Patterico's Pontifications

3/1/2023

An Invitation to a Certain Sort of Reader: Please Self Deport

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:00 am



Marjorie Taylor Greene — harasser of shooting victims, past proponent of Jewish space laser myths, and close confidant to the GOP Speaker of the House — was busy yesterday doing what a good Trumpist does: shamelessly and repeatedly spouting blatant lies. I won’t repeat them. You can find them if you are interested.

CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale, who is not perfect (no fact checker is), but who is in the right as to the relevant instances I will cite below, called her on these lies. Here were the responses from her spokesmen:

Some will applaud this. Decent people will be disgusted.

Your reaction to the spokesmen’s responses tells me whether I want you here.

I spent years as a media critic of the local paper and am still a media critic when warranted. That said, I deal in facts. Greene here is dealing in lies, and crudely rebuffs any attempt to use facts or logic or evidence.

She does this because there is a market for this behavior.

If you approve of the spokesmen’s responses, you form part of that market. You, personally, are part of the problem.

If if that’s the case, I don’t want you here. Please leave. Self deport. Go.

Bye now.

120 Responses to “An Invitation to a Certain Sort of Reader: Please Self Deport”

  1. Anyone who yuks it up at these responses merits the deepest contempt.

    Patterico (911429)

  2. More common will be the reaction along the lines: “fine, [dismissive and reluctant of acknowledgment that these responses are not ideal] but we have to remember [some other complaint about the media].”

    If this is your reaction, you can stay, but you should recognize that partisanship has broken you. This is not the time or place for your complaints. The issue is Greene’s lies and rude reaction to the people trying to spread the truth. Criticize that and sit down.

    But you can’t, can you?

    You simply can’t handle anything that flies in the face of your partisanship without reflexively trying to make an opposing point. This is the sort of mentality that causes people to make noises about how it’s not good to give arms to Ukraine. Their motives are not rooted in genuine concern, although they believe them to be; if the GOP culture war line were to resolutely support Ukraine, all that concern would melt away. They just don’t like the support for Ukraine because Biden is for it, he might get some credit for being for it, and all their fellow yokels are therefore against it.

    So no matter how clear the morality is, as to the specific example in front of their eyes, they just reflexively have to make the opposite argument.

    Such people are broken and should do some self-reflection.

    Patterico (911429)

  3. I’m going to try not to engage directly with individual people who take issue with me on this. It causes me to be rude and I don’t like it. You now know what I think of you.

    Patterico (911429)

  4. First, there was Trump’s Art of the Deal, which was book-length, and now we have Trump’s Art of the Lie, which can be explained in a few short sentences.

    One, lie as much as you want to get what you want.
    Two, when someone calls out your lies, attack the caller-outer and then double-down.
    Three, never retract and never apologize for all your dishonesty.
    Four, go back to #1.

    This is where my party has gone.

    Paul Montagu (8f0dc7)

  5. Mr. Dyer just got promoted to MTG’s deputy chief of staff with a new salary of around $120,000. Paid by the taxpayers. Money well spent, eh?

    He’s from Cumby, Texas. You don’t suppose he’s related to Beldar? Nah! He couldn’t be.

    nk (bb1548)

  6. Paul @4. Yeah, I was also thinking that Dyer’s act was more of a New York thing than a Southern thing.

    nk (bb1548)

  7. I don’t want to listen to Empty Greene (life is too short). Is her argument that Biden is now doing nothing and that’s murder, or that Biden murdered these kids in 2020?

    Appalled (b72f57)

  8. Also Marge last week:

    “You know, we just heard Mike McCaul, one of my colleagues in Congress, talk about bipartisan support for this war against Russia in Ukraine,” she added.

    The deceitful schtick works because it’s what her people want. She doesn’t formulate opinions based on the facts of an issue, but instead, she manipulates the issue to reinforce her presuppositions and viewpoints. And her supporters eat it up, even when she is proven wrong.

    Dana (1225fc)

  9. i intensely dislike Greene – probably more than I dislike Trump. But frankly – I also don’t really care. There are useful idiots on both sides and Greene is just the GOP version of Maxine Waters, AOC, Tlaib, Pressley, and Omar.

    Perspective man, perspective. Trump has driven you insane.

    I don’t care what you think of me. I find what is posted here interesting from time to time and it’s important to be aware of what people like you, Goldberg, and French are thinking. You add to the conversation even if you sound completely unhinged at times. So I’ll continue lurking.

    yaddamaster (e97841)

  10. Greene has absolute immunity from punishment by McCarthy. She alone represents 25% of the Republican margin in the House, and she alone can call for vote to vacate the chair, and end McCarthy’s speakership; I’m sure other members like Biggs and Gaetz would be more than happy to follow her. McCarthy can do nothing to rein her in.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  11. Patterico, I’ve always liked your writing and I think your current mood would be well informed by some reading (probably re-reading) of HL Mencken for additional inspiration.

    Green’s statements, her spokesperson’s response, and the resonance they both have with her stupid supporters target the real goal of the current GOP; Expressing cultural grievances.

    Rich Lowery captured it well when he explained how Trump (and by extension Green) are a way for their supporters to wave a middle finger at their culture war opponents.

    I think fundraising is a factor also, I expect these vulgar responses resulted in at least a few donations by people happy to see someone from CNN shown disrespect.

    Time123 (36927c)

  12. This is a thread where i wish FWO were able to comment. He did a good job of presenting what’s appealing about ppl like Greene in a way that was somewhat sympathetic. It was a useful perspective in these types of conversations.

    Time123 (36927c)

  13. This is a thread where i wish FWO were able to comment.

    He self-deported.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  14. The hearing clip is not as bad as MTG’s tweet. Using the Finkelman approach to textual analysis, I can see arguing that MTG did not mean to suggest that Biden murdered these two kids in 2020, but he is murdering 1,000s more through his failure to change Trump policies.

    Oh dear, my head hurts.

    Appalled (b72f57)

  15. MTG: ‘a bomb-thrower’… the Gingrich Seed:

    ‘Combative, Tribal, Angry’: Newt Gingrich Set The Stage For Trump, Journalist Says

    Partisan combat has always been a part of American politics, but Atlantic journalist McKay Coppins traces many of the extreme tactics used today to one man: former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

    When Gingrich entered Congress in 1979, the Georgia Republican rejected bipartisanship and “turned national politics and congressional politics into team sport,” Coppins says. While in Congress, Coppins says Gingrich treated politics as a “zero-sum” endeavor — and he wasn’t above resorting to name-calling, conspiracy theories and strategic obstruction in order come out on top: “He was not there to work in the committee structure and deal with constituent services. He was there to foment revolution and declare war.”

    Though Gingrich left Congress 1999, his aggressive tactics have had a lasting impact. In his Atlantic article, “The Man Who Broke Politics,” Coppins writes about how the former speaker helped pave the way for Donald Trump’s election. “He set a model for future Republican leaders,” Coppins says of Gingrich. “I think that his defining legacy is he enshrined this combative, tribal, angry attitude in politics that would infect our national discourse in Washington and Congress for decades to come.”

    On how Newt Gingrich reshaped Congress into the partisan body it is today…

    His career is important to understand if you want to understand how we got to this point in our politics. … If you look at the way that [Gingrich] gained power in the first place, he did it very deliberately and methodically by undermining the institution of Congress itself from within, by kind of blowing up the bipartisan coalitions that had existed for a long time in Washington and then using the kind of populist anger at the gridlock in Congress to then take power. And that’s a strategy we’ve seen replicated again and again, all the way up into 2016 when Trump was campaigning on draining the swamp. This is a strategy that may seem kind of commonplace now but that Newt Gingrich was one of the premier architects of.

    Prior to entering Congress, Newt Gingrich had been a historian. He had a Ph.D. in history. He was teaching history at West Georgia College, and he kind of gravitated toward heroes of war more than anything else. He loved reading war histories [of] World War I, World War II. In fact, one of the defining moments of his life, according to him, was when he was 15 years old and he visited a battleground in Verdun, France, with his parents and toured the grounds. And it was this very macabre setting where there [was] an ossuary where there were bones piled high from dead soldiers, and it was still scarred by cannon fire. He told me that that was an important moment where he realized, in his words, “that countries can die,” and that it would be his role to make sure that America didn’t.

