Patterico's Pontifications

2/10/2010

The Three Liberal Stooges: Brad Friedman, Eric Boehlert, and Marcy Wheeler

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:15 pm

Did you know that you can “pose” as a pimp without dressing like one?

Can someone explain that to Brad Friedman of the “BRADBLOG”? And to his oafish sidekicks Marcy Wheeler and Eric Boehlert?

Three Stooges
Above: Brad Friedman, Eric Boehlert, and Marcy Wheeler

Friedman has not one, not two, but three lengthy screeds complaining that the New York Times should correct a “suggestion” that James O’Keefe wore his pimp costume inside the ACORN offices:

In short, the Times suggested in an article a week ago Sunday — and at least seven others prior to it, all published after the release of the former MA Attorney General’s report — that O’Keefe was wearing his infamous pimp outfit inside the offices of ACORN while speaking to employees in his now-infamous hit videos. In actuality, according to the December 7th report by AG Scott Harshbarger, in direct contradiction to the Times reporting, he was not.

Note how slippery this is. First Friedman says the Times merely “suggested” O’Keefe wore the pimp costume in the offices. Well, if the report by “AG Scott Harshbarger” (actually a former AG) stood in “direct contradiction” to the New York Times‘s reporting, then the Times must have done more than “suggest” this.

But, of course, they didn’t. Friedman provides no quotes from any news outlet directly asserting that O’Keefe wore the pimp get-up inside the ACORN offices. Here’s what the New York Times actually wrote:

Mr. O’Keefe is a conservative activist who gained fame last year by posing as a pimp and secretly recording members of the community group Acorn giving him advice on how to set up a brothel.

You can “pose” as a pimp without dressing like one. Look up the definition if you don’t believe me.

And “posing as a pimp” is precisely what O’Keefe did. Yet Friedman writes a huge, several-thousand-word post wailing about the New York Times‘s failure to “correct” something that they never got wrong.

Naturally, dopey ol’ Eric Boehlert walks right into this one:

Go read the BradBlog for a truly eye-opneing [Yes, he wrote "eye-opneing." Stand in awe of the Soros-funded copy editors! -- P] encounter the blogger had with a Times standards editor after the blogger pressed for an ACORN/O’Keefe-related correction. Specifically, Brad Friedman urged the paper to correct its erroneous reports that suggested O’Keefe, when making his undercover ACORN clips, entered the ACORN offices dressed outlandishly as a pimp.

According to an independent investigation into the ACORN matter, that claim is not true. (i.e. “He was dressed like a college student – in slacks and a button down shirt.”) But the Times, like lots of news outlets, has made that dressed-as-a-pimp assertion again and again.

Uh, no, dopey. The Times hasn’t.* Nor have the other outlets cited by Friedman. These outlets have made the “O’Keefe posed as a pimp” claim. And that claim is true, because if you have seen the tapes, that’s exactly what O’Keefe did.

Friedman doesn’t seem to realize that, of course. In his screed the third, he credulously repeats this nonsense from Kevin Whelan, ACORN’s Minister of Lies Communication Director, who makes this outlandish and easily disproved claim:

“In fact,” he continued, “the transcripts posted on biggovernment.com themselves reveal that O’Keefe presented himself as Giles boyfriend not her pimp – his scam involved a story about rescuing her from a violent pimp. So it would not have made sense for him to wear the costume, even within the fictional scenario he presented.”

Uh, except that O’Keefe most assuredly did present himself as a pimp. Specifically, as a pimp willing to run a house of child prostitution. This is apparent to anyone who has even the slightest passing familiarity with this scandal.

Friedman also repeats lies told by ACORN in Philly:

In the video (seen at right), Russell explains what happened when O’Keefe and his partner Hannah Giles — seen dressed similarly to a prostitute in the edited videos from other cities where O’Keefe carried out his campaign — came in for an interview in her office. “They never said that she [Giles] was a prostitute, and he was not dressed in any usually flashy manor,” Russell explains.

