Patterico's Pontifications

7/18/2009

hilzoy: You Can Completely Dismiss Patterico’s Credibility, Which I Have Just Proved by Linking to a Post He Didn’t Write

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:19 pm



The other day I praised hilzoy as a level-headed blogger who manages to disagree with opponents while refraining from nasty, baseless attacks.

I spoke too soon.

In one of her final posts, she draws up a list of bloggers who, she says, “didn’t bother to do the most basic, rudimentary research that any blogger ought to do” regarding the House’s health care bill. Not content with disagreeing, hilzoy contended that the alleged mistake made by these bloggers was proof that they should be completely disregarded for all time as utterly lacking in credibility:

[S]ince life is short, it’s nice to find an actual, objective test for things like intellectual irresponsibility, one that lets you just see that some people are, really and truly, intellectually irresponsible, and thus that you can dismiss them forever, and read them only for laughs, while saving your precious free time for others who deserve it more.

This is just such a test. Tom Maguire passed. The other bloggers I listed failed. That’s useful information.

(All emphasis in this post added by me.)

Among the bloggers she listed who can be dismissed forever: “Patterico.” This, she proved by linking to a post written by . . . Karl.

Mmmm, that’s some crack research, hilzoy!

To be fair, the post by Karl contained hardly any hint that it was written by “Karl” — and not, as hilzoy falsely claimed, “Patterico.” The only clues were subtle indeed:

  • A line immediately under the post title reading: “Filed under: General — Karl @ 11:00 am”
  • A line immediately that reading: “[Posted by Karl]”
  • And a tag line at the end of the post reading “–Karl

I generally consider myself to be a reasonably careful researcher. My training and temperament lead me to document the things I say. Yes, I make mistakes — as does any blogger. Including — here’s a secret! — even hilzoy!

hilzoy’s decision to argue that I lacked credibility for all time, based on a post that I did not write, evinces some pretty sloppy research on her part. If we were to apply the hilzoy standard, we could safely disregard her for all time. Frankly, I think that’s an unfair standard, and I’m not going to make that pronouncement. I’ll simply note the irony.

I guess it’s a moot point, since she’s not going to be posting any more. I’ll just leave it at this: I thought I was going to miss her blogging (which I didn’t read often, but did occasionally). Now I’m not so sure. To have my 6 1/2 years of careful and well-sourced blogging so cavalierly dismissed on the basis of a post written by someone else — well, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

This is not a minor issue. If I leveled a broadside against hilzoy, and cited as evidence a post written by, say, publius, I think hilzoy would be offended. And rightly so. Well, this is the flip side of that coin.

Plus, when you leap upon your high horse and excoriate others for allegedly sloppy readings of text, it’s generally a good idea to refrain from even sloppier readings of others’ texts — at least in the same post. You know?

P.S. On the substantive issue of the correctness of Karl’s post, let me say this:

I don’t pre-screen the posts of my guest bloggers. I trust them, and they have repeatedly shown that they have earned that trust. I do not always agree with them, and I do not have time or inclination to fact-check every one of their assertions.

If I believe one of my guest bloggers may have gotten an issue wrong, I will of course take steps to rectify it. And I did so here. When I saw hilzoy’s post, I sent an e-mail to Karl alerting him to Tom Maguire’s analysis. Karl has posted an update and clarification that more carefully explains the nature of the bill, and notes that the quoted language from Investor’s Business Daily lacked the necessary nuance to make its explication accurate. I am satisfied with Karl’s update, and believe that no reader who sees it will be misled.

What’s more, if you look at the entirety of Karl’s work on the health care issue, it’s quite clear that he understands the issue well, and has done great work in helping make it clear to readers here. It would not have been fair to dismiss his credibility on the basis of one post with an allegedly misleading passage — any more than it would be to dismiss the entirety of hilzoy’s work simply because she carelessly attacked my reputation based on a sloppy and lazy reading of a post on my site.

And yes, I will be writing hilzoy and asking for a correction.

110 Responses to “hilzoy: You Can Completely Dismiss Patterico’s Credibility, Which I Have Just Proved by Linking to a Post He Didn’t Write”

  1. In general, not knowing Hilzoy from a hole in the wall and reading two posts ….

    Hilzoy writes that he/she/it started blogging in 2002 b/c madness engulfed certain pockets of Pro-Iraq-War crowd who were smearing Anti-War Americans by calling them terrorist supporters.

    …. yet Hilzoy smears a certain large segment of the population by calling them crazy without really looking at the motivations, biases and hatred of the Anti-War crowd ….

    OK, fine.

    Yet now, Hilzoy writes in the same article he/she/it is giving up blogging b/c he/she/it feels the nation is in better shape now ….. because I guess with Obama in power everything is sane again?

    So Hilzoy does not see any madness in what Obama is doing? Or maddness in how folks beat on the Bush adminsitration?

    IT IS ALL GOOD!!!!! Bush Hitler is gone. God Obama is in power. Hurrah!

    Wow, what a treat.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  2. And Hilzoy was lamenting all the vitriol on the intartubes in her goodbye post today. Savor the rich, chewy irony there.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  3. Well, you know the advice about holding your breath right?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  4. Maybe it is just me but my father taught me to dis-trust all people in power regardless of whether you agree with them or not. The laws of self interest trump all and power corrupts.

    These morons who now see roses and champagne at every turn of this douche bag Presidency make me wanna puke with their absolute stupidity.

    I just can’t trust any person or party that much to turn a blind eye to the political and economic earth quake this lunatic is creating.

    It is going to make the Vietnam and Iraq War problems seem like child’s play.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  5. Patterico – In the Hilzoy piece you linked she is making a false assumption, which she claimed conservatives ignored, that premiums will go down in the new plans. There is no such evidence. Look at Massachusetts – costs are up although I don’t know whether that refers to what portion the state has eaten, insurer costs, or premiums passed on to insureds, or a combination. Hilzoy casually assumes that it is due to the effects of a large pool. She fails to note that the pool will be community rated – accepting all risks and pricing them the same.