    He’s always kind of framed his role in politics as that of a figure in war or at battle. He doesn’t kind of look to the great legislators or deal-makers or politicians, for the most part, as his role models; he looks to generals and warriors.

    On how Gingrich went about creating a new kind of Republican to run for the House

    This just isn’t a story of ideology, it’s also a story of kind of attitude and style and tactics. Most of the congressmen that Gingrich helped elect or kind of gave power to were more conservative, but they were also — for lack of a better word — meaner and more aggressive and more combative and more confrontational. …

    Gingrich had this organization called GOPAC that he used to provide training to Republican candidates who wanted to emulate Newt Gingrich. He would send out cassette tapes and memos to these candidates providing them with kind of attack lines and talking points and frankly created a whole new vocabulary for this rising generation of conservatives.

    There was one memo I write about in the piece called “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control,” that literally included a list of recommended words that Republicans should use in describing Democrats. And they included words like “sick,” “pathetic,” “lie,” “anti-flag,” “traitors,” or “radical” and “corrupt.” The kind of broader strategy when waging these national campaigns was to reframe the kind of policy debates in Washington that may have seemed kind of dull or inaccessible to the average American and turned them into these big struggles between good and evil, or white hats versus black hats, and a battle for the character and soul of America….

    On how Gingrich worked outside of the established Republican infrastructure

    His tactics, strategy was to build his own infrastructure entirely outside of the Republican institutions. So he went out himself and raised money. He went out himself and recruited candidates. Some of the candidates that he backed were explicitly Republicans that most establishment figures in Washington did not want to see in Congress, but he didn’t care. He kind of saw his role as building a new Republican Party outside of the existing infrastructure. … And certainly Donald Trump was able to win the Republican nomination without any institutional support at first by kind of following the same tack.

    On how Gingrich pioneered the use of C-SPAN for political advantage

    Gingrich recognized the potential political value in the C-SPAN cameras that had just recently been installed in the House at the time that he was kind of rising up through the ranks. He would kind of take to the floor at the end of the day when the chamber was basically empty, and he would give these kind of thundering speeches, kind of tirades against the Democrats, that were being delivered to no real audience in the actual room where he was, but that were then being beamed out to televisions across the country. He found that the more provocative he was and the more angry he was, the more likely his speeches were to get picked up in the news.

    On Gingrich losing his speakership and resigning in 1999

    On the way out the door, there’s this great quote where he says, “I’m willing to lead, but I’m not willing to preside over people who are cannibals.” I think, like a lot of revolutionaries — or people who see themselves as revolutionaries — they’re great at gaining allies early on and turning it into a movement and gaining power, but then they’re not always great at using that power to achieve the agenda that originally got them to where they were. And so Gingrich did end up kind of getting driven out by the same bloodthirsty brigade of right-wing lawmakers that he helped elect in the first place.

    On how Democrats in the Trump era are also using Gingrich tactics

    Gingrich’s tactics began with the Republican Party, and to a certain extent, the Republican Party ever since Gingrich has been much better at wielding them. But you do increasingly, in the Trump era now, see Democrats kind of saying that: “We need to take cues from Newt Gingrich. We need to take cues from the Republican Party. If we want our agenda to be taken seriously, we need to take this war for power ethos that Gingrich enshrined and play by those same rules, or we’ll never get our priorities passed and we’ll never be able to kind of beat back Trump and his Republican allies.”

    https://www.npr.org/2018/11/01/662906525/combative-tribal-angry-newt-gingrich-set-the-stage-for-trump-journalist-says

    MTG; a Georgia congresscritter… so was Newt Gingrich.

    DCSCA (e0d3be)

  16. Even if it is all Newt’s fault (with an assist from Limbaugh, Fox News, etc), so what?

    And stop blaming Georgia — Newt has a better claim to Pennsylvania roots than your buddy Biden. MTG is Georgia born and bred, but she had to move to get the perfect nutty district for herself.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  17. The most annoying problem with Greene and her ilk is that some of her concerns and complaints are quite valid, but she hides them behind a pile of crazy.

    One should be concerned about fentanyl, wherever it is from, coming over our southern border. One should be concerned about the Biden administration’s handling of border security. But MTG takes that and uses it to project insanity and bile, to the point where the facts are lost among the stream of hatred and lies.

    This toxicity, btw, is a hallmark of Trumpism, where every valid topic they address they poison. They are the kind of advocates you want the other guy to have.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  18. MTG; a Georgia congresscritter… so was Newt Gingrich.

    Georgia also sent us John Lewis.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  19. I actually like Newt. Sure, I was distressed when he latched onto the Trump bandwagon and I admit he has several faults. But he has IDEAS and is creative, and both of those are rare. He’s also got about 80 IQ points of Ms Greene.

    Had he (or Romney) won the presidency in 2012, we would not be talking about Donald Trump, and he would have been a lot more interesting than Romney. The Teas would have been ecstatic.

    And remember, it was Newt who planned the 1994 takeover of Congress, something that had eluded them for 40 years.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  20. I fault MTG here for thinking mistating the facts is necessary to condemn Biden’s destructive policies.

    And, I don’t like the F word response.

    I wish her spokesperson had simple told Daniel Dale “You only fact check republicans. You’re a partisan hack, not a fact checker, and so we have no further comment.”

    JF (d29d92)

  21. “She does this because there is a market for this behavior.”

    This is the problem. Shame is dead. How has George Santos not been shamed out of office? There is no shame placed on the people who keep sending MTG money and applauding her act, although it’s embarrassing. For many, this is just entertainment. MTG is cheap entertainment who strikes at a common enemy. For others, it is hyper-tribalism with the same end result. Truth is relative and expectations have been lowered. There’s always a what-about. Is there an antidote? I’m not so sure. Engage MTG and she gets more attention. Ignore her and her propaganda goes unchallenged and her following metastasizes. This is the lesson of Trump.

    AJ_Liberty (5f05c3)

  22. “It was a useful perspective in these types of conversations.”

    It was mainly about neocons not having done enough to fight, but without much perspective on what was practical politically. Like some here, he just really wanted to express exasperation with people who weren’t as feverish about cultural issues…without having a real plan or the ability to be persuasive. Every interaction pretty much ended with him losing his cool. He also strained to put everybody into convenient stereotyped categories. It just seemed like he came here to vent and not to really have a conversation. But hey, maybe others saw him differently…

    AJ_Liberty (5f05c3)

  23. @18. Georgia also sent us John Lewis.

    Big difference: Lewis was D; Newtie & MTG: GOP.

    @19. I actually like Newt.

    ROFLMAO. You like The Big Dick, too. You earn credit for consistency. 😉

    DCSCA (54535c)

  24. “She does this because there is a market for this behavior.”

    Yep. Just like Newtie’s speeches to an empty House chamber for the ‘must carry’ C-SPAN cameras beamed into millions of homes across America, spouting his lexicon of caustic terms distributed to the GOP members.

    DCSCA (54535c)

  25. Big difference: Lewis was D; Newtie & MTG: GOP.

    Georgia also send Cynthia McKinney and Hank (“Guam”) Johnson, but Democrats.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  26. *both

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  27. You like The Big Dick, too. You earn credit for consistency

    You really have a knack for dishonest representation. Also consistent.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  28. Appalled (b72f57) — 3/1/2023 @ 8:51 am

    Is her argument that Biden is now doing nothing and that’s murder, or that Biden murdered these kids in 2020?

    This has to be subdivided.

    The answer to the criticism by Daniel Dale is that the example is irrelevant. Surely Daniel Dale agrees that people have died from fentanyl poisoning during President Biden’s watch – she just didn’t find one where the mother was so emotional. You could change the example without changing any of the argument, such as it is. That much is true.

    Where she is lying or misleading on points that Daniel Dale did not challenger, being content with a gotcha.