Uh, that’s “manner.” Anyway, that’s an easily provable lie, as Friedman should know by now:

OK, now on to Marcy Wheeler. Her post is titled NYT Thinks TeaBugger James O’Keefe Entitled to Own Set of Facts. And she says . . . wait. What is that term? “Teabugger”? Oh, I get it. It’s like “tea bagger” — only the word “bugger” is substituted . . . a reference to O’Keefe’s “bugging,” which it’s now clear he did not do. So it’s a joke name based on a lie. Which tells you all you need to know about Marcy Wheeler.

Anyway, Wheeler sez:

Brad Friedman lays out an entire exchange that, first, one of their readers, and then Brad Friedman himself had with the NYT, attempting to get them to either correct or back up the claim that O’Keefe dressed as a pimp.

Except that, again, the paper never made that claim in the way (at least in the way that Wheeler means, if you read her post).

Also, all three bloggers repeatedly refer to a supposedly “independent” report by a guy paid by ACORN, which makes various findings totally at odds with the unedited audio that the report (and all three bloggers) refuse to acknowledge even exists. (Did you know there is unedited audio? In all the whining about the lack of unedited video, did anyone ever bother to tell you that you can listen to the full unedited audio of these visits? It’s true! Click the link if you don’t believe me.)

In short, these three are pathetic hacks.

Seriously: if Brad Friedman, Eric Boehlert, and Marcy Wheeler are the best liberalism has to offer, we conservatives have nothing to worry about.

*In context, this statement is a refutation of the claim that Friedman’s evidence backs up his assertions. However, Boehlert has since dug up other apparent instances where the New York Times did appear to suggest that O’Keefe wore the get-up inside the offices. This actually makes ACORN’s case worse, as it removes any argument that they didn’t take O’Keefe seriously due to his ridiculous costume.

75 Responses to “The Three Liberal Stooges: Brad Friedman, Eric Boehlert, and Marcy Wheeler”

  1. You’d think Boehlert would get this since he poses as a journalist regardless of how he’s dressed.

    Andy Levy (8b47aa)

  2. actually, we have to worry about the public that is so dumbbed down that they think these cretins and the rest of the MFM are purveyors of reliable information.

    that is the real problem.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  3. So it’s a joke name based on a lie. Which tells you all you need to know about Marcy Wheeler.

    It’s true. She uses childish nicknames for all her targets and her blog reads like a 5th-grader writes it.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  4. Boehlert and Wheeler and the rest are licking their wounds over Briertbart big time and are jonesing for revenge in the form of any right-wing retraction they can get. It’s so pathetic, they’re resorting to made up errors.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  5. Patterico: Since you’re dinging their spelling errors, you may want to correct your third-to-the-last paragraph: Did you know these is unedited audio?

    aunursa (a1573d)

  6. The left firmly believes in the adage about telling a lie often enough…..and it usually works for them. Palin seeing Russia from her home, Bush claiming Iraq carried out the 9/11 attack….I could go on and on, but I’m sure obama will be supplying one falsehood this very day.

    J (2946f2)

  7. Brad Friedman is, for those who don’t know, the most vociferous . . . alarmist . . . claiming that President Bush somehow stole the 2004 election. His kool-aid is so seriously spiked that even the craziest of the leftists won’t touch it.

    The snowed in Dana (3e4784)

  8. So now we know where timmah gets his talking points. He was screeching this same drivel in the last couple days.

    JD (bdb93b)

  9. the thing about friedman, and so many like him, is that he probsbly believes everything he says. he got his ideology from the school systems of america. feminism has totally screwed up his ability to reason from a position of cognizance. unfortunately there are millions out there just like him. think megan mccain and marcy wheeler as two low brow examples.

    don welch (783369)

  10. Heathers strike again!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  11. when I clicked your link yesterday, I then clicked through to this `Bradblog’ place.

    I started reading through the very entry you are critiquing here.

    I began to scratch my head: the point of all of this verbiage is that the NYT stated that OKeefe dressed as a pimp… when he didn’t (just how does one `dress as a pimp’ anyway?).

    And this is relevant to what, exactly?

    I then thought: this is the level of desparation leftist bloggers have reached about this matter, that they need to go nuts – writing an entry that long about this surely qualifies as psychotic.