    You might ask what research she has to back up that claim that premiums will be lower or if it’s just an asspull.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  6. Not to mention that the inaccuracy, such as it is, was confirmed by the House Ways & Means Committee. If hilzoy wants to dismiss people, the Committee would be the place to start.

    Karl (ade276)

  7. daley,

    Why don’t you go there in their comments section and ask yourself? It’s your point, not mine, and I would be interested to see you discuss it with her.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  8. Silly Hilzoy, Karl is the idiot spreading wingnut misinformation. Not Patterico.

    imdw (5f60be)

  9. Patterico, you won’t believe this. Hilzoy once referred to Dwayne Johnson as The Rock even though he prefers being called Dwayne Johnson!!! Judging from your priorities, I am confident you will waste no time getting right on top of this crushing issue.

    josef johann (400cf2)

  10. I tend to agree with Hilzoy’s assessment of you, Patterico. Anyone who thinks hilzoy “as a level-headed blogger who manages to disagree with opponents while refraining from nasty, baseless attacks” is truly intellectually irresponsible.

    John Henry Eden (d3a8ee)

  11. Aaaaaaand Gary Farber weighs in, with his usual good humor and charitable approach.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  12. (At the linked Obsidian Wings post, that is.)

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  13. imdw,

    As just noted, please direct your complaint to the House Ways & Means Committee for misinforming the wingnuts.

    Karl (ade276)

  14. After seeing what Hilzoy and co-bloggers did to Kevin Drum’s blog when they took over, I wouldn’t worry if I were you. Everyone but them is crazy. I certainly am. I have yet to get a sensible reply since Drum left. Not all, by any means, were sensible when he was there but he was usually pretty sane.

    Mike K (90939b)

  15. #5, All pooling does is make the premiums lower for the sicker and more expensive for the healthy.

    This usually has the effect of sicker people going to the Doctor more since now it is cheaper and healthy people go to the Doctor more since “they might as well use their insurance.”

    It actually raises costs. That is why price discrimination in the insurance market is important.

    Basic Econ 101.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  16. I always liked Kevin Drum. Even met him personally, once. Quiet, reflective fellow. Seem to remember him sort of slandering Marc “Armed Liberal” Danziger once, though, and Marc is a good friend of mine. So I have been wary of Drum since.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  17. Another example of Patterico’s gullibility. When will he learn?

    http://patterico.com/2008/11/14/soliciting-your-predictions-on-what-obama-will-do/

    John Henry Eden (d3a8ee)

  18. Indeed, John Henry Eden:

    “I think he will damage this country with bad policies.” He’ll raise taxes and appoint rotten judges. He will weaken our fight against terror. At times, he will use shady political tactics to achieve all sorts of wrongheaded, far-left goals.

    How “wrong” I was!

    (Yes, I recognize your ironic tone.)

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  19. I just beat Fallout 3 (John Henry Eden is a computer trying to be the president in that game). I thought it was vastly overrated, though the game itself was ambitious, the base creativity just didn’t seem to be there.

    Great game, though.

    Karl’s a GREAT blogger. This kind of attack puts him in the awkward position of being used to slime his host… but he didn’t do anything wrong. He relied on awful drafting and awful reporting and a dishonest and lazy House committee. When analyzing legislation these days, you have to understand thousands of sloppy pages in a short amount of time, and that’s just impossible to do without an occasional error. Karl corrected himself, but while the left can parade lies for years after it’s told them, a conservative who makes an honest and understandable error will be called ‘unreliable’.

    Sickening how the left is so often just trolling with attacks that are lousy, over the top, and actually designed to be annoyingly wrong. They know they won’t get the attention they crave if they are fair and decent. That’s just boring. Also boring: reading the blogs they are attacking to see that they are actually sliming the right targets.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  20. Heavensent @ 15 – Precisely. I made a visit to Hilzoy’s post. Why not add a comment as well?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  21. Patterico, I just read through hilzoy’s post and subsequent comments. Being ever mindful of my mother’s admonition, ‘If you have nothing nice to say…’, I’ll just say, wasn’t it thoughtful of Gary Farber to link to the definition of tu quoque, in case you didn’t know what it meant? :)

    Dana (57e332)

  22. Karl’s a GREAT blogger.

    One of the very best. You have no idea how lucky I feel that he’s posting here.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  23. […] x2: Given that the point made in the update is one of some controversy, here’s a little more about the relevant provisions of the House bill: Two main bills are being […]

    The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Obamacare: The mask is off (e2f069)

  24. Dana – If you look up the definition of dickhead in the dictionary, I believe Gary’s picture is still there.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  25. The interesting question is this one: why the bile and anger from that left-leaning blog? I mean, they “won,” right? They should be overjoyed!

    Instead, they appear to trying to impose perfection on others, while a nice target for that laudable goal is just a wee bit closer.

    Eric Blair (acade1)

  26. Dana – If you look up the definition of dickhead in the dictionary, I believe Gary’s picture is still there.

    I believe it appears under several other entries as well, many having to do with the concept of dishonesty.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  27. #20, Daley, every day I repeat the same and no one really listens. I call it the Paradox of Pooling.

    Paradox b/c everyone always thinks pooling is a good thing when in reality it is a disaster for all because of basic human nature.

    The one who gets cheaper insurance says “Hey, I can consume more and it won’t cost me anything” and the one who is forced to pay up says “I am getting screwed anyway so let me spend some money on things I don’t really need.”

    Overall, this whole Health Care Debate is nonsense. From the “we have a crisis” which does not exist to the “we need to insure everyone” which you really don’t.

    The Special Interest Groups have hijacked this thing and they will drive us into the ditch along with “feel-a-good Obamanomics.”

