a shithead from Detroit who started a blog war with Jeff and a number of others a year or so back. The guy now claims to have switched from being a liberal (then) to a libertarian (now). He is a serious loser and not worth any time.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:15 pmEric,
Maybe the griefers, spoofers and troofers have new orders? When sophists like SEK show up babbling and burning pixels alongside the nishbot it should cause antenna to raise.
The concept of “fair play” isn’t in the other sides rule book – except as a joke. The right’s unwillingness to pump the septic tank is not, IMO, a sign of strength or an indication of principle given that t’other sides rule book is Rules for Radicals. Period.
I support any blog owners protection of his property and as long as basic rules are clear I’ll never complain about banning.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:15 pmHe is a serious loser and not worth any time.
Then he’ll get no more of mine.
This conversation with him is over. Good day!
Or should I say:
Good day, sir!
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:16 pmSugar Sugar to you, Dan.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:17 pmSee, Eric? It wasn’t about you.
Dan, I confess I have no idea what Alan’s point was.
Does that say something about effective communication? I don’t know.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:18 pm“well, it makes it harder to call a guy evil or bad because he does some unsavory things in the pursuit of political power.”
I certainly understand the premise. I just wish thoughts of Austrians, Italians, Georgians, Japanese, Cambodians and Chinese hadn’t floated through my head immediately after reading it.
Maybe Goodman Sunshine is just floating the names of the dregs to test public reaction? We’ll see.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:22 pmimdw — 11/9/2008 @ 8:35 pm:
I was not making a point about Obama or what I think about Obama. My point was to use the same standards SEK used to criticize Jeff G. and apply them to Obama. Thus, I gave an example that shows Obama is “incapable of rational reflection” according to the same standards SEK used regarding Jeff G.
DRJ (cb68f2) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:26 pmI mean, like alphie apparently is.
You were right, JD. Snuffles is alphie.
Snuffles is banned.
Aw man, Snuffles is Staunch Brayer? And I didn’t pick up on it?
Darn. Now it’s too late to mock him with more parody verses from ‘Moonshadow.’
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (f4c545) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:31 pmI certainly understand the premise. I just wish thoughts of Austrians, Italians, Georgians, Japanese, Cambodians and Chinese hadn’t floated through my head immediately after reading it.
I think you’ll have to be a little clearer than that.
Are you comparing Obama to a mass murderer? Or am I missing your point?
If your point has anything to do with people in political power who kill others, then yes, those people are evil. But it’d be a leetle bit of a stretch to put Obama in that category, wouldn’t it??
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:31 pmA nasty infestation of the most vile sort of parasite….the commertariat of Protein Wisdom. Try not to turn this into the cesspool of ad hominem and profanity that PW is. There are actually some smarter cons here, not to mention Patterico is not dangerously unstable.
lee atwater (8f04c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:34 pmHey, I think the world of Dan’s posts. So I’m glad I wasn’t an irritant. A lot of that going on these days.
Rick, I worry that I am slowly descending into Black Helicopter territory, but I do think that some of “progressives” indeed have decided to go on the attack on the internet.
On the other hand:
So who knows?
I’m still dumbfounded that I am hearing that Raum Emmanuel and Jamie Gorelick (despite their Fannie Mae connections, for one thing) are centrists and a good thing.
Ah, bipartisanship.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:35 pmAh. Paleo Pat is Chuck Adkins.
Yeah, that Chuck Adkins.
So when I thought he was an asshole, turns out I was right.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:36 pmOh, DRJ… You wrote:
Sadly, many people will never forgive you for illustrating their…um…inconsistencies. In fact, they usually go on the attack–claiming their pacifism, of course–when you do.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:37 pmOh, Good Lord, Patterico. I just read those links.
Making jokes about dead spouses is very classy. Certainly a blog I’m not likely to visit.