    R.B. Glennie (32bede)

  12. aunursa:

    I saw that last night and “fixed” it within 5 minutes of publication. I guess the fix somehow didn’t take.

    My Soros-funded editors are falling down on the job.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  13. Weird, jd, because I don’t read bradblog.

    I do, however, read biggovernment.com transcripts on occasion….well, okay, that’s an exaggeration, I’ve only read the one I’ve read today. Maybe I can read the others later, if Patterico needs more proof that listening to Andy ain’t helping his credibility. Nonetheless, since there’s no link to the transcript here in this post I googled “transcripts posted on biggovernment.com” from this here page and the first hit is to O’Keefe’s Baltimore journey….where he tells Shira on page 2 and 3 that he is Giles’s boyfriend; that he will attending graduate school at John Hopkins. On page 4, he’s running for student government and can’t let anyone know about Kenya. On page 5, he’s running for Congress after law school.

    Page 7 features O’Keefe saying he’s trying to get her place where she can work without the “other guy targeting her.” At no point through this discussion has O’Keefe claimed to be a pimp. All either hase claimed so far is that she doesn’t have any 1099′s for her work. On page 15, he once claims she’s running from an abusive pimp.

    I’d love to detail all 46 pages for you guys, since none of you, including Patrick, are interested in reading it, but I made my point: O’Keefe’s claim to be a pimp is not one he made in all his videos. It’s an outlandish claim he made so chuckleheads in the media would broadcast his tapes.

    I’d say y’all owe an apology to the people who actually researched this, but, hey, we’re all grown ups here and we know the Party of No doesn’t apologize!

    We now return you to Patterico’s frantic defense of O’Keefe. We can only hope James’s defense counsel works this hard…

    timb (449046)

  14. Hey, Rb, O’Keefe spliced pictures of himself outside the offices of Acorn buildings into the edited videos with the dishonest implication that he wore those crazy outfits inside. It’s prima facie evidence, according to those liberal bloggers, that his videos are grossly edited and intended to mislead us almost as much as he lied to the ACORN people.

    timb (449046)

  15. timb,

    I can go you one better. I have listened to the unedited Baltimore audio. You know: the audio that people like you pretend doesn’t exist.

    If I prove you wrong, what prize do I get? You go away? You abjectly admit you were wrong?

    Would it be too much to hope for both?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  16. @ timb -

    *I do, however, read biggovernment.com transcripts on occasion….well, okay, that’s an exaggeration, I’ve only read the one I’ve read today. Maybe I can read the others later, if Patterico needs more proof that listening to Andy ain’t helping his credibility*

    Which is an interesting admission `timb’.

    You will prove that Okeefe never claimed to be a pimp… when you get around to actually reading the transcripts, which you admit haven’t read before in full, and you didn’t read at all before today…

    See what I mean by desperation…

    R.B. Glennie (32bede)

  17. *Hey, Rb, O’Keefe spliced pictures of himself outside the offices of Acorn buildings into the edited videos with the dishonest implication that he wore those crazy outfits inside. It’s prima facie evidence, according to those liberal bloggers, that his videos are grossly edited and intended to mislead us almost as much as he lied to the ACORN people.*

    And you know this, how, Timb?

    by reading the transcripts that you admit you haven’t read yet?

    R.B. Glennie (32bede)

  18. The creepy ones never really go away, Patterico.

    JD (1500d2)

  19. timb:

    There is too a link to the transcripts. All of them. Click the link to “unedited audio” and you’ll find a link to all the ACORN resources. Unedited audio, full transcripts, etc.

    It’s all there.

    Now, let me patiently repeat the claim I made in the post.

    O’Keefe most assuredly did present himself as a pimp. Specifically, as a pimp willing to run a house of child prostitution.

    That’s my claim. Read it over, as many times as you need to. There’s no shame in moving your lips if you need to. It’s the Internet; we’re not watching.

    OK. Done?

    Am I wrong?

    Did O’Keefe not present himself as a pimp willing to run a house of child prostitution?