    I only hope to profit from it and laugh at the road kill ….. here is hoping anyway.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  28. It’s my uninformed opinion that hilzoy is running away. As the disaster of Obama unfolds, she doesn’t want to be available. Lefties never really take responsibility.

    Ken Hahn (240397)

  29. That post and comment thread sums up nicely why I don’t comment at Obsidian Wings any more–it’s just another moonbat colony these days, and Hilzoy’s presided over the sliding into the ooze phase of things there. Good riddance.

    M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0)

  30. It would not have been fair to dismiss his credibility on the basis of one post with an allegedly misleading passage — any more than it would be to dismiss the entirety of hilzoy’s work simply because she carelessly attacked my reputation based on a sloppy and lazy reading of a post on my site.

    Actually, I disagree with this, not with regard to Karl, but hilzoy. As intellectual responsibility appears to be something hilzoy admirably holds in the very highest regard, her response to you pointing out her obvious error and mis-accusation will tell me whether her work should be dismissed or not. Because in that instance, we will be talking strictly about her credibility.

    And I would like to thank Karl for all of his Health Care posts and his relentlessness in digging deeper. The posts,provided links and external references have really provided quite an education.

    Dana (57e332)

  31. My prescription for real health care reform short of just killing folks b/f they get old …

    1) Tort Reform to get rid of frivolous medicine
    2) Govt Sponsored Catastrophic Insurance for all regardless of income — Catastrophic equals severe accidents, remediable genetic problem or life threatening illness. I call this the Limited Govt Plan.
    3) No Gov.t coverage anywhere else for anything else including the poor.
    4) All Citizens should have a Personal Insurance Policy which lasts a life time. The Premiums would be set on a straight line till expected death with an underlying valuation of the policy establish day 1 it is written. Yearly the consumer can get quote on the policy and get new Premiums and New Cash Value and decide to switch around based on this. If their is a positive cahs value the insurance company who got under quote needs to transfer that policy with cash to the new carrier who will capitalize it on the policy. Over time health people build “equity” that can be used while also allowing for Premiums to be adjusted over time so as health people can benefit while sick people pay. Really complicated — sorry.
    5) Abolish Insurance Assignment — make Patients responsible to MDs and Insurance Companies responsible to Patients.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  32. Anyone hear how that shared risk pool of home mortgages ever work out for those two quasi-government agencies?

    BfC (5209ec)

  33. Dana has a point. hilzoy seems to be actively willing to condemn people for honest errors (in simply bringing up problematic sections of sloppy legislation!), but in so doing, does not have the decency to even read the post she condemns for the most basic of fact checks. She didn’t even know who wrote it.

    Though the idiot brigade supporting hilzoy, such as Gary, seem to ignore it, Karl’s post did contain a retraction and correction. It was a serious attempt to discuss legislation that is being rammed through. It was a boring, but strong example of how to blog honorably. The assumptions made in that post and its comments are so sloppy and lazy and biased that it’s apparent that all hilzoy wants to do is say ‘left=good right=demon’. Hilzoy’s had plenty of time to correct her error, and hers is a great example of how to be dishonest and a jerk.

    Hilzoy’s right that at some point, a single action is enough to remove credibility.

    Juan (bd4b30)

  34. I think the hilzoy one is a lot fooling herself about how inaccurate the IBD editorial can be said to be. Besides, that editorial was written before we learned that we have to spend trillions of dollars on dirty socialist third world-style health care to avoid bankruptcy. The debate has moved on.

    Also Karl is the mostest credible one ever. No one can maintain a shred of credibility what says otherwise.

    happyfeet (c75712)

  35. Here’s where IBD is right – saying any private offering is ok as long as it accepts preexisting conditions is the exact same as saying there will be no private insurance.

    We’re not going to tax unicorn shops either.

    lonetown (d7ec3b)

  36. One slight note on this: in your stylesheet.css, you have the blog metadata (which produces “Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:19 pm”) set to a very light grey font color. That doesn’t explain away the other references to Karl, but it should be noted.

    There is an easy “sort by author” code that you can put in your sidebar as well; that might be useful here, and even moreso on The Jury sideblog.

    If you want the code, I’ll give it to you, but I can’t just put it in this comment; the system recognizes it as code, and won’t show it.

    The Dana who never calls out sick (474dfc)

  37. Darn! Forgot to change my name!

    The inattentive Dana (474dfc)

  38. “Hilzoy’s had plenty of time to correct her error, and hers is a great example of how to be dishonest and a jerk.”

    Yes, the fact that she’s in Rwanda (or still in route) is doubtless only because she’s deliberately trying to avoid responding to Patterico.

    Gary Farber (a05202)

  39. Rawanda? Yeah, I am in Rio right now and Bariloche later.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  40. Liberals remind me of the missionaries that went to Hawaii and ended up owning the Islands —– “They came to do good and did very well indeed.”

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  41. “As just noted, please direct your complaint to the House Ways & Means Committee for misinforming the wingnuts.”

    Oh. There’s no doubt there’s misinformation coming from the House too — it would be helpful to know what exactly that was. But what the IBD wrote about this bill is simply wrong, whether they wrote it and the wingers parroted it before or after someone from a house a committee spoke up.

    This was just a case of ‘too good to be true’ so of course, it was broadcast far and wide.

    imdw (c5488f)

  42. Farber is a mendoucheous twatwaffle of the highest order. When he is not lying, he is prolly felching underage goats. NTtAWWt.

    JD (0d131e)

  43. “2) Govt Sponsored Catastrophic Insurance for all regardless of income — Catastrophic equals severe accidents, remediable genetic problem or life threatening illness. I call this the Limited Govt Plan.
    3) No Gov.t coverage anywhere else for anything else including the poor.”

    So if I detect cancer, the govt will pay only once it is life threatening. But not before? Makes a lot of sense.

    imdw (c990d8)

  44. Save your pixels if you are considering having a discussion with imdw. You are more likely to have an honest discussion with that mendacious Farber person.