    1) This is not new – it didn’t start with Biden. The number of illegal migrants crossing the border increased, but that was not a deliberate decision by Biden and was mostly based on hope. She has Biden “refusing” to “close” the border but never, until you get into the weeds, does she even attempt an explanation. That’s because the argument would not be strong if she did.

    2) The assertion that the smuggling of fentanyl has anything to do with the smuggling of migrants, or that concentrating more on migrants is the way to stop drug smuggling of fentanyl is totally unproven and probably without any factual basis.

    It is an assertion made without any effort to draw a connection beyond the fact that it might be the same people doing both. This is like arguing that cracking down on illegal sports gambling by organized crime in 1975 would have stopped drug dealing.

    I think it is the border guards union that is saying that migrants have some connection to fentanyl — and also claiming migrants bring disease! The stupidest and most malicious arguments.

    Most fentanyl is smuggled is smuggled in goods, particularly avocados coming from Mexico, or by boat, on both the west and east coast, (not air, that’s been stopped) and when individuals are involved as mules they are most likely people who can legally cross the border. Young, maybe under 18, U.S. citizens.

    I have also heard that migrants are used as a distraction – get CBP to chase after a collection of migrants, while meanwhile letting a vehicle cross the border in the same area they cover. So the solution is to chase after them more??

    Now there’s an argument for preferring the cartels to amateurs. The cartels don’t ant to kill too many of their customers, while people new to the business might try other ways of using fentanyl that are more dangerous.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  29. I suppose, as a Christian the proper response to someone like MTG is to pray that she be enlightened and repent, but what I really hope is that the voters of her district repent at the next election and end her political career. Really, words like “classless” and “boorish” seem to have been invented just for someone like her and, evidently, at least some of the people she employs, but “disgusting” is a pretty good fit too.

    I can sort-of understand how someone like her, despite her awful behavior, might be elected once with a well-run campaign or a weak opponent, but it’s astounding to an outsider that she was re-elected as you think decent people in her district would have found her to be, at best, an embarrassment. Maybe someone who knows Georgia politics can explain this.

    RL formerly in Glendale (7a2d64)

  30. Appalled (b72f57) — 3/1/2023 @ 9:43 am

    Using the Finkelman approach to textual analysis, I can see arguing that MTG did not mean to suggest that Biden murdered these two kids in 2020, but he is murdering 1,000s more through his failure to change Trump policies.

    What MTG spokesman Nick Dyer said was that Daniel Dale’s point was irrelevant, because surely other people than this woman’s sons died from fentanyl. The problem here was that Daniel Dale was content with an easy to prove gotcha.

    While Nick Dyer did not challenge Dale’s implied claim that this was going on while Trump was president, he didn’t concede it outright either.

    He just said that plenty of people died from fentanyl poisoning on Biden’s watch (which he knew Dale, being more honest, would not dispute) and then said what would it matter to any of them who was president at the time?

    And the fact that MTG was stating false things about the 2020 election in Georgia he didn’t even attempt to dispute, contenting himself with a profane insult.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  31. He’s an idiot for cursing. The leftist media are partisan hacks.

    All should take lessons from Governor DeSantis.

    NJRob (d0b767)

  32. #29

    She represents a district that previously sent Larry McDonald, a John Birch Society head, to the House. Essentially, the population is Appalachian — similar to West Virginia, Southern Ohio, East Tennessee, East Kentucky. This isn’t the gracious plantation southerner living out that way. The latin american population in Dalton, and Chattanooga suburbia is not populous enough to extract her from the district.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  33. I wish her spokesperson had simple told Daniel Dale “You only fact check republicans. You’re a partisan hack, not a fact checker, and so we have no further comment.”

    JF (d29d92) — 3/1/2023 @ 12:52 pm

    You’re full of it. Quelle surprise:

    Fact check: Biden makes false and misleading claims in economic speech

    By Daniel Dale, CNN

    (I don’t know how many links get a comment sent to moderation, so in an excess of caution I’m going to limit it to one apiece. Apologies in advance for the following comment string.)

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  34. Fact check: How Democratic ads mislead on four GOP candidates’ abortion stances

    By Daniel Dale, CNN

    Those are all from the last few months. Obviously I could go on, but the point is made. Besides, I’m sure you have goal posts to move, so I’ll let you get to it.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  35. @lurker I think you can always use three links.

    The Congresswoman and the mother were talking past each other in the hearing. The mother didn’t understand the question (which didn’t distinguish between the future and the past and anyway was a vague assertion) or didn’t want to opine on it.

    What the mother desperately wanted to say was that it was wrong to say that demand was the cause because her son did not intentionally buy fentanyl He thought he was buying Percocet. (and here it has to be said that the war against drugs has placed a premium on small quantities and fentanyl is easier to process and smuggle than other things. The Nixon Administration started it by cracking down on smuggling of marijuana from Mexico, this causing a switch to heroin, and now we’ve got fentanyl, which also has a more unclear legal status since every different molecule must be put on the banned list separately and there are many fentanyl compounds.)

    The mother also wanted to say that rehab (as it existed) didn’t work, and so there shouldn’t be more of the same.

    (As a matter of fact, it’s people coming out of rehab who are most vulnerable to drug overdoes because their tolerance for opioids has been reduced)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  36. As a person who has been banned many times in many places for giving unpopular views I am disinclined to cancel people. As lincoln said as I would not be a slave I will not be a master. Over at DU they told everyone who didn’t vote for hillary clinton to leave. My problem is MTG is a crazy anti-semite and racist ;but as voltaire said before he was poisoned “I disagree with every word you say ;but will defend to the death your right to say it.” How many here disagree with my view that capitalists appeal to their sacred principals of liberty which is the rich must not be restrained of their excercise of tyranny over the poor? As paster neomoller said by the time they came for me their was nobody left to say anything! I think it is far better to point out the error of their ways then ask them to leave. My opinion.

    asset (931a2d)

  37. NJRob (d0b767) — 3/1/2023 @ 1:54 pm 31.

    He’s an idiot for cursing.

    No, not an idiot. It was the only thing he could say because he had no answer.

    The leftist media are partisan hacks.

    Different media are different things. ‘

    The most partisan hacks, of course, are people who work in campaigns. (not all)

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  38. @lurker I think you can always use three links.

    Thanks, Sammy.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  39. Maybe someone who knows Georgia politics can explain this.

    The top left corner of GA is probably the most paleo-conservative district in the country. Maybe some competition in AZ or TX. It sent us Bob Barr (who would be considered a moderate) and Larry McDonald, the then president of the Birch Society.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  40. Appalled (b72f57) — 3/1/2023 @ 9:43 am

    The hearing clip is not as bad as MTG’s tweet.

    She got the idea of the tweet later.

    She had invited the mother to agree with her blame-border policy position.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  41. asset: “How many here disagree with my view that capitalists appeal to their sacred principals of liberty which is the rich must not be restrained of their excercise of tyranny over the poor?”

    People who are actually rich pay a lot of taxes. How exactly do they exercise tyranny over the poor? If you want to earn more money, you have to acquire the skills or knowledge that commands it, or work really hard. There’s no magic transfer program or tax

    AJ_Liberty (5f05c3)

  42. @27. Dishonest? Denying your often stated admiration; there be your ‘non-denial’ denial. 😉

    DCSCA (54535c)

  43. @33. We put fact checking Plagiarist Squinty to bed in 1988.

    You know, back around when ‘Who’s Zoomin’ Who’ was, as Joey’s boasted, an Aretha Franklin song from HIS generation… when he was already 45 years old… Joe’s very much a child of the 80’s, you know …

    Now… literally. 😉

    DCSCA (54535c)

  44. When MTG no longer represents her constituents, they’ll vote her out. I’m sure they could not care less what a coastal Californian thinks (I’m talking about me) and anyway I enjoy a good train wreck, so thank you NW Georgia. Nutty Aunt Marjorie somehow broke out of the attic and got herself elected. I remember when the GOP was going on about how deep their bench of future candidates was. I remember thinking it was more accurately a mile wide and two inches deep… not that the Democrats are better. Remember when people were wondering aloud about how far Lori Lightfoot could go once she finished with Chicago and went national?

    steveg (fd317d)

  45. Those are all from the last few months. Obviously I could go on, but the point is made. Besides, I’m sure you have goal posts to move, so I’ll let you get to it.
    lurker (cd7cd4) — 3/1/2023 @ 2:00 pm

    oh wow, let me correct myself:

    You only fact check Republicans During a three month span from June to September you never fact checked Biden, and any time otherwise you rarely did, focusing mostly on Republicans

    The goalpost was and is “partisan hack”. But, you’ve shown he’s really actually objective. Don’t think so. Or, what was your point?