    Let’s find out how far on that little limb you’re willing to climb.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  20. I think the Three Stooges would be insulted by being compared to those guys.

    Peter (ca0268)

  21. “actually, we have to worry about the public that is so dumbed down that they think these cretins and the rest of the MFM are purveyors of reliable information.

    that is the real problem.”

    Comment by redc1c4 — 2/10/2010

    Indeed.

    GeneralMalaise (4d34a1)

  22. I’m with Peter on this one. This is an insulting comparison to the Three Stooges who provided some good slapstick humor.

    I wanted to suggest the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” but that connotes wisdom, so I had to rule that one out.

    The triplets you mention serve no useful purpose, unless by bad example where you can point to them as parent showing your children what not to be.

    Tex Taylor (2d3775)

  23. Ah, yes, Brad Friedman. The last time I thought about that guy is when I busted him on his ransom note of a blog for lending credence to the idea that Glenn Beck & Michele Bachmann were responsible for instigating the “murder” of Census worker Bill Sparkman (who, as we know now, hanged himself and tried to make it look like murder for the sake of his adopted children’s insurance policies).

    L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5)

  24. Hey, Rb, O’Keefe spliced pictures of himself outside the offices of Acorn buildings into the edited videos with the dishonest implication that he wore those crazy outfits inside. It’s prima facie evidence, according to those liberal bloggers, that his videos are grossly edited and intended to mislead us almost as much as he lied to the ACORN people.

    Comment by timb — 2/11/2010 @ 6:53 am

    For the sake of argument, timbo, let’s say that we could prove that assertion — O’Keefe WASN’T dressed in that outlandish outfit with as seen on the video, and nobody in the office could just look at the guy and , “He’s dressed like he’s a pimp.”

    OK? Ready, now?

    (((Lewis Black mode)))

    What’s their excuse for not figuring it out AFTER HE TOLD THEM HE WAS A PIMP????!!!111

    L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5)

  25. It just never ceases to amaze me. These people are worse than clueless, they’re just short of criminal. They have only one goal: Make their opponents seem hideously loathsome, regardless of the truth.

    It’s not enough to say that O’Keefe may have broken the law, they have to drop little bread crumbs leading the gullible and uninformed to baseless accusations of bigotry and murderous intent. I can’t imagine the acidity of the bile in the mouths of people who perpetrate these sort of attacks.

    L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5)

  26. ah, timb making up stuff. In other news, dog bites man.

    SPQR (8475fc)

  27. Graham, Leach and Bliley are the Three Stooges that brought us our conservative manufactured Great Recession (see Graham Leach Bliley Act). But sure, go on obsessing on ACORN and manufacturing your outright lies. The corporate plan to rule America? – divide and conquer through social wedge issues.

    How any middle class american could support conservative politics is mind boggling. They are the most economically ignorant group on the planet.

    [note: fished from spam filter. --Stashiu]

    sam (41f5cb)

  28. I picture timb as the Mayo character in “An Officer and Gentleman” after the Lou Gosset character kicked the crap out of him and Mayo screaming that he has no where else to go.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  29. [...] so when Patterico thinks he’s caught me in a lie because I persist in describing four pathetic overgrown boys who [...]

    Patterico Confirms NYT Owes Its Readers a Correction | No Bull. news service. (ef0eb9)

  30. dude, you really shouldn’t try to take on Marcy

    in that battle of wits, you are definitely UNARMED

    james okeefe is a lying shit, and you shouldn’t waste your credibility on him

    the acorn tapes are a fraud against America

    james okeefe is on his way to being a federal felon

    and you are on your way to the trash bin of history

    Marcy is SMART

    you, not so much

    go read up on the definition of “bugger” you little fool

    and then consider if you want a rematch

    but you would be well advised to cease and desist

    it don’t pay to try challenging my Muse. She’ll leave ya on the intellectual killing floor

    freepatriot (9c8639)

  31. (Did you know there is unedited audio? In all the whining about the lack of unedited video, did anyone ever bother to tell you that you can listen to the full unedited audio of these visits? It’s true! Click the link if you don’t believe me.)