Well, as Augustine wrote, you wish them well and move along. Being angry (as I reminded myself today) doesn’t upset the people who have made you angry, and too often diminishes the person who is angry. Tortured syntax, but still true.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:42 pmAh. Paleo Pat is Chuck Adkins.
Yeah, that Chuck Adkins.
So when I thought he was an asshole, turns out I was right.
Aw, man, another missed mocking opportunity.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (f4c545) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:44 pmI hope we don’t have a hat trick with Levi showing up under an assumed name.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (f4c545) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:46 pmI wonder if Chuck has lost any weight over the past year. Those pictures on his prior blog showed him suffering from TMB – Too Much Buffet.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 9:49 pmTo my mind, the most profound and epistemologically labyrinthine aspect of Jeff’s take on Obama, is as regards his (Obama’s) connection to the Alinskyite model. I won’t attempt to sum up the evidence that suggests Obama’s fealty to this model as it is bountiful. To suggest as much, pace SEK, strikes me as nothing at all like tin-foil, bircher, troofer conjecture. Inasmuch as Obama is employing rules for radicals as it were, it would be inaccurate to suggest he’s “hiding” anything per se, unless you characterize it as “hiding in plain sight”.
The epistemic nature of the problem is what I find particularly interesting. I think it is interesting because it ties Obama’s strategy (as described by Jeff’s conjecture) to the developments in academia (in both praxis and theory) that have obtained over the last 80+ years. Chief among these, per Jeff, is a post-structural view of interpretation that seeks to emancipate meaning-making from its empirical moorings. In practice, this view leads not to some kind of universally-realized illumination wherein all the shades of meaning (you know, the socially constructed meaning) is teased out of every signifier. No, in our current milieu it leads to the arrogation of the very power to interpret by those groups whose grievances and political will allow them to aspire to such an usurpation.
Per Alinsky, Obama deflected virtually all criticism or inquiry through appeals to his ostensibly pragmatic, post-partisan, post-racial bona-fides. When that didn’t work, he or his proxies would simply shrug off the detractor as racist. Jeff’s conjecture is that Obama’s strategy is only possible because we’ve been collectively primed to accept this slippery epistemological premise that however meaning gets made, what was intended by the communicator is epiphenomenal.
Deductively, no amount of empirical adduction of evidence for, say, the inherent racism of the “Obama’s opponents are racists” circumlocution will actually do anything because the ability to determine the meaning of the word “racist” has been wrested from the abstract institution of empiricism, gift-wrapped, and delivered to those who would make it mean whatever proves apposite to their political aspirations. (In spite of the construction of that last sentence, I assure I am neither Jeff nor plagiarizing him.) Thus, the personal becomes political or vice versa or whatever.
So while putative conservatives—who, like modern day redcoats disgusted by the guerilla tactics of the damnable yanks—whinge about the illogic of their progressive opponents, they lose the epistemic battle. It is not now, nor was it ever, given that enlightenment philosophy should be preeminent. We cannot loiter in our haughty disgust for the progressive teleology. Nor, and I think this was the source of Jeff’s post about Patterico’s comity, can we countenance a veneer of civility when it provides strategic cover for continued guerilla attacks on the philosophical principles upon which our republic was founded. To say that Obama “ran a brilliant campaign” (my words—I don’t remember Patterico’s formulation), while true in some Machiavellian sense, is to give philosophical succor to strategies which are damaging to the design of our form of government. Which, if someone wants to undermine our form of government, well fine. It just seems dispiriting to see the system go away before most people even come to understand as much.
No, we must take back the language. It is the time of the OUTLAW.
malaclypse the tertiary (8fcf5c) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:00 pmYou didn’t use the terms “hermaneutics,” “transformative,” and “hegemony.” Other than that, far too familiar.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:12 pmNo, but I did use some of his other more marginally used constructions such as, “Which, …”
Strangely, I wrote kinda like Jeff before I started reading Jeff and now I write even more like him.
malaclypse the tertiary (8fcf5c) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:18 pmmal – Thanks, but are you getting paid in your day job by the word or something? That gobbledegook could have been condensed into one paragraph without losing any meaning. I think you were just trying to impress SEK.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:32 pmHey, daley: it’s academese.