    JD (0d131e)

  45. Gary Farber – when you got donkey punched by Michael Moore, did it hurt, or did you kind of enjoy it?

    JD (0d131e)

  46. Okay, maybe that was a tad bit inappropriate, and not at all fair to goats and Michael Moore.

    JD (0d131e)

  47. Here is Hilzoy calling Tom Maguire a racist, then pretending she didn’t.

    MayBee (781c96)

  48. MayBee – Water is wet. That is what Leftists do.

    JD (0d131e)

  49. Dontcha know that we are all hostile to minorities?

    JD (0d131e)

  50. And let’s don’t forget that Hilzoy failed her own test, by blaming Phil Gramm for the economic disaster because everyone else on the left was doing it.

    MayBee (781c96)

  51. That whole TM is racist, but I am not calling him racist post was surreal. The comments even moreso. They all assume ongoing race issues and racism by those that do not share their “empathy”. Farber continues his douchenozzlery in those comments.

    JD (0d131e)

  52. I’ll admit I didn’t read her carefully over the years. But I recall reading posts where lefties were making blatantly false claims — provably false ones — and when I would read her take, it was usually smarter and avoided easily whacked-down assertions.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  53. So if I detect cancer, the govt will pay only once it is life threatening. But not before? Makes a lot of sense.

    Sure, if you’re an idiot.

    The US has such astonishingly high survival stats for most all forms of cancer because we detect and treat early. If you wait for it to be “life threatening”, you usually don’t have a very good chance of survival, and even then it often comes back, and/or the treatment is god-awful. Treating cancer early usually allows for milder treatments that don’t make you wish for death.

    But, in the end, only treating cancer when it became life-threatening would lower health-care costs in the long run, because more people would die, thus removing their further care from the bottom line. Then again, we could achieve the same savings by shooting one out of every ten people in the head and killing them.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  54. “But, in the end, only treating cancer when it became life-threatening would lower health-care costs in the long run, because more people would die, thus removing their further care from the bottom line. ”

    There you go.

    [note: fished from spam filter]

    imdw (5d4ed6)

  55. Jeeze guys. I’ve read you Patterico for years now – 5? 6? I love your media bias pieces and I’ve linked you (especially your LAT year in review) more than once at OW. Karl – I’ve read you here, at HA, and at PW. I agree with you guys more often than not. I’m here like twice a day. I have rarely commented, but I read daily.

    I am a vet, a conservative, and a great admirer of RR. I was a Republican until the party went totally off the rails. You know what? I was wrong. You were wrong. Our side was just plain wrong. And we have to now live with that. Deal.

    I just can’t even enumerate the many ways that you are all wrong here in this thread.

    So Hilzoy made a mistake? It actually makes me feel better to know that she is human and capable of making a mistake. It endears her to me that much more. She is on vacation and can’t defend herself right now. I’m not sure she will when she returns. She shouldn’t because this is BS.

    There are one hell of a lot of people right now who are very sad because Hilzoy is retiring from blogging. Count me among them. She is a fantastic writer. Hell, the best. I don’t agree with much of her politics but I can still appreciate an excellent writer.

    And Gary Farber? Again, I do not agree with most of his political positions. But as far as honesty and integrity there are few out there I would put above him. Shit, let me make that perfectly clear – there is no one. He and I have had some knock-down drag-out arguments sometimes running for days – but I am proud, nay – damned proud to call him friend. The comments here concerning him are totally inappropriate, unfounded, and just plain asinine.

    I’m sure it doesn’t mean much, but you can count on a couple fewer page views per day.

    OCSteve (492222)

  56. “Gary Farber – when you got donkey punched by Michael Moore, did it hurt, or did you kind of enjoy it?”

    Let’s see. I am so unwilling to criticize leftists that I wrote this about Michael Moore:

    […] That would be because Michael Moore is, alas — what’s the term? — oh, yes: a big fat liar. (This is a comment on the weight of his lies, not his body.)

    And I posted this criticism of him.

    And this.

    And this:

    […] It is, in fact, the same sense of overwhelming Moral Superiority and self-inflated belief in one’s ability to Pierce Society’s Evil Veil that I get from Michael Moore in recent times, and much of the failed and juvenile left, the same sense that leaves them with a moral compass ever-spinning, and a moral yardstick that magically changes in size from moment to moment and issue to issue, the same sense that makes for such wrong-headed political analyses such as that it is better to make sure poor people in the third world have no job and income than it is to let them be Exploited, or that it is better to let people suffer under the Taliban than to Not Have Peace, and that to make these observations is to be a war-monger and a fascist oppressor.

    It’s quite common to not just blindly consume, but to blindly consume opinion, whatever the flavor.

    And this.

    And this:

    MICHAEL MOORE INVITES ME TO COME STAY WITH HIM INDEFINITELY!: I assume he does, anyway. He is, unsurprisingly, unfamiliar with the concept of “staying longer than invited” or “renting for a specific time period.”

    […]

    This seems straightforward, doesn’t it? Michael’s take when, big surprise, police show up to clear the hall after midnight?

    […]

    Apparently his legs had been broken, and he was prevented from leaving the hall he no longer rented — which presumably had to pay maintenence people — you know, those working class people he professes to care about? — to stand around to wait before they could clean and reset the place and turn out the lights and go home — and he was unable to go outside to autograph.

    No, wait!

    […]

    Etc. So we learn that Michael Moore has no idea what it felt like to be in a “banana republic” (perhaps he might read Jacobo Timmerman’s account of being tortured) or in East Berlin in the Stasi days.

    I’m sure someone somewhere will post about his “heroic” actions here in “resisting” and “speaking the truth no one can speak in America” and yadda yadda yadda, since that’s what he posts about himself, in between implying that he’s the only author in America to not have his publisher pay for him to go everywhere he’d like to go and to not always find his book in a store.