    no, I didn’t KNOW there was “unedited audio”

    but I know what the word means, and more importantly, what that IMPLIES

    when you specifically reference UNALTERED AUDIO, we can assume we’re talking about EDITED AUDIO

    and since the charges against okeefe revolve around EDITED AUDIO, I’ll take your choice of words to be an admission of guilt

    james okeefe altered the audio on the acorn tapes

    btw, did you know that submitting altered videos in a court case is a crime ???

    still want to defend okeefe now, since you admitted that he is a fraud ???

    can’t wait to see the unaltered video

    when ACORN sues okeefe, the game is up, and liars like you will be exposed

    then you’ll be buggered

    freepatriot (bc1c51)

  32. See, the thing is freepatriot, that you really need to hit the caps key at the start of sentences for only that first letter. Also, periods at the end generally note the completion of the statement.

    Just a tip, you’ll seem a little less ranty and bizarre and ee cummings-ish that way (but only a little).

    JSinAZ (ae2d5e)

  33. Sam and freepatriot are devastatingly eloquent. They sure showed you wingNazis.

    JD (bd7f0f)

  34. I cannot hope to adequately express the thrill at seeing how ferociously Patterico is working here to defend the journalistic credibility of The New York Times.

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  35. Good Allah, those 3, and their little lickspittle minions, are mendoucheous.

    JD (bd7f0f)

  36. “How any middle class american could support conservative politics is mind boggling. They are the most economically ignorant group on the planet.”

    Show us on the doll where the middle class touched you, sam.

    JSinAZ (ae2d5e)

  37. What would really provide the coupe de grâce to these clowns is for Patterico to lay out, calmly, and succinctly, what precisely Mister O’Keefe surely intended to accomplish by his editing into his Acorn exposé the several depictions of himself dressed, not as he actually appeared to the workers in the ACCORN offices, but as some sort of OTT MadTV cartoonish archie-type of a pimp.

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  38. NYT: “Their travels in the gaudy guise of pimp and prostitute through various offices of Acorn…”

    Oops.

    ignatov (97cd7d)

  39. ignatov @ 39:

    Sir! (or Madam!) — Do you mean to suggest the words you quote are lifted verbatim from an article published in The New York Times under the name of one of its pre-eminent national security reports, Scott Shane, such as hereinafter linked?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19sting.html?_r=1

    How DARE you suggest such a thing? I fully expect someone here, perhaps even Patterico himself, to arise to smote you and your scurrilous quote back to the lefty moonbatosphere from which you primarily ooze.

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  40. There being no response to the several challenges to the premises of this Patterico post, and the issues having being thoroughly canvassed elsewhere if not here, it hereby is proposed THAT we have witnessed here a clear and mighty example of someone in the acting of hoisting himself on his own petard.

    Excerpted from wikipedia:

    “A petard was a small bomb used to blow up gates and walls when breaching fortifications. The term has a French origin and dates back to the sixteenth century… In a typical implementation, it was commonly either a conical or rectangular metal object containing 5 or 6 pounds of gunpowder, activated with a slow match used as a fuse.

    The word petard comes from the Middle French peter, to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from Latin peditum, from neuter of peditus, past participle of pedere, to break wind; akin to Greek bdein to break wind….

    The word remains in modern usage in the phrase hoist with one’s own petard, which means “to be harmed by one’s own plan to harm someone else” or “to fall into one’s own trap”, literally implying that one could be lifted up (hoist, or blown upward) by one’s own bomb.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petard

    This in turn raises the question of whether the depiction of the comedy troupe at the top of the post applies more aptly to the administration of this blog than to the artificial assemblage of apparently fact-based bloggers at whom it appears Patterico intended to aim his missile.

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  41. Not to distract from the much larger point of the semantic differences between “pose” and “dress”, but all of this huff changes the child-prostitution-enabling behavior of ACORN how, exactly?