    JF (d29d92)

  46. There are a lot of people I wish would self-deport in general. To me, scoring points against someone as a type of “look at me game” is tiresome.

    MTG is a symptom of what is wrong with our system. Lots of confirmation I see based on trollish and rude comments here.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  47. #32

    The Appalachian people I’ve known aren’t like that. Went to high school in Front Royal, VA, northern terminus of the Skyline Drive and known locally as “Hell Town” because of a good number of rather rough people, but although the area was and remains pretty conservative those folks would not have voted for someone like MTG. Neither would the other Southerners I’ve known, including my own family whose roots have been in Tennessee for many generations although none lived on a plantation. Even in MTG’s district, her predecessors Barr and McDonald were not particularly boorish or disgusting on a personal level, as far as I know. So it still seems astonishing someone like MTG could get re-elected, notwithstanding it being an Appalachian-dominated district.

    RL formerly in Glendale (7a2d64)

  48. Several should self deport. I am one of them as long as DCSCA is here.

    DRJ (fea4b5)

  49. For everyone getting the vapors over Greene breaking out the profanity, you’re remiss in not pointing out that Dale’s network broke it out first.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/cnns-jim-acosta-tells-former-melania-trump-aide-f-k-you

    As for the “two wrongs don’t make a right/turn the other cheek crowd”, ask yourself whether that strategy has worked over the last 4 decades. If you don’t occasionally fight fire with fire, your opponent will continue to light you on fire. Respond in kind, make it hurt, and eventually the pain reflex will make them stop.

    I’d love to stay above the fray and play by Marquis of Queensbury rules. But we live in the real world.

    SaveFarris (65b2d7)

  50. The taxpayers pay this Nick Dyer person $10,000 a month for his New York manners. MTG, $15,000 a month. And that does does not include their free cars, expense accounts, and fringe benefits.

    nk (bb1548)

  51. Those are all from the last few months. Obviously I could go on, but the point is made.

    Only one of those is post-midterms.

    One fact-check in 3 months. Compare that to the Trump era when he’d fact-check Trump at least 20 times a day. During the run up to the midterms, he fact-checked Herschel Walker 3X as often as Biden. Which one was POTUS again?

    Dale deserves every bit of scorn and disrespect he gets.

    SaveFarris (65b2d7)

  52. There are a lot of people I wish would self-deport in general. To me, scoring points against someone as a type of “look at me game” is tiresome.

    MTG is a symptom of what is wrong with our system. Lots of confirmation I see based on trollish and rude comments here.

    I agree that to some, the name of the game is to score points with a “look at me” or “whataboutism” schtick. These are not serious people and are not interested in genuine discussion or debate. I must admit that it can be hard not to take the bait (that’s what it is). But I try to remember that whenever I do, I’ve become a part of the problem and breathed life into the gotcha game. It is good to remember that there is no obligation on our part to respond. To those of us who simply want genuine conversation, we must continually step over the landmines and walk only where vigorous and respectful debate fills the landscape. I really wish I didn’t have to keep reminding myself of this…

    Dana (1225fc)

  53. Thank you, Dana. Trolls gotta troll, I know.

    But I remember a time when there was so much more discussion (and frankly, kindness) here.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  54. Not really Dana. The issue has become that the criticism is only on one side of the aisle. If the guns were open on both sides, you’d see less discontent. But instead, the focus and ire is on Trump and people like him over and over again. It’s been clarifying to many of us on all sides.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  55. Any Organization With the Word “Integrity” In Its Name Shouldn’t Include MTG:

    ………..
    “I had a discussion with the Election Integrity Caucus. A big part of that is talking truthfully about the challenges in elections and identifying REAL issues,” wrote Gabriel Sterling, chief operating officer for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, in a tweet Tuesday night.

    “Some still deal in disproven conspiracies. It’s a challenge we all face, but having a @CocaCola makes everything better,” Sterling tweeted alongside a screenshot of him taking a deep swig of soda while seated next to (caucus member Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene).
    ……….
    The roundtable discussion was intended to address “election administration best practices,” said a press release from Rep. Claudia Tenney, a New York Republican and the caucus co-chair. “Panelists discussed what went right in their states during the 2022 election and raised a range of ideas for improving elections as we look forward to 2024.”

    Greene on Tuesday evening posted a video from that event that showed her turning to Sterling and criticizing him directly.

    “Gabe, I do not consider you an expert on this issue. As a matter of fact, I consider you a major problem,” Greene said.
    ……..
    Greene then made the repeatedly disproven assertion that there were “thousands” of dead voters whose ballots were counted in Georgia.

    Sterling interjected: “There were four.”
    ………
    “I’m going to follow up with one more thing: Trump won Georgia,” Greene said, before voicing more election conspiracies, including the debunked claim that “suitcases” full of ballots were secretly scanned in Atlanta. Sterling and Raffensperger said in sworn testimony last year that that conspiracy theory was false.

    On Wednesday morning, Sterling tweeted another version of the photo of him drinking soda next to Greene, this one mocked up with the old Coca-Cola slogan, “Have a Coke and a smile.”
    ………..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  56. During a three month span from June to September you never fact checked Biden

    For most of that time (July 8 – August 27), he didn’t fact check anyone. Lol, I don’t know, but I’m guessing maybe he was on vacation. What do you think? Also, if I didn’t know better I’d say this is Dale fact-checking Biden in the brief interval he wasn’t on vacation during the period you’re now re-asserting he never fact-checked Biden. If you’re going to move a goalpost, at least spend the time to pick a new location carefully. Moving it over and over again can get embarrassing.

    Look, I’m not holding Dale out as some kind of neutral arbiter. I assume that like most of the MSM, he has a liberal bias. But when an accusation like yours is supported only by proven falsehoods, the leap from presumably biased liberal to partisan hack says more about you than it does about him.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  57. lurker (cd7cd4) — 3/1/2023 @ 5:17 pm

    well, it is embarrassing for one of us. From the link I included:

    “In fact, it has been more than three months since he’s penned a fact-check of President Biden, according to his online roster of stories. On June 10, he hit Biden for a “false” claim to ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel that the U.S. had the fastest-growing economy in the world.”

    which is exactly the same fact check you claim refutes my statement.

    JF (d29d92)

  58. You said:

    During a three month span from June to September you never fact checked Biden

    Don’t blame me if your assertion was debunked by your own link.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  59. Don’t blame me if your assertion was debunked by your own link.
    lurker (cd7cd4) — 3/1/2023 @ 6:17 pm

    June 11 to September 13 covers “a three month from June to September”

    I think we’re done, lurker

    JF (e8c669)

  60. I understand the need for Patterico’s request, and am saddened by the behavior that led him to make it. He’s done the nation a favor by keeping up this blog as long as he has, as a place for political discussions.

    And we should all make it easier for him to get back to criticizing the LA Times more often, by honoring his request.

    (Here’s an example of the kind of stories we should be spending more time on, from my own local monopoly newspaper, the Seattle Times:

    Over 82% of 484 licensed cannabis retailers statewide in 2020 identified as white, according to the LCB’s survey. Asians followed thereafter with 7%. Black retailers received 4% of state-issued licenses.

    The author, Alison Saldanha, thinks this is terribly unfair. But those numbers are actually fairly close to Washington state’s demographics. Especially if you allow for age differences.

    And she never considers whether anyone should sell marijuana to vulnerable groups.

    “No amount of marijuana has been proven safe to use during pregnancy or while breastfeeding. In 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its first official guidelines, advising women who are pregnant or nursing to avoid marijuana use because it isn’t safe for them or their children.