    […]

    Moore used to have some funny things to say about corporate indifference. Nowadays he’s all about promoting himself as a Hero for Speaking Up. I have the funny view that sitting on your ass, like he, or me, or any other blogger or writer not actually taken away by squads and tortured, aren’t actually at all, in the least, in the slightest, one iota, one teeny-tiny, itsy-bitsy, nano quantum particle sized bit “heroic,” for speaking their mind, particularly when the “price” they pay is to be quite well-paid and have huge numbers of people agree with them.

    Michael Moore is precisely as “heroic” as Bernard Goldberg, or Ted Rall, or David Horowitz. No more, no less, which is to say: not one scintilla.

    We’ve seen lots of people in recent times being real heros: risking their lives, saving people’s lives; we see plenty of other heros in ordinary professions: doctor, nurse, firefighter, soldier, maybe even Peace Corp volunteer in some circumstances.

    Shooting your mouth off, like I do, be it by keyboard, camera, drawing pad, lyric, musical instrument, or whatever the means of expression, isn’t heroic. Not unless you’re in a country that actually takes people away to a Gulag archipelago or cell for what they write.

    It’s a very misguided sense of values that confusedly thinks expressing one’s opinion to vast popularity in America is heroic. Even if one, shock, horror, doesn’t support the President. Or says the nasty about him. Here, watch: George Bush stole the election!

    Bring me my medal, Jeeves.

    I have made 46 posts in total criticizing Michael Moore.

    But, gosh, I sure am unwilling to critize leftists, because I’m so intellectually dishonest and “unwilling” to “critize” those on my alleged “team.”

    Incidentally, for six years, this was prominently on the sidebar of my blog:

    Farber’s Second Fundamental of Blogging:
    The more interested you are in scoring a “point” for a political “team,” a “side,” than in exploring the validity or value of an idea, the less interested I am in what you’re saying.

    My favorite comment on this thread, by the way: “The interesting question is this one: why the bile and anger from that left-leaning blog?”

    Thanks to all for demonstrating constrasting courtesy, presumptions of good faith, and lack of bile and anger.

    Have a nice week.

    Gary Farber (a05202)

  57. I’m sure it doesn’t mean much, but you can count on a couple fewer page views per day.

    Your choice. Frankly, I don’t even understand your point, OCSteve. Is it that it is always wrong to criticize hilzoy?? Because she was indeed wrong — even Farber eventually admitted that. Her error unfairly tarred my reputation. I said it’s not worth writing her off — which makes me more charitable than she was in her post. I don’t even understand what you’re trying to say.

    As for Farber, I made my points clear about him on the other thread, in comments which he evidently hasn’t read yet. Bottom line: it was a totally avoidable argument that he started with unnecessary sarcasm, for which he has now apologized, and which apology I have accepted.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  58. I see, however, that OCSteve has adopted hilzoy’s ethic: if you write a single post I don’t like, I will write you off forever.

    At least I understood what hilzoy’s beef was.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  59. Is it that it is always wrong to criticize hilzoy??

    Not at all. I’ve criticized her plenty myself, in comments to her posts. Many, many times over years…

    I have to admit that I normally like your style – very sarcastic and hard hitting. I just found that it totally pissed me off when applied to people I think very highly of.

    Call me a hypocrite or worse. I cop to it. But these are folks who are important to me.

    OCSteve (492222)

  60. Its a shame then, OCSteve, that they don’t live up to your opinion of them.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  61. The other day I praised hilzoy as a level-headed blogger who manages to disagree with opponents while refraining from nasty, baseless attacks.

    I don’t know who hilzoy is, but if he or she is a leftwinger, neurotically fixated on the need to have comprehensive healthcare throughout America — and therefore, probably also neurotically fixated on the need to end global warming and get US troops out of Iraq, etc — why would you have given him/her any benefit of the doubt in the first place?

    So many of these liberals are so confident that their philosophy makes them somehow so beautiful, compassionate, heartfelt, loving, warm, generous and benevolent, while, at the same time, they’re also so ass-backwards in accurately assessing the good and bad in people and situations, you shouldn’t be surprised if they’re the first ones who’ll stab you in the back when you turn around.

    Mark (411533)

  62. OCSteve, hilzoy included me among a group of people who are totally not to be taken seriously — based on a mistake she made. Applying her logic, I could say you are not to be taken seriously because she made a mistake. If I advanced that thesis seriously, how would you feel?

    If you don’t like my tone in responding to her careless slur, it’s your right not to read. But I think I handled it appropriately. I certainly was not unfair to her, as she was to me.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  63. Farber – Your defense of hilzoy, and baseless claims against Patterico tell us all we need to know about you. Kudos for criticizing Michael Moore. That is about the equivalent of being against genocide, really going out on a limb there. Also good to know that you have disagreed with hilzoy about romance novels. You are a brave man.

    JD (d71a7a)

  64. Oh, and if you doubt I have been a regular reader search your logs. I know you know how. I greatly enjoyed the whole Greenwald sock-puppet thing. I have had a new ISP since January, but you can find my old IP by my handle.

    I’ll retract my statement that I won’t read you anymore. I do appreciate your work here. But man this post pissed me off.

    OCSteve (492222)

  65. Did it piss you off because hilzoy was so wrong, or by how disingenuous people like cleek and Farber were towards Patterico in the comments @ hilzoy’s?

    JD (d71a7a)

  66. I’m sure it doesn’t mean much, but you can count on a couple fewer page views per day.

    Comment by OCSteve

    O just love it when fake lifelong Republicans threaten to go away and hold their breath until you do something silly that they want done.

    Mike K (90939b)

  67. OCSteve,

    Why in the world would I doubt your assertion that you have been a regular reader? I take you at your word.