    JSinAZ (ae2d5e)

  42. JS – it changes it not one iota. It does prolly prove we are racists.

    JD (e58b12)

  43. This in turn raises the question of whether the depiction of the comedy troupe at the top of the post applies more aptly to the administration of this blog than to the artificial assemblage of apparently fact-based bloggers at whom it appears Patterico intended to aim his missile.
    Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 3:13 pm

    Step 1: Come in and make pointless comments while host is at work.
    Step 2: Continue comments while everyone ignores until a point is made.
    Step 3: Declare victory with pseudo-intellectual lecture on etymology.
    Step 4: ??????
    Step 5: Profit!!!!!

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  44. Slams banking, auto companies, oil companies, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies,……sure am glad he’s not antibusiness.

    Next thing you know he would be taking over auto companies, banking, insurance companies…..OH wait he has done that to 2 out of the 3, and is trying to take over the health insurance industry.

    Damn sure am glad he is just sooooooo pro-business.

    peedoffamerican (44a207)

  45. Damn. Posted this on another thread. Page takes it. And redirected the comment and me to here.

    peedoffamerican (44a207)

  46. [...] had his panties in a crunchy wad last night because, as he foolishly seems to be charging, the New York Times never said O'Keefe "dressed" as a [...]

    The BRAD BLOG : Rightwing Blogger 'Patterico' Whiffs, Hugely, In Attacking Our NYTimes O'Keefe Pimp Reporting (d011b8)

  47. #26 L.N. Smithee:

    It just never ceases to amaze me.

    Me either.

    That is some strange ass trollery up there.

    Is there supposed to be a point to it? Like the one claiming “Marcy is SMART” while demonstrating no smarts of its own?

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  48. Stashiu3, yep. Someone’s making themselves rich! ROFL

    SPQR (26be8b)

  49. Patty -

    Don’t bother to link over to the three posts which now rebut your silly (oh, and inaccurate) arguments. Would hate for your readers to find out that you’ve, um, somewhat misled them and/or failed them. Again.

    Marcy Wheeler’s fact-based rebuttal to this blog item:
    http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/02/11/patterico-confirms-nyt-owes-reader-a-correction/

    Boehlert’s fact-based rebuttal to this blog item:
    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002110029

    And my own:
    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7695

    Now, by all means, DON’T let your readers know about those rebuttals by posting those links as updates. DON’T issue any retractions or corrections in the bargain. And — for God sake — DO NOT issue any apologies!!! They’ll think you’re weak! Only “liberal stooges” and “pathetic hacks” would do that!!!

    Sigh…

    Brad Friedman (ea4d05)

  50. freepatriot sucks Marcy’s toes? That’s just gross!

    Another day, another moronic convergence of angry, retarded libturds.

    I thought Patterico promised us better trolls.

    Was there anything at all worth responding to in those screeds earlier? It didn’t look like it to me.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  51. Excuse me, but is there supposed to be a point to your useless hairsplitting, Friedman?

    I mean, I really don’t give a shit how O’Keefe was dressed. What interests me is that he uncovered a willingness in ACORN offices across the country a willingness to engage in felonious behavior.

    What does it matter if he was wearing a Brooks Brothers or Levi Strauss instead?

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  52. Good grief: I’ve managed to insert an extra three syllable word in my post above.

    I’ve probably gone over my conservative limit of syllables in my daily intellectual allowance.

    And I’m pretty sure JD is racist.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  53. The difference between someone posing as a pimp and dressing like a pimp absolutely absolves ACORN of their collusive behavior. I know I’m convinced.

    JSinAZ (ae2d5e)

  54. Stashiu @ 44:

    You’re saying I haven’t provided sufficient time for Patterico to respond, especially given his day job. Of course, no one else here has hazarded any sort of response, either — least of all, your own good self. Still, according to you, we all can look forward to an expert exhibition of petard removal. It’s like Christmas for petards!

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  55. Avattoir, it would be more impressive if there was actually anything resembling a point in your commentary.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  56. #55 Stashiu3:

    if there was actually anything resembling a point

    I feel better now.

    First, I looked for a point. Then, I looked again, thinking that I missed it the first time. I am pretty sure that I examined it seven ways from Sunday and didn’t find one.

    So then, I looked for something that looked like a point. You know, that had the faintest resemblance. Couldn’t find it.