    “Whether smoked, eaten in food (edibles), or vaped, marijuana is stronger than ever before, which makes use during pregnancy especially risky for a developing baby’s health. Marijuana contains nearly 500 chemicals, including the mind-altering compound tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). These chemicals can pass through a woman’s placenta to her baby during pregnancy.”

    Similarly, I wouldn’t want anyone selling alcohol to women who are pregnant.)

    Jim Miller (f29931)

  61. #63 I should have mentioned that I found that official warning in an Amy Dickinson column.

    Jim Miller (f29931)

  62. OT- For those interested, NASA/SpaceX is making another launch attempt of Crew 6 to the ISS in about 90 minutes from Cape Canaveral:

    https://www.nasa.gov/content/live-coverage-of-nasas-spacex-crew-6-mission

    DCSCA (507b1c)

  63. @44 Not only do they pay taxes sometimes example trump they pay politicians to buy their votes so the poor have no voice in the halls of power unless they riot.

    asset (74131e)

  64. I wish no one here self deports I like to read everyones opinion.

    asset (74131e)

  65. OT- Congrats to NASA/SpaceX on the stellar launch of Crew 6 into orbit.
    Outstanding job, kids. Never grows old.

    DCSCA (507b1c)

  66. Several should self deport. I am one of them as long as DCSCA is here.

    DRJ,

    I am listening. Make the case.

    I’d rather have you as a regular commenter than him. So if you say you’d be a regular commenter if he is gone, that’s probably good enough for me. But I suspect you have more to say.

    Many people noted recently in my post about the blog being here 20 years that your contributions have been vital. I totally agree. Some of my more interesting posts and/or series were done based on things you told me or with your input. I think the single best day this blog ever had — a day when this blog broke a story that was featured on Hannity’s show — was entirely based on something you told me.

    Tell me why DCSCA should go. Frankly, I am tired of his Trumpist pro-Putin anti-Ukraine apologetics. But I generally like to let people have their say. I’d rather call them stupid than ban them. But again: I am open to hearing your case.

    Patterico (f405c8)

  67. @69 I totally disagree with DCSCA on ukraine and his isolationist view as I have pointed out many times. Both liberals and conservatives and even some populists like me support ukraine ;but isolationism is a legitimate position that I disagree with. In a debate you should know the other sides position and be able to explain it better then they can. As sun tzu says if you know your enemy and yourself you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.

    asset (74131e)

  68. It’s not that his position is disagreeable, it’s his trollish behavior in pushing it. He doesn’t engage other than superficially, he often just contradicts. He posts long, wild and pointless off-topic digressions that make no sense to anyone but himself (e.g. #15), and at times he seems to occupy half the blog with this drivel.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  69. @70. Leaders delegate. The viewpoint is a matter of delegating the responsibility to those directly affected by decisions they made and forcing them to muster the courage to accept responsibility for those decisions, especially as they can afford to carry the burden in this century. It is long overdue to do so, particularly given the corrupt parties they chose to deal with. And given my personal history, it is hardly an isolationist POV. If you want the United States to help, fine, just pay for it. But you can’t ignore how the situation developed– and it didn’t occur overnight; it took two decades; the video below is damning. It is a similar policy attempted w/China- and the U.S. is waking up to that misjudgment as well:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCCTf17ZiIs

    ‘Vladimir Putin, especially these days, is widely reviled. To some he’s a war criminal, to others he’s a dictator, and to many he’s simply a very bad man. But it wasn’t always this way. We trawled through video footage from 20 years of international summits, speeches and news conferences and discovered a man who once basked in high regard: the one who went fishing and dancing with George W. Bush, who fell into warm embraces with Tony Blair and whose jokes had NATO’s leaders rolling on the floor with laughter.

    As the Opinion Video above starkly reveals, Western leaders once considered Vladimir Putin not just an ally, but also, apparently, a friend. Even if they were simply giving him the benefit of the doubt for political purposes, they were taking a naïve gamble of historic proportions: Be nice to Putin, and maybe he would be nice back. It’s true that this brand of personal diplomacy scored some significant security victories. Arms control treaties were signed, and Putin allowed U.S. jets to strike the Taliban from bases in Russia’s satellite states. But as Russian tanks rolled into Georgia in August 2008, Bush learned that his eight-year friendship with the Russian leader had earned him zero leverage over Putin’s territorial ambitions.

    While it’s debatable whether Western governments could have foreseen the bloody horizon of Putin’s vision, let’s now be clear about one thing: Personal diplomacy doesn’t work when you need it most.’- NYT.com

    DCSCA (76eb58)

  70. @71. I’m sorry you can’t see how MTG is following the attention getting, headline grabbing pattern created and used by Gingrich for his party to succeed, Kevin. More’s the pity.

    DCSCA (76eb58)

  71. Kevin: “I actually like Newt. Sure, I was distressed when he latched onto the Trump bandwagon and I admit he has several faults. But he has IDEAS and is creative, and both of those are rare. He’s also got about 80 IQ points of Ms Greene.”

    I fall in the same boat. This piece DCCCP quoted just seems like someone exercising a 30-year grievance with Gringrich. His political enemy must of course created the current monster. It’s almost comical. Newt’s angry empty-chamber CSPAN speeches set the stage for Trump. Huh? Really?!

    Newt was certainly a big personality who enjoyed the spotlight, but he was first and foremost an idea guy. That’s the opposite of Trump who is hardly a policy savant. Newt looked for conservative solutions to many problems. Trump couldn’t get beyond walls getting bigger and bigger, trade wars that were simple to win, banning Muslims, detail-free health care plans that would be the best ever, and magically balancing the budget in 8 years. This was, in all effect, the anti-Newt. A weird parody perhaps.

    Trump is a product of ever-ratcheting manufactured anger. If Right-Wing infotainment keeps saying that liberals are an existential threat to our country and liberty, then eventually the only candidate that works is the angriest, loudest, and least restrained. Trump is what happens when Obama hysteria boils over. Blaming Gingrich misses the role of social media and the transformation of fair-and-balanced into whatever the heck it is today. Blaming Gingrich is just lingering hatred for conservatism and “of course conservatism hatched this monster”. Sorry, but that just gets a big yawn from me.

    AJ_Liberty (fd54fd)

  72. I doubt DRJ is the only one who drew that line.

    Paul Montagu (8f0dc7)

  73. It’s Gresham’s law of the internet.

    Simon Jester (0d54cc)

  74. Trump is a product of ever-ratcheting manufactured anger. If Right-Wing infotainment keeps saying that liberals are an existential threat to our country and liberty, then eventually the only candidate that works is the angriest, loudest, and least restrained.

    If you evaluate art as the ability to evoke feeling in the audience / viewer you could describe Fox News as artistic genius. Their ability to consistently evoke fear, outrage and spite is amazing. Of course, for Fox to be art it’s audience would need to be aware that it was intended as art in the way that reader of the Onion knows that the intent is humor through satire. Not clear that Fox could accomplish it’s current feats of emotional evocation if they were openly entertainment.

    If Dominions claims are proven true, and I think the evidence shows that they should be, I hope the damages are sufficiently large to deter any company of that size from similar lies in the future.

    Time123 (938b5b)

  75. #73

    You know, Ed Wood may have been influenced by Orson Welles. But that doesn’t make Citizen Kane bad or Plan 9 from Outer Space good. In particular, it does not make Welles responsible for the future cinematic sins of Writer/Director/Producers.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  76. > Trump is a product of ever-ratcheting manufactured anger.

    That ever-ratcheting manufactured anger is *terrible* and seriously dangerous. As it keeps ratcheting at some point people are going to get killed.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  77. Appalled #78: I think it depends on why you make movies…or post comments. What saddens me is the tone of how posts seem to be going. And not just here.

    Aphrael #79: I agree. And part of it is the dangerous idea I see on campus every day, that words are violence.

    When we disagree with someone (with very few exceptions) they are not evil. Why can’t we wish them well and simply say that we believe they are wrong. Again, it comes down to why people post. Sometimes, it’s about “owning” an opponent, insulting a person, or deflecting honest disagreement…and all of those things intersect with narcissism.