    I still don’t understand what your problem with my post is. Maybe I can ask some targeted questions to suss out the problem:

    1. Do you agree with me and Gary Farber that hilzoy incorrectly accused me of repeating a falsehood?

    2. Do you agree with me that, on the basis of her error, she argued that I (and several other bloggers) completely lack credibility and can be safely written off as a joke?

    3. Assuming the answers to 1 and 2 are yes, would you be upset if someone claimed you are an intellectually dishonest joke of a blogger based on someone else’s writings that they mistook for your own?

    4. With all that in mind, can you point me to the specific quotes in my post that you believe were an inappropriately harsh response to someone calling me a sloppy joke of a blogger based on their own mistake?

    Patterico (a9cf92)

  68. Farber is too infatuated with the sound of his own words which distracted him to the point where he could not figure out who wrote a damn post. Either he is stupid, or dishonest. Or both. At any rate, the dissembling and sophostry Senor Farber displyed in the comments over there were epic. Bridget did a fine job of shredding him, and Patterico preicted the likely outcome from the beginning. He only “apologized” after he had already had his arse served to him on a silver platter.

    JD (d71a7a)

  69. I get annoyed when people write endless lengthy comments in a faux-polite tone, packed to the brim with false assumptions and strawmen. I am far from underemployed and I don’t have time to respond to each bullshit strawman and falsehood. Enough to declare the entire enterprise a waste of time.

    This is a reminder, however, of why I don’t like commenting at OW. The experience is ruined by one catty person with far too much time on his hands and far too little self-restraint.

    Patterico (bc86f8)

  70. I am still curious what pissed OCsteve off about this …

    I have to admit that Fary Garber’s mendoucheity amused me, and many a bon mot will be made of that fellow. When I see a Leftist spinning I will ask myself “what would fary garber do?”.

    JD (d71a7a)

  71. 57: “…and which apology I have accepted.”

    Followed by 69.

    As I wrote at Obsidian Wings:

    […] But while I’m repeating myself unnecessarily, I’ll conclude by repeating again to Patterico, in the spirit of, and in honor of, Hilzoy: I’d like to conclude our exchange by sincerely thanking you for your own generosity of spirit in attempting to defuse this.

    Feel free to lend a hand here.

    In that spirit, I’m refraining from commenting further on anything else said here.

    Gary Farber (a05202)

  72. The biggest irony of this is that Patterico, DRJ, and Karl are unfailingly fair to Leftists, often to a fault, and will bend over backwards to have a good-faithed discussion with them. The Leftists never seem to understand that.

    JD (d71a7a)

  73. I looked at Farber’s blog and it is so depressing to me that the left has no clue about how to reform healthcare. I doubt anything will pass this session because Obama and the moderate Democrats are on a collision course. The sad part is that there are things that could be done to moderate the cost problem but they involve market mechanisms and the left cannot admit that markets work.

    If you look at centrist blogs like Megan McArdles,’ and look at the comments about what people are concerned about, you can see the makings of a reform.

    What most people want, and what young people should have, is a catastrophic coverage policy that does not cover routine care. That would not be that expensive to buy. Especially for the young. If they had that coverage, a huge portion of the cost shifting would be gone.

    Anyway, the left is not going to solve the problem and they may create a worse problem if left in control.

    Mike K (90939b)

  74. Hilzoy writes that he/she/it started blogging in 2002 b/c madness engulfed certain pockets of Pro-Iraq-War crowd who were smearing Anti-War Americans by calling them terrorist supporters.

    Name one. If we had a dollar for ever claim of “they called me a terrorist sympathizer” minus evidence of that actually happening, we could put a dent in Obama’s deficit. I’m quite sure there are internet yahoos who say all sorts of things & I’m sure that this would be the ONLY evidence someone could put forth, but…..well, we’ve had eight years of claims & it would be nice to see some of these poor folks who were actually called terrorist supporters.

    My guess is that hilzoy, who thinks that 9.4% unemployment, a trillion deficit & the same two wars are okay now that black Jesus from Telepromptereth is in power, is pulling stuff from internet comments sections and running. You know, the honest stuff she expects from her superiors (chose that word intentionally, hilzoy).

    Cam Winston (96ec19)

  75. I still don’t understand what your problem with my post is.

    Look dude. I like you. I have read you for years. I have cited your work many times. I think you are in the top tier of bloggers. But when you get a bone in your mouth you don’t let go. Sometimes I like that, this time, not so much…

    It’s not always logical. There is history between Gary and me, and Hilzoy and me. One event beyond all others binds us together. It crosses any political boundaries. There is history between us too – you as the blogger and me as a long time reader. Free ice cream I know, all the work is on your part, and I take without giving. Pretty silly that I can then turn around and complain huh?

    I ask one tiny favor of you for all those page views – could you take 10 minutes and re-read Hilzoy’s last posts?

    OCSteve (492222)

  76. “But while I’m repeating myself unnecessarily”

    That’s apparently one of Farber’s features and not a bug, as is avoiding the subject, which is why I got ticked off when I read his responses to Patterico.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  77. Þhat really does not explain why you would be pissed off. Hilzoy was way wrong, aggressively so. Fary Garber, cleek, and the crew piled on, brainlessly. Is that what pissed you off?

    JD (d71a7a)

  78. Which posts should we read? The one that Patterico linked to with praise for hilzoy, or the one where hilzoy returned the favor by being aggressively wrong, and stating that Patterico’s credibility can be dismissed out of hand?

    JD (d71a7a)

  79. It’s not always logical. -OCSteve

    Apparently.

    Look, OC, Patterico would be justified in much worse treatment than he dished out in response to an egregious lie that wasn’t just wrong, but contained in a ridiculous overreaction.

    And that’s even if he hadn’t previously reached out to show some attempt for civility across the political divide. And Patterico’s got a long record of being easy on the left, taking all kinds of jerk lefties on his comment section if it will help foster some discussion, etc etc etc.