Do you know about holograms? You can cut one up into a dozen pieces, and each of them contains the same information. Sort of like an academic paper: remove every other word, and the gist is intact.
Sadly.
Eric Blair (a723e0) — 11/9/2008 @ 10:49 pmdaleyrocks – Nah. Too much Pepsi, I think. Up working late and the Pepsi, y’know, keeps me going. Sometimes a bit overmuch. And I’m autistic so therefore given over to complexity. Sadly, I don’t always recognize the degree to which it appears to be arrogant. I’m a nerdy autodidact whose knowledge, while not small, is rather full of errors. Also not very original I’m afraid.
malaclypse the tertiary (8fcf5c) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:01 pmBut still, despite my waxing grandiloquent, I made, like, some points I think.
malaclypse the tertiary (8fcf5c) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:09 pmmal – I wasn’t dissing your points in any way. I’ve seen them made before I believe at PW. I just thought they could have been made in a heck of a lot less space without the $10 words is all.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:27 pmSadly, I don’t always recognize the degree to which it appears to be arrogant
I thought you were just verbose, til you said that.
NOW it seems kinda arrogant.
lee (97da21) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:27 pmlee – I don’t know. SEK is elitist and arrogant. He refuses to accept that he is just another bozo on the bus and expects deferential treatment. My experience with mal is different.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:31 pmObama is already toast. If you don’t believe it, look at this picture.
Naturally, it’s Wonder Bread.
Official Internet Data Office (fc3217) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:32 pmYeah daleyrocks, just ribbing malaclypse .
Frankly, my eyes glazed over after the second paragraph and I conceded whatever point he making with such exhaustive deliberation.
I’ve waded through that stuff at PW, and mostly get it, but it’s late…
lee (97da21) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:38 pmI promise, not arrogant. I like words is all.
happyfeet is my favorite commenter in the universe. Does that establish it?
malaclypse the tertiary (8fcf5c) — 11/9/2008 @ 11:46 pmNow I see what this “psycho” stuff was all about. Some guy named “psycho” claimed, in a Protein Wisdom thread, that I invented the e-mail that I quoted in this post.
It was actually from someone named Cory S., and it was much longer than the stuff I quoted. But I think this “psycho” person managed to convince Jeff that it was all some passive-aggressive shot at him.
And in the same comment he called Allahpundit a bitch. Hence happyfeet’s reference.
I get it now.
Here’s the full e-mail from Cory S., which I don’t think he’d mind my reproducing here:
Pretty good e-mail. Maybe I should have quoted more in the post.
I certainly didn’t make it up — and I thought the part I quoted was worth responding to.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:06 amWhat I think Jeff G. and some of your more vocal (and acknowledgedly unrestrained) detractors are concerned with is that you’ll take your desire for moderateness, a good and necessary quality, and you’ll hold back in calling Obama’s policies honestly for what they are.
I don’t think that you’ll hold back on calling Obama policies for what they are.
I think Jeff is looking at it from a linguistics issue; calling a turd a turd (to substitute a more appropriate saying than I first thought). That is the front he is defending against in the effort to subvert our Republic toward fascism. You’d be better served to go there and read his post on it though.
My concern is that you know you got a fox on your hands (to construct an analogy), you’ve been telling us all that’s what he is, and now that we have to put him in the hen house you tell yourself he won’t act like a fox and it’s best to give him a chance. No use getting worked up over it before he even does anything.
I say no, you were right before. That’s a fox and he’s drooling all over the place, we need to keep that in mind when he goes in so we know what to expect and have a plan for what to do.
Otherwise, you might go to sleep and wake up to a shed full of feathers and kits.
lee (8d67a3) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:44 amHere is a short list of things to watch out for:
Strict gun laws, though he promised he would not.