    My opinion only. Because I am well aware I can be wrong about things.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  78. #80

    What I was saying — politely — to DCSCA via analogy is that whether MTG looked at Gingrich as a role model or stylistic inspiration doesn’t really matter. Reagan clearly channeled FDR in his communication style. I didn’t notice a lot of Liberals supporting him back in the day as a result. MTG (and Plan 9, for that matter) stands or falls on their own merits. Newt isn’t relevant.

    As for both Welles and Wood — they both loved movies and loved being a director. There are home movies of Ed Wood directing one of his awful things in the early 50s. He is so happy — he is having a blast! Wood did porn late in life to put food on the table. In the 50s, he directed for love.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  79. > are a way for their supporters to wave a middle finger at their culture war opponents.

    Sure, who cares if we burn the country down as long as we get to show contempt for people we dislike.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  80. That ever-ratcheting manufactured anger is *terrible* and seriously dangerous.

    Driving the country into US and THEM camps is not the best path for a nation. To do so in the name of “nationalism” is quite ironic.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  81. >And part of it is the dangerous idea I see on campus every day, that words are violence.

    I’m an adult who has spent years doing hard work to recover from severe childhood *emotional* abuse. Words *can be* violence, without question.

    That doesn’t mean that any particular words are necessarily, nor does it mean that the words being claimed as violence by activists are in fact violence.

    But it lands as utterly ludicrous for me when people allege that words can never be violence.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  82. But it lands as utterly ludicrous for me when people allege that words can never be violence.

    But they rarely are, as in most cases people can just shrug it off, and ignore the speaker in the future. In a family this isn’t possible as you cannot distance yourself from the speaker, and the words are repeated regularly.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  83. aphrael, I am sorry that you had a horrible childhood. I truly am.

    I do think, on campus, that the issue has softened its edges to include some fairly disturbing stuff, which I believe is disrespectful of your own experience. I have heard a laugh called an act of violence. I have heard statements that, ten years ago, every left of center politician said, called violence. The FIRE website has tons of awful information.

    Again, I am sorry that you experienced awful things. You have always seemed to be a kind and decent person.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  84. aphrael: “As it [anger] keeps ratcheting at some point people are going to get killed.”

    I think we have a lot of people stewing on issues and grievances. And media…both social and traditional…recognizes that this is obsessive and has gladly monetized it. Now, what stops it? Like Patterico and Twitter, people just have to get sick of wasting so much time, become uncomfortable with how it’s effecting their mood, and not like the obsessive element of it. It’s just not good for your health, relationships, sleep, and perspective to be angry all the time with the outlet being to abuse people on line who you barely know…or yell at a radio/TV. And yes, some on the periphery can escalate to violence. But it’s addictive….and people will rationalize it. This is freedom, but as Kevin notes, this manic divisiveness is an odd platform for nationalists.

    AJ_Liberty (5f05c3)

  85. The mother agreed with MTG that it was correct to call it fentanyl poisoning, which seems to be phrase that is circulating among Republicans instead of overdoses. It is used by others, and this video or something similar is also circulating. The mother appreciated it because they did not ask for fentanyl but thought they were getting Percocet.

    In the New York Times today I saw an article in which the paper itself used the word overdose, but the Republican quoted used the expression fentanyl poisoning. (Actually he used both)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/01/us/politics/garland-senate-justice-department-trump-biden.html

    “This is a war — act like it — do something,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the top Republican on the committee, quoting the mother of two sons who died of overdoses. “So, 106,000 people die from drug overdoses — 70,000 from fentanyl last year — it’s getting worse. The leading cause of death for Americans age 18 to 45 is death by fentanyl poisoning. What are we doing?”

    The mother, to the extent she blamed a particular policy, blamed Covid relief, because it gave them the money to buy the drugs. (and she also stated that they were wasting their money on rehab – one son was in federal rehab — it was a flophouse she said.

    They died six months before Biden became president. Biden enjoyed the rebuttal in aspeech, saying heh, heh, and the mother got angry at him.

    Attorney general Merrick garland blamed corrupt Mexican officials, whom he wouldn’t say were corrupt – he probably was instructed not to say that – for the smuggling of fentanyl into the United States.

    Tackling the crisis was a top priority, Mr. Garland said, adding that its sheer magnitude, and the ease of producing, transporting and selling the narcotic, made it particularly tough to combat.

    “It’s a horrible epidemic, but it’s an epidemic that’s been unleashed on purpose by the Sinaloa and the new-generation Jalisco cartels,” said Mr. Garland, who said he pressured high-ranking officials in Mexico to crack down on producers during a recent trip to the country.

    The different cartels for decades have had a policy of “silver or lead” – accept bribes or be killed. Kind of like the Taliban in Afghanistan. We don’t have that problem inside the United States.

    There’s been something in the news recently about the extent of corruption in Mexico:

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/3adxp9/genaro-garcia-luna-us-trial-drug-trafficking-conviction

    El Chapo’s Inside Man Was America’s Closest Partner in Mexico

    Genaro García Luna’s conviction for taking millions in cartel bribes while working closely with the DEA revealed the epic futility of the drug war.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  86. ‘Vladimir Putin, especially these days, is widely reviled. To some he’s a war criminal, to others he’s a dictator, and to many he’s simply a very bad man.

    According to that author, nobody has any better opinion of him than “bad man.”

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  87. Vladimir Putin is a strong leader who has control of his country.

    nk (bb1548)

  88. I guess she was onto something. 1/3 of Americans agree on National Divorce?

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/03/02/17/68268305-11812977-image-a-40_1677778824239.jpg

    steveg (e1f9b2)

  89. Looks like patterico is in trouble! Floriduh state legislature is passing bill that all bloggers who mention desatan or his running dogs must register with the state of floriduh or face arrest! (DU)

    asset (6e8896)

  90. @12

    This is a thread where i wish FWO were able to comment. He did a good job of presenting what’s appealing about ppl like Greene in a way that was somewhat sympathetic. It was a useful perspective in these types of conversations.

    Time123 (36927c) — 3/1/2023 @ 9:23 am

    I’m not FWO… but, I’d like to comment along this tangent.

    I don’t really give a flying wet fart about Greene. I just roll my eyes, every time she’s in the news just as much as I do when AoC or Adam Schiff speaks.

    Why?

    Because there’s absolutely NOTHING I can do that can change it. It’s between the voters in their districts and their elected-whackadoodles. I agree with NR’s Jim Gerity’s descriptor that politicians like MTG, Schiff and the likes are “bomb-throwers” designed to foist a big middle-finger to Congress.

    That’s the voter’s prerogative and I suspect that the amount of attention these politicians get from their detractors would be deemed as a “bonus” by most of these voters.

    Unless you’re fabulously wealthy, or in a powerful position in your job (ie Union boss or TV/radio personality, etc…) there’s scant little those of us can do regarding the likes of MTG, Schiff and the likes.

    Yammering at each other on this site, and others, is doing nothing beside pissing in the wind. We can state our case here and have a debate, but I think all of us, and I’m including me in this bucket, could do a little more in the “lets agree to disagree to move on” thing, than trying to win every single conversation.

    If you want to affect change in the party of your choice, then you are going to have to do the hard part in our political spheres. That is, to be actively engaged locally. Starting with your local races, townships, mayoral, state legislatures and state governor. We are going to have to participate in the process in some way to better identify and “groom” the next political candidates. That way, we’d have an extremely strong bench to choose from as these nascent politicians climbs that political ladder.

    We have to start, right freaking now, being engaged during the primary process to ensure that our preferred candidates ends up with the nomination. If your end goal is to prevent Trump from running, and potentially winning a 2nd Presidential term, you should be JUMPING with JOY that the likes of DeSantis and Youngkin are actually polling decently, despite not having officially announced anything yet. NOW is the time to get onto their bandwagons, and work to convince your political colleagues to back the likely non-Trump candidates, so that there isn’t a million candidates in the field, which would only increases the chance that Trump snags the nomination.