    Gary is self defeating. I love it! This entire post was amusing red meat, and I’m pleased Gary decided to prolong the fun. Given that this healthcare bill is so awful, convoluted, and being rammed through to America’s horror, I’m glad at least some fun resulted.

    And while it’s too bad things work this way, this is exactly the kind of thing that makes viewers come back for more. OCsteve will be back!

    Juan (bd4b30)

  80. But while I’m repeating myself unnecessarily, I’ll conclude by repeating again to Patterico, in the spirit of, and in honor of, Hilzoy: I’d like to conclude our exchange by sincerely thanking you for your own generosity of spirit in attempting to defuse this.

    Feel free to lend a hand here.

    I already did: by accepting your apology for the unnecessary sarcasm.

    Let’s review. I left a comment on OW which factually stated that hilzoy had made a false accusation about me. Despite the fact that, as I eventually forced you to admit, my comment was accurate, you:

    1. Ignored the point I made in the comment, tha hilzoy had unfairly leveled a false charge against me;

    2. Falsely stated (based on an incorrect assumption) that I had reviewed Karl’s entire post for accuracy;

    3. Falsely claimed that I admitted I never fact-check any posts before publication;

    4. Falsely accused me of denying any responsibility for incorrect claims on my web site;

    5. Misrepresented hilzoy’s claim about me (as a claim that I had failed to fact-check a post, rather than what she claimed, which was that I had “repeated” a false claim);

    6. Mischaracterized my complaint about hilzoy (that I was complaining she had failed to see my update, which was not my complaint);

    7. Engaged in a lengthy and irrelevant tirade about perceived deficiencies in my sidebar, while studiously ignoring that the very post hilzoy had criticized stated in three separate places that it was written by Karl; and

    8. Throughout this breathtaking display of serial dishonesty — yes, dishonesty — addressed me in your characteristic this-is-why-I-was-beaten-as-a-child sneering faux-polite tone (your speaking voice is nasal and high-pitched, isn’t it? how did I guess?).

    After all that, you apologized for . . . being sarcastic. Not for all the other astonishingly dishonest rhetorical devices. Only for sarcasm.

    I accepted your apology, ignoring the fact that you failed to apologize for your most egregious offenses.

    I’d say that was a major concession on my part.

    Your apology for your wrongdoing does not entitle you to an apology from me when I have done nothing wrong. Nor am I required to pretend that I like you. If your apology was tendered as nothing more than an opening gambit in an attempt to extract concessions or apologies from me, then it’s not sincere and you are free to withdraw it.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  81. Did you expect good-faithed discussion from Fary Garber?

    I am still curious about what exactly pissed OCSteve off.

    JD (d71a7a)

  82. I am still curious about what exactly pissed OCSteve off.

    Me too.

    He doesn’t seem to want to address my specific questions, other than to say that he doesn’t like stubbornness when the person I am lambasting is his buddy. It doesn’t seem to have much to do with whether I’m right; I pretty clearly am, and if there were an argument that I’m not, you’d think OCSteve would make it.

    I think it’s a standard defend-your-pal-right-or-wrong reflex. If I’m wrong, maybe OCSteve can tell me so. I wish he’d answer those 4 questions I posed above.

    I’m not angry at him, just puzzled.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  83. not a child with a lick a sense don’t know last thing he need of a Sunday evening is Mr. Patterico layin’ a #9 upside his head I think

    happyfeet (c75712)

  84. Did you expect good-faithed discussion from Fary Garber?

    He displays the characterist Glenn Greenwald tactic: he lies and distorts, and then if you get angry, he strikes a pose of civility, bats his eyes, and with a million (insincere) pleases and thankses, wonders why in the world you’re so upset.

    I list his numerous dishonest tactics in the lengthy comment above. Since I don’t do dishonesty, I can’t and won’t fight fire with fire, leaving me with no recourse other than to document the dishonesty and write him off as a result.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  85. “Maybe it is just me but my father taught me to dis-trust all people in power regardless of whether you agree with them or not. The laws of self interest trump all and power corrupts.

    These morons who now see roses and champagne at every turn of this douche bag Presidency make me wanna puke with their absolute stupidity.”

    Your Dad’s a smart man.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  86. “as I eventually forced you to admit”

    How you think you “forced” me to do anything, I can only attempt to imagine.

    But I’ll take that as your final word on all this for now. Maybe someday you’ll reconsider, maybe not. I always try to think the best of people, if they give me any opportunity at all to.

    And just as I haven’t bothered to leap into refuting all the other accusations and insults and ad hominems made here about me, I’ll leave you with whatever final word you wish to have, be it your comment #80, or something further. I’m sorry we couldn’t come to a better mutual understanding on this exchange. Be well.

    Gary Farber (a05202)

  87. or, not

    happyfeet (c75712)

  88. I could understand if OCSteve was pissed @ hilzoy or Fary Garber, but not Patterico.

    JD (d71a7a)

  89. “I doubt anything will pass this session because Obama and the moderate Democrats are on a collision course. ”

    Please … don’t get our hopes up.

    I am convinced that if Obama declared the Congress would instantly disband for the term and go out of session, the reccession would end and the stock market would rise 10% and people would be amazed at the ‘comeback of America’…

    No man is safe while Congress is in session.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  90. I always try to think the best of people, if they give me any opportunity at all to.

    Yeah, that’s why you made a series of false assumptions and accusations about me as I documented above. Your politeness is a thin smear over your innate nastiness, and anyone with the weakest bullshit detector (even with old batteries and a short in the circuits) can see that.

    Give me someone who is honest and direct over the faux-polite bullshit any day of the week.

    You are full of shit. With that, I bid you a very good day indeed and hope you have a very pleasant week.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  91. Fary Garber’s #86 is brilliant insofar as it confirmed Patterico’s #84. Thank you for that.