2). “In God We Trust” will be removed from all currency.
3). He will renege on his pledge to Israel and leave them to the wolves of Islam.
4) Hillary Clinton will be named to the Supreme Court.
5). Tax rates will surge to the highest levels in 30 years.
6). Capital gains tax will be at least double current levels.
7). Retired Army General Wesley Clark will be named Secretary of Defense.
8). Your borders will be open to all comers – especially from the Middle East and South America .
9). Amnesty will be granted to all illegals in the U.S, regardless of status or even gang membership (think MS-13).
10). Our presence in Iraq will come to an abrupt end – with tragic results though their citizens and devastating consequences to our military.
lee (8d67a3) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:56 amThere’s one more, lee, this one bright and shining for your Monday morning entertainment and encouragement:
Fucking moonbats just took down the United States Constitution.
JHoward (b51d2c) — 11/10/2008 @ 4:08 am“Fucking moonbats just took down the United States Constitution.”
thanks to a speech by gordon brown.
imdw (4fe3dc) — 11/10/2008 @ 4:40 amYou’ll do your thing; Jeff will do his.
All of this could be worked out over coffee and eggs.
There is no shortage of work to be done over the next four years.
Life in the wilderness for the right of center is going to be quite something.
mcgrduer (7e7eb1) — 11/10/2008 @ 6:17 am“I think you’ll have to be a little clearer than that.”
Hannah Arendt was more clear about the utter banality of evil than I could ever hope to be. You have proposed a construct of “good” without laying any foundation other than the fact that Obama has not, as yet, been indicted and convicted and/or that his friends and family say nice things about him. I submit that his willingness to protect those committing legal homicide upon the most defenseless and truly innocent is a spotlight on the depth of his depravity.
Applying the standard of “until proven guilty” in order to apply the label “good” is (IMO, obviously) sophistry based upon the conflation of a legal standard with a moral standard. Who is to say what is “good” or “evil”? I’ll go with the Pope, not with legal sophistry applied outside of the legal sphere.
Rick Ballard (e3e91f) — 11/10/2008 @ 7:46 amYou know this ‘infighting’ is a bit ‘cheering’ for us “liberals”.
But it’s getting a bit boring. Can you mix it up with us Liberals or Progressives a little more?
Can you refute Paul Krugman’s latest post about FDR being too conservative with economic stimulus? Rather than continue on the lines of debating whether Jeff G. is the Dumbest Jew in the World. Rahm Emanual is Chief of Staff and the most pro-Israeli administration ever is now coming in place and yet Jeff’s worried about “progressives” going after him and his.
As mentioned, Jeff’s negative obsession with the “Magic Negro” kind of puts him in the running for being the “World’s Dumbest Jew”. He’s far ahead of Jonah G. on this standard since Jonah’s got a good day job at NRO.
Sasha Cohn, please come back to America and interview Jeff G. Please!
datadave (7100c4) — 11/10/2008 @ 8:06 amIt is a freaking joke, a mindless idiot. Nobody with functioning grey matter could type that and not have their head assplode.
Anti-semite much, asshat?
JD (831256) — 11/10/2008 @ 8:54 amComment by JHoward — 11/10/2008 @ 4:08 am
There are several UN treaties said to be on the BHO action list that would “take down” the U.S.Constitution, and compel changes to the Constitutions of individual States within the U.S.A.
Any subjugation of the U.S. to the will of the U.N. would have to be the one issue that would demand a filibuster in the Senate.
Another Drew (d51d84) — 11/10/2008 @ 8:56 amjd,
Jeff being “World’s Dumbest Jew” is a joke. Not sure if Jeff’s constant refrain about Obama being a “Magic Negro” is a joke. So why is it that saying “jew” is antisemitic but saying Magic Negro isn’t racist?
note: Jeff got upset over me calling him a ‘skinhead’ even though he does occasionally trim his hair very closely as I do…but such I was really just pointing out his thin skin?