    Do the hard work, outside of just yammering with your internet buds. Anything, donate what you can… donate your TIME (I am)… actively discuss amongst your peers to vote for you favored candidates. Don’t wait till the last minute of the General Election, because at that point, its too late. You are going to be asked to vote on a locked in slate of candidates. You can also choose NOT to vote. But I think socially, we should be adverse to the idea that volunteering to abstain from voting because we don’t like any of the candidates. I think, socially or even moral obligation, we should encourage our peers to be more actively engage earlier in the process, so that our ideas can be sustained in higher offices.

    You simply cannot worry about the folks outside of your state, as there really isn’t anything you can do. Fight the battles that are at the very least, engageable. THAT, is the beauty of a federalist system of governance. There are 50 states in our nation, which each having some say in who runs the federal government.

    Frankly, these “fact checkers” and the industry is the blame for MTG’s spokeperson’s response. I don’t blame them one bit, and it doesn’t bloody matter if THIS TIME, it’s a sincere effort to assert the facts (as I do believe as well), these fact checkers doesn’t deserve a good faith interactions with politicians, even as someone as disgusting as MTG.

    They are reaping what they’ve sowed. Fact checker’s MAIN JOB is to maintain the integrity of their work by making a good faith effort to be neutral fact checkers. In this partisan fact checking era, no one can say that has been adhere to 100%. And as such, the consequences of biased-partisan fact checking, ACCESS to the politicians are being constrained.

    In the social media age, politicians does not require access to traditional media sphere and their partisan fact checkers to reach their voters.

    See, DeSantis’ team now (and some extent Youngkin’s). They’re known for calling out partisan media and their fact checkers. That is the model that others should be following.

    I don’t see it getting any better either, and it would take an herculean effort by the fact checking industry to rebuild their integrity to reclaim the easy access to these politicians that they’ve traditionally enjoyed.

    One other thing, all of us should really assess their bias and how it influence your interactions here on this board.

    I’m not trying to troll anyone here when I’m pointing out this bias: I have a few.

    I’m bias’ed against just about every Democrats.

    I’m bias’ed against the Democrats voters.

    I’m bias’ed against anyone who made the Democrat’s job easier to win their office. Yes, that means all of “you people” who nominally votes Republican, but couldn’t vote for Trump.

    You VOTED in a way that allowed Biden and Democrats to push their destructive polices. You voted for it, whether you like it or not and if you’re irritated or upset by that state, I would simply implore you to really figure out WHY you’re irritated or upset for being blamed.

    Because, at the end of the day, it’s the polices that matters, not the person. Not MTG, not Biden, not Trump, not “pick your politician”. It’s the POLICIES that we all have to live under that matters.

    I’m old enough to notice this trend, and it really started hitting my awareness when Democrats lost the House during the Clinton years. This trend of ‘partisan bias’ that is infecting us more and more… which the rise of the digital age and social media, cranked up that ‘partisan bias’ to Eleventybajillion.

    Breitbart made a really astute observation that has stuck with me: Politics is downstream from culture.

    @Patterico made a heartfelt post of Breibart’s passing. But, I’m willing to bet my life savings that Breibart would’ve been on opposite ends of Pat and the other not-Trumpers regarding “all things Trump”, because he truly believed in the mission to stop the left’s progressive movement in higher office. As, it’s really about the battle of ideas and policies that matters.

    I complete understand the bias for all things against TRUMP. I also understand the bias for all things FOR Trump. I don’t agree with all the factors that would lead to against/for Trump, but understand them.

    For my piece, I want to try to convince some of you, yes, even our host whom I hold the highest regards, that for some things, it doesn’t matter “who” holds such office. It should only matters by what “policies” such a person would advance whilst in office. This is not an effort to relitigate the past, but an effort to reframe the debate as to who should be nominated AND voted for based on policy preferences.

    Because, at the end of the day, my argument is simply that we ought to treat all of our politicians as if they’re rental cars. Which rental cars can take us to point A to point B, and afterwards, discard these politicians like we do with rental cars.

    whembly (d116f3)

  91. @79

    > Trump is a product of ever-ratcheting manufactured anger.

    That ever-ratcheting manufactured anger is *terrible* and seriously dangerous. As it keeps ratcheting at some point people are going to get killed.

    aphrael (4c4719) — 3/2/2023 @ 9:15 am

    What do you mean by “manufactured”?

    Are you saying that there some grievances that aren’t legit?

    I’m reminded by how the Chilean dictator Augusto rose to power.

    Do you know how that happened?

    whembly (d116f3)

  92. @80

    Aphrael #79: I agree. And part of it is the dangerous idea I see on campus every day, that words are violence.

    When we disagree with someone (with very few exceptions) they are not evil. Why can’t we wish them well and simply say that we believe they are wrong. Again, it comes down to why people post. Sometimes, it’s about “owning” an opponent, insulting a person, or deflecting honest disagreement…and all of those things intersect with narcissism.

    My opinion only. Because I am well aware I can be wrong about things.

    Simon Jester (c8876d) — 3/2/2023 @ 9:26 am

    You’re spot on.

    I can’t think of something so toxic, so cancerous as to the idea that “words are violence”.

    Those who advocates for that ought to be round be mocked for being so petty.

    whembly (d116f3)

  93. @84

    >And part of it is the dangerous idea I see on campus every day, that words are violence.

    I’m an adult who has spent years doing hard work to recover from severe childhood *emotional* abuse. Words *can be* violence, without question.

    That doesn’t mean that any particular words are necessarily, nor does it mean that the words being claimed as violence by activists are in fact violence.

    But it lands as utterly ludicrous for me when people allege that words can never be violence.

    aphrael (4c4719) — 3/2/2023 @ 11:53 am

    Please don’t conflate having a debate on idea vs actual abuse.

    There is a distinction and I think your premise actually gives covers to those activists to proclaim “words are violence”.

    whembly (d116f3)

  94. >There is a distinction

    There is, and those who claim that words cannot be violence are just as guilty of blurring that distinction as are the people who claim that words are always violence.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  95. >What do you mean by “manufactured”?

    There are influential people on both sides of the debate whose goal is to enflame anger and divide us into warring tribes, and who are using their influence to encourage people to react emotionally rather than thoughtfully.

    >Are you saying that there some grievances that aren’t legit?

    I’m saying that some “grievances” are based either on outright lies or deliberate misunderstandings, reinforced by an unwillingness to listen to anyone who might point out that they are lies or deliberate misunderstandings. Absolutely.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  96. SimonJester:

    > Again, I am sorry that you experienced awful things. You have always seemed to be a kind and decent person.

    Thank you. That lands as high praise for me, and I deeply appreciate it.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  97. “words are violence” say people who use the language of character assassins. Trying to patiently, politely, respectfully engage with them is about as productive as shouting into a food waste dumpster on a 100 degree day, and to be fair, both sides do this. I believe there has been a divorce over irreconcilable differences between the two groups on the fringe, engaged as they are in passing hallway sex (F-U, F-U too). I think the people in the middle want a divorce with both fringes but there are complications. GOP and Democrats need their fringe voters to avoid tipping poles of power

    steveg (0b9a68)

  98. As I pointed out @85, repeated words and actions in a captive setting, like a family, have to be looked at differently than even similar words and actions out in the world.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  99. > “words are violence” say people who use the language of character assassins.

    Maybe. it’s also the language of people who have been on the receiving end of words used as violence.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  100. Example:

    If someone calls me an idiot as I’m walking down the sidewalk, well whatever. If my dad called me an idiot every day for 10 years, it would have a profound effect. Even if that person on the sidewalk caused me to relive those words from my dad, it was probably not his intention or meaning.

    Words by themselves are not violence.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  101. @103

    Words by themselves are not violence.

    Kevin M (1ea396) — 3/3/2023 @ 12:38 pm

    Exactly. Context matters too.

    We can distinguish between abusive behaviors vs jerkwad free speech.

    Simply saying “words are violence” conflates the two.

    whembly (607028)

  102. I don’t come often anymore, Patrick. I only come to read your posts and comments.

    I agree with Kevin M. #71.

    In addition, I believe DCSCA simply rehashes the debate from the 1960’s-1970’s on every issue — constantly comparing the present to Reagan, NASA, Vietnam, foreign affairs, etc. His stories from that era can be interesting, as if we are sitting at his childhood dinner table listening to his parents argue, but his attitude is always harsh — as if he always wanted one parent to win and one to lose.