    Gut if you looked, and couldn’t find it…then I can rest easy that there wasn’t one.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  57. Of course, then I turned around and misattributed a remark made by SPQR to Stash, and I can’t even attribute it to drink.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  58. SPQR -

    Oh ouch. Still, it’s good to see some surge from the local troops, even if it’s just the legless sort:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690

    Avattoir (4ee812)

  59. The Monty Python clip failed to add anything like a point as well.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  60. Avattoir,

    I’m saying exactly what I said, nothing more. When you get to a point, I might have something to add.

    What would really provide the coupe de grâce to these clowns is for Patterico to lay out, calmly, and succinctly, what precisely Mister O’Keefe surely intended to accomplish by his editing into his Acorn exposé the several depictions of himself dressed, not as he actually appeared to the workers in the ACCORN offices, but as some sort of OTT MadTV cartoonish archie-type of a pimp.
    Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 2:02 pm

    Nothing to anyone here except Patterico and why not ask O’Keefe directly instead of conjecture from a third party?

    How DARE you suggest such a thing? I fully expect someone here, perhaps even Patterico himself, to arise to smote you and your scurrilous quote back to the lefty moonbatosphere from which you primarily ooze.
    Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 2:18 pm

    You might stop with the obvious Moby-act, I’ve seen the comments under your old name. To this, you have expectations of people pretty readily for someone who still hasn’t made a point. You’re really going to try and get people to defend a comment by an anonymous drive-by (ignatov hasn’t been here before) and get huffy when nobody takes the bait? Okay, you can try I guess.

    There being no response to the several challenges to the premises of this Patterico post, and the issues having being thoroughly canvassed elsewhere if not here, it hereby is proposed THAT we have witnessed here a clear and mighty example of someone in the acting of hoisting himself on his own petard.
    Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 3:13 pm

    Profit!!!

    Still, according to you, we all can look forward to an expert exhibition of petard removal. It’s like Christmas for petards!
    Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 5:46 pm

    Show where I said anything of the sort. I don’t like words put in my mouth, so a quote will suffice. Can’t do it? Thanks for playing. You might want to reconsider your weight-class… you’re overmatched. You’ll find the pointless discussions at the links in the post.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  61. Patty -

    Oooh, what classic wit and sarcasm – move the hell over, Oscar Wilde!

    Now, by all means, DON’T let your readers know about those rebuttals by posting those links as updates. DON’T issue any retractions or corrections in the bargain. And — for God sake — DO NOT

    You can always tell the quality of the response when it contains a lot of CAPS – DEVASTATING REJOINDERS ARE ALWAYS POSTED IN ALL CAPS!

    Dmac (799abd)

  62. Comment by Avattoir — 2/11/2010 @ 6:00 pm

    Step 6: Distract from lack of real profit!

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  63. If Brad’s posts were organized and comprehensible, it might make the task of tracking who said what to whom a little easier. Instead, he rants on and on and links back to relevant NY Times pieces are found over a series of blog posts.

    Reading through the links it appears the Times did imply in places that O’Keefe wore his pimp regalia into the ACORN offices rather than editing onto the tapes for effect at the beginning and end. Whether a correction is necessary for that minor point is another discussion, since it doesn’t change the substance of the story. There are plenty of innaccuracies in Friedman’s posts worth discussing whether corrections need to be issued rather than just the NY Times.

    Brad says: “But the tapes were, in no small part, a scam. They were, for example, misrepresented as an “ACORN child prostitution investigation” by O’Keefe and Breitbart to this day. They were anything but that.”

    Would including tax and mortgage fraud in addition to child prostitution remove the taint of misrepresentation of what was discussed on the tapes? The risible he was only a boyfriend gambit does not cut it folks. He was going to run for Congress financed by a hooker and wanted to hide the source of the funds.

    Keep talking about the edits too, because what’s on tape just isn’t good enough, or the unedited audio.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  64. Avattoir – What is your native language?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  65. and the issues having being thoroughly canvassed elsewhere if not here,

    Yeah, you really made a…point of some sort. What is the point again?