JD, you’ve constantly followed my comments with name-calling, but never offer an argument of your own.
Jeff temporarily blocked me and then unblocked me. So I don’t know if he’s desperate for ‘hits’ over there or what? I’d been blocked for responding to the name calling attacks there but now frequent many other more intelligent sites usually in the economic realm like ‘marginal revolution’ (rightwingerish libertarian orthodoxies) or Roubini’s (centrist criticism of the Orthodoxies of economics) or left of center ones I’ll let you find on your own. I come here or to PW to understand the Right-wing mind and see where you are all coming from.
JD. If you weren’t such a mindless follower, I’d offer other sites to check out. But you’re a Troll against Trolls. Kind of a sub-Troll.
datadave (044b8f) — 11/10/2008 @ 11:32 amdd –I come here or to PW to understand the Right-wing mind
Your inability to differentiate between the collective and the individual exposes your accusation of JD as a ‘mindless follower’ as simple projection.
Apogee (366e8b) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:01 pmWas datadave attempting to write “Sacha Baron Cohen”? Talk about fumble-fingers on the keyboard!
Icy Truth (aedb2f) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:15 pmComment by datadave — 11/10/2008 @ 11:32 am
BTW dd, “Magic Negro” is a meme popularized by Rush Linbaugh, quoting a LIBERAL/LEFT writer in the LAT who first used the phrase in an early column about Barack Obama.
Another Drew (d51d84) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:22 pm“I come here or to PW to understand the Right-wing mind and see where you are all coming from.”
DD – Wrong. You come here to spew mindless progressive inanities and historical innaccuracies. You have zero interest in understanding. Anyone who has followed your comments at PW knows this to be true. Why not return to your true passion, bareback sex with sugar maples. ‘Tis the season. I hope you get splinters again this year.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/10/2008 @ 12:41 pmI come here for a laugh, too. Thx, daley!
I regularly google and investigate the ‘ideas’ and ‘hero’s’ you all expouse too. Thomas Sowell for example…but I remembered he kind of sucked in the several newspaper columns I read of his with his syndication with Gannett. Really, he is too isolated and narrow-minded in his opposition to liberalism (a philosophy that allowed him a Harvard education despite his minority status). I listen and learn but remain very, very unconvinced in the Right’s ideas. I was once, as a youngster a Right-winger, and maybe have a little too much in common here. It feels ‘comfortable’ here.
I give you a easy-going “troll” to bash when so-called trolls are less and less interested in visiting conservative sites. We might get rarer and rarer and then you’d get bored having no one to talk with except the other True Believers.
Another Drew! thx for more info. For Jeff G. at PW to emulate Rush Limbaugh…eh, poor guy. He’s really dragging his numbnuts then. I guess you were at the marginalrevolution blog too. ?
I recommend Matthew Yglesias’ blog for commenting. He actually listens to conservative ideas and is willing to buck liberal orthodoxy once in awhile even if being “of the left”. (he’s too busy to actually participate in the comments but that’s to be expected of ‘success’.) At Progressive blogs I am seeing fewer and fewer conservatives being gutsy or proficient enough to maintain an argument other than the ‘drive-by’s leaving sarcastic and profanities.
then there is Protein Wisdom on the right…seems like a narrow band of bombasts dominate there even if they are funny much of the time.
I never participated at Cafe Hayek, an obvious conservative economic issue site but liberals seem to be welcome there after the current ban on comments expires.
datadave (bbbd3a) — 11/11/2008 @ 1:21 amMaybe next time David Ehrenstein drops by, you can ask him. He’s both Black and Jewish, and he’s also that liberal writer in the LAT that Another Drew refers to in #358. Or, maybe you could read the source material.
Pablo (99243e) — 11/11/2008 @ 5:11 amoh, look, Jeff’s dog made it over to defend his master. Nice work, Pablo. Can we see his hands move when you type?
timb (1426f9) — 11/11/2008 @ 12:58 pm