    I lived through the 1960’s-1970’s, too. We should learn from history, not dwell on it. I would gladly come back and welcome DCSCA here if he would engage in debate now, not 50 years ago, but it is clear he can’t do that.

    DRJ (dd161a)

  103. Better for me to leave. I am happy to say I have a life where I remember my past but live in the present.

    DRJ (dd161a)

  104. Plus, DRJ, you do not sneer or insult.

    I know which poster I value more.

    Simon Jester (0d54cc)

  105. We all have our issues. I think DCSCA undermines discussion instead of adding to it, but he probably thinks that about me.

    I loved posting and commenting here, Simon. I guarantee I would be exploring viruses, microbiology and related science topics with you if I were still here. They are more interesting than ever given recent events.

    DRJ (b39202)

  106. What do you mean by “manufactured”?

    Are you saying that there some grievances that aren’t legit?

    The 2020 election results?

    Rip Murdock (24fce2)

  107. Trump Litigation Watch:

    …………
    In an amicus brief filed on Thursday, lawyers for the DOJ argued that while immunity for sitting presidents from civil lawsuits is rightfully broad, it is not absolute — it does have an “outer perimeter.” The DOJ argues that it’s possible that Trump did indeed spur his supporters on to violence.

    “No part of a President’s official responsibilities includes the incitement of imminent private violence,” the Justice Department argues. “By definition, such conduct plainly falls outside the President’s constitutional and statutory duties.”

    Attorneys for Trump had argued that a president is “undoubtedly” entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability “when he or she gives a speech on a matter of public concern.”
    …………
    “[T]he scope of a President’s absolute immunity in this context should be informed by principles analogous to those the Supreme Court has developed in defining the sort of incitement that is unprotected by the First Amendment,” the brief says (citations omitted). “Under Brandenburg v. Ohio, speech lies outside the First Amendment only if it is ‘directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.’ That standard reflects our ‘profound national commitment’ that ‘debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.’ And it ensures that speakers cannot be held liable merely for ’emotionally charged rhetoric,’ ‘strong language,’ or ‘spontaneous and emotional appeals.’”
    ………….
    “Nixon v. Fitzgerald establishes a rule of absolute immunity for the President’s official acts,” the brief says. “It is not a rule of absolute immunity for the President regardless of the nature of his acts.”
    ………….
    The DOJ did not take a position on whether Trump’s speech that day actually did reach that level of incitement, only that the appellate court should conclude that Brandenburg should be the standard for determining whether a president could be sued for speech that reaches that stringent standard.

    The Justice Department’s amicus brief was filed in connection with multiple civil cases filed against Trump over his role in sparking the Jan. 6 Capitol riot………
    …………..

    Rip Murdock (24fce2)

  108. @105. Miss you, too. Harbor no animus toward you at all and enjoy engaging. Our POVs may be less divergent than you suspect- though personally am not an ideologue. Age yields wisdom– and back aches. But do believe it is important to recognize where much of what we are today can be sourced back to earlier eras seeded and rooted in years, experiences and decisions past. A small example- which has always stayed with me. When Walter Cronkite died in 2009, our host posted he didn’t mean much to him- likely a simple generational reference–no biggie. Thing is, for those of us a little longer in the tooth, his standards of broadcast journalism- unlike many of the teleprompter and opinionators today which Cronkite deplored–were the gold standard every journalist and news platform tried to emulate. He was a genuine, seasoned, print, radio and broadcast reporter- and the Managing Editor of his newscast; a powerful position he was keenly aware of; he did not earn ‘the most trusted man in America’ label for nothing yet always encouraged people to seek out many sources. Those standards he established are gone. In general, for good or bad, much of what we are reaping “now” was seeded “then” and recognizing that can help heal our times today and be a guidepost to avoid reliving the same mistakes and tragedies tomorrow. History, indeed, rhymes.

    DCSCA (556fc7)

  109. Cronkite’s reputation for honesty made him a legend. As Jack Paar reportedly quipped, “I don’t believe in God,but I do believe in Walter Cronkite.”

    I am partial to Cronkite because we are both Longhorns. He was a trusted broadcaster for years, but we had no way to tell how ethical he was. He was no saint, just as current journalists aren’t saints.

    DRJ (b39202)

  110. He also took political sides while appearing not to. Sound familiar?

    DRJ (b39202)

  111. To me, Edward R Murrow was far more interesting than Cronkite.

    DRJ (b39202)

  112. DRJ,

    > I guarantee I would be exploring viruses, microbiology and related science topics with you if I were still here.

    That sounds like it would bring significantly more value than is bought by the people who aer causing you to want to not be here.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  113. @112. Yes, but what remains admirable is Cronkite was very much aware of his position and the responsibilities that came with it as the television age matured yet made a deliberate effort to work toward objectivity and communicate to those who viewed his newscast. Double checking sources, etc. Nobody’s perfect, but he made a deliberate effort to work toward high standards. He insisted on being named Managing Editor so he had control and final say of the broadcast content, not the suits in management. Everything from slowing the cadence of his speech to x-number of words per minute to the vocabulary used- as audiences skewed to an average education level. He was quite careful and deliberate to mask his personal political positions. Nobody knew what his personal politics were when he was Managing Editor and anchor. Learned that from colleagues first hand, internally, too. And he fought w/CBS Management over any attempts at influence over content of his broadcast– as Murrow did w/less success. Certainly through Vietnam his reporting tone modified when, in the early days, he flew along on bombing runs over the North but as the ‘Five O’Clock Follies’ made clear, what was being said did not match what was being seen– and he made a point to label his famed ‘stalemate’ commentary, after discussions w/Dick Salant, that it was ‘commentary.’ We really need those standards returned today – particularly in cable news, which is a cesspool.

    Indeed, Murrow is a legendary broadcaster for his time and was a much better writer than WC. It was Murrow who hired Cronkite. Have many hours of his radio broadcasts and he assembled a superb reporting team, ‘Murrow’s Boys’ team of similar caliber– most of which became the core of CBS News after Cronkite took over from Doug Edwards and newscasts went from 15 to 30 minutes. Most, from the war time era, worked in CBS Radio- where their style fit- some managed to transition to television, where pictures supplanted their use of language- but it was hard for them.

    Murrow was constrained by the format he excelled in; superb on radio, where descriptive language could paint vivid mental images. For television, he fell victim to both the limits television puts on language w/pictures replacing words and, perhaps worse, the corporate pressures which had him contractually obligated to do both entertainment programming and journalism [‘See It Now’ vs. ‘Person To Person’.] It eventually drove Murrow to leave CBS and join the USIA. As an anchor, Cronkite fought against crossing over that entertainment/news line with great success [and, if you recall, drew criticism over same after a brief, benign appearance in the fictitious TV newsroom of ‘Mary Tyler Moore Show’ in the mid ’70s- [a CBS Entertainment program]- as himself.

    Different styles for different mediums, too. It’s the loss of standards both broadcast journalists sought to maintain that is sorely missing today– and the decline began when the news divisions were driven to be profit centers– which, in itself, can skew how news stories are stacked for broadcast- and that is corporate influence, not journalism. Many of Murrow’s topics in his documentaries would never be budgeted for production today. Even the investigative ‘CBS Reports’ broadcasts were curtained by the 80’s. The last bastion of that kind of in-depth journalism was ’60 Minutes’ – and even that has become tainted by the drive for profits and significant corporate meddling. The really sad thing is- the news cablers of today just don’t care, or merely give ‘standards’ lip service, and seldom label their cable broadcasts opinion commentary [as newspaper editorials are]– which is not news. It’s all about chasing $ and ratings points– which they can measure now to the minute. And w/t explosion of the web with so many platforms now pitching a POV, it’s very hard work sourcing basic news today. And that, sadly, is the way it is.

    DCSCA (3f00c7)

  114. To me, Edward R Murrow was far more interesting than Cronkite.

    Yes. Also David Brinkley

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  115. No love for Charles Kuralt?

    aphrael (4