    JD (d71a7a)

  92. Is there a civil and honest lefty blog ? I used to think Kevin Drum was pretty honest (wrong but that is not the issue) but haven’t seen any evidence of honesty since.

    Mike K (90939b)

  93. “In that spirit, I’m refraining from commenting further on anything else said here.”

    And now Gary cannot deny that he’s a liar.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  94. Patterico, the famous “be well” snark is almost always objectionable. It’s pretty clear that it suggests a judgement that the person to whom it is delivered is unbalanced and irrational.

    Instead of the more mature “agree to disagree” approach.

    It’s an insult. Of course, the person who delivers that business usually scoffs and feigns great hurt over such an implication. But the last few times I have researched people who use that little bon mot, I have found that they themselves object, specifically, to that kind of approach.

    Hypocrites.

    Eric Blair (acade1)

  95. Patterico – You have to be psychic, as your #84 perfectly described Fray Garber, and the poofter came along to confirm it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    JD (d71a7a)

  96. Comment by Eric Blair — 7/19/2009 @ 6:40 pm

    I use it all the time Eric and have for years. Just sayin’ (I use that one all the time too 😉 )

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  97. Patterico:

    “…Throughout this breathtaking display of serial dishonesty — yes, dishonesty — addressed me in your characteristic this-is-why-I-was-beaten-as-a-child sneering faux-polite tone (your speaking voice is nasal and high-pitched, isn’t it? how did I guess?)….”

    Ouch. That’s going to leave a mark.

    On the other hand, it does support one of my theories about many of the “tough guy” or “twee” Keyboard Kommandos I see on blogs.

    I wonder who was selected last for softball teams in middle school? It’s good to know that I wasn’t the very last one picked, after all.

    Eric Blair (acade1)

  98. The difference, Stashiu, is that you are honest and a non-douchebag, as opposed to the dishonest douchenozzle refernced above ;-). Just sayin’ …

    JD (d71a7a)

  99. “Give me someone who is honest and direct over the faux-polite bullshit any day of the week.”

    So true. And he probably did it with a smile on his face.

    PatAZ (9d1bb3)

  100. Stashiu, I should retract the comment. I have seen nasty little people use the expression as an insult, and it colors my thinking.

    It does not follow that everyone who uses that expression does so in a passive aggressive way.

    I apologize to you directly, and anyone else who uses that expression honestly.

    Eric Blair (acade1)

  101. I ask one tiny favor of you for all those page views – could you take 10 minutes and re-read Hilzoy’s last posts?

    Had already read them, just re-read them.

    The one I criticize in this post does not live up to the principles expressed in the other posts.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  102. I am a vet, a conservative, and a great admirer of RR.

    Wait, you left out some things – aren’t you also a concerned Christian voter?

    I was a Republican until the party went totally off the rails.

    And how did this occur? Lots of talk, but no substance. Please detail your many grievances.

    You know what? I was wrong.

    OK

    You were wrong. Our side was just plain wrong.

    Projection is also your middle name. And don’t presume to ever speak for others here – if you were a regular reader, you’d never make that assumption in the first place. Consider yourself outed as another Moby and beclowned.

    live with that.

    Ohhh, snap! Witty repartee is unfortunately not your style. Better work on that weakness in the future.

    Dmac (e6d1c2)

  103. No worries my friends, and no offense taken. I don’t think I’ve ever used it as snark, but I’ve seen it done as you mentioned. My snark is usually more aggressive and a response to dishonest comments. I delete far more than I post… even the ones to Cyrus or Thomas Jackson.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  104. #43, IMDW, Basic health care includes normal wellness screening for cancer. If you happen to get cancer, and if it happens to be life threatening, then the the Gov.t Policy kicks in to cover remediation and therapy.

    Not sure what bizarre straw-man you erected to debate the point but to a health care pro it is pretty straight forward.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  105. Patterico – of course they have to ‘write you off’.

    Hilzoy and friends can’t debate your arguments, as they’ve more than demonstrated here.

    There’s a reason they’re panicked that people might be reading your site. If their criticisms were justified in any way, they’d be able to supply evidence.

    You address the incredible weakness and corruption evident in this current administration, the Democratic Party and the left in general.

    Their system doesn’t work, and they’re terrified that people will recognize that it is they that have lost all credibility from supporting the current corrupt frauds in our government.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  106. #85, My father is a great man. A self made man and a decent person to the core. A child of poverty, servitude, abuse and cruelty that few know of. Yet he never stopped fighting and he was never a cruel or abusive man.

    He taught himself to read and write as well as math. He taught himself history. He bailed his family out of two dead end countries with sacrifice and hard work. He never stole. He never worked the system.

    He would take the Bus and Subway by waking up at 1:00am and work on his feet till 4 or 5 pm in order to earn some overtime. No car because we could not afford it. Couldn’t afford it because he had to pay out-of-pocket for my birth and all its medical complications that my mother went through. And if that would be it, but there was much more about it.

    To this day I live in awe my father.

    No complaints either because he was just so happy to be in the USA. He was happy to be to move ahead with his own efforts. I am so proud to be his son. If I can be half the man to my sons that he was to me, I can die satisfied.

    HeavenSent (641cde)

  107. Someone started a blog to save the world from the lyin’, cheatin’ neocons and I only hear about them just after he/she/it has once again retreated into noble obscurity.

    Thank God for small favors.

    Irish Rabble (9838d9)

  108. I went back and looked again at the Drum/Armed Liberal exchange that I had described as a “slander” by Drum, and it doesn’t look like Marc (AL) was as peeved as I had remembered him being. So forget what I said about Drum — at least the part about being “wary” of him.

    Patterico (117e49)

  109. It is smart to always be wary of Fary Garber.

    JD (5b6053)

  110. […] x2: Given that the point made in the update is one of some controversy, here’s a little more about the relevant provisions of the House bill: Two main bills are […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Obamacare: The mask is off (e4ab32)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4420 secs.