    Even better are the awesome source quotes from that worldwide authority on all subjects…Winkeypeedia. Not that thousands of entries there ever get edited or posted incorrectly, right? Nah, it’s cred is absolute.

    Dmac (799abd)

  66. Brad Blog…Brad Blog…ah yes.

    I knew it sounded familiar.

    That’s that worthless website where “the most gagged woman in America” Sibil Edmonds went to rant about how the FBI was covering up the TWOOF ABOUT 9-11.

    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5197

    Wow. Some “scoop” that turned out to be, huh?

    Here’s a treaser for this BRAD BLOG EXCLUSIVE, in case you want to engage in a little masochism:

    Everything she hasn’t been allowed to tell since 2002, about the criminal penetration of the FBI where she worked, and at the Departments of State and Defense; everything she heard concerning the corruption and illegal activities of several well-known members of Congress; everything she’s aware of concerning information omitted and/or covered up in relation to 9/11. All of the information gleaned from her time listening to and translating wire-taps made prior to 9/11 at the FBI.

    And don’t forget to note the correction where Brad confused the Senate Intelligence Committee with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    Because Brad places a premium on ACCURACY when he pens his voliminous, circuitous screeds, people. Unlike Patterico, who just makes stuff up, or somthing.

    OOOOOO! Super conspiracy sekerets about 9-11 coverups! When will you get on this, corporate rightwing media?!

    What ever happened to that lunatic, Brad?

    Let us know. And write 15,000 words on it. We’ll all be anxiously awaitin gthe update.

    Good Lt. (7edfb8)

  67. Liberal Journalism 101: If you cannot defend your ideology, argue about the wallpaper.

    Catherine (0e754a)

  68. You’re missing the point. They don’t give a carp about truth or lies — those are irrelevant. What counts is Advancing the Narrative, to convince the deluded peasants that they should allow the Vanguard Party to run their lives for them.

    Mike G in Corvallis (70f47e)

  69. #69 Mike G in Corvallis:

    What counts is Advancing the Narrative, to convince the deluded peasants that they should allow the Vanguard Party to run their lives for them.

    Well, I knew that already.

    What I can’t figger out is, is what the hell the narrative is supposed to be, because I sure can’t tell from the incoherency they’ve demonstrated so far.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  70. He didn’t dress as a pimp, which proves you are a racist. That is all.

    JD (a79cd7)

  71. “What I can’t figger out is, is what the hell the narrative is supposed to be, because I sure can’t tell from the incoherency they’ve demonstrated so far.”

    EW1(SG) – As far as I can tell it’s something along the lines of sure, O’Keefe and Giles discredited and embarrassed the heck out of ACORN and showed them to be a bunch of amoral slimeballs, but nothing the ACORN people did was criminal. What O’Keefe and Giles did was far worse, including potentially illegally wiretapping those ACORN folks, misleading them, editing the videos even though we won’t acknowledge unedited audio is available and that the edited stuff damning enough or say what we claim was edited out, that the videos were publicized in a misleading way because O’Keefe was dressed like Giles’ preppy boyfriend and not her pimp (huh?), blah, blah, blah…………..

    Oh, and you’re a bunch of RAAAAAACISTS!!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  72. That’s more coherency than I could find from Avawhatever.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  73. #72 daleyrocks:

    Oh, and you’re a bunch of RAAAAAACISTS!!!!!!!

    Ah! Got it!

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  74. What is that term? “Teabugger”? Oh, I get it. It’s like “tea bagger” — only the word “bugger” is substituted . . . a reference to O’Keefe’s “bugging,” which it’s now clear he did not do.

    That (teabagger + bug) is the more charitable of two possible readings. Mine (teabag + bugger) is less charitable. Your trolls read it my way, and are proud of it.

    Of course your original point about a bad joke + lie stands under either reading. While a few disingenuous hacks may believe that O’Keefe bugged the place (or that what he did do was morally equivalent to bugging), no one who isn’t a complete retard has ever accused the guy of teabagging small boys. Which, I suspect, is why the retards like that interpretation so much better – and is also why Wheeler probably intended it.

    Xrlq (1cd5bb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5580 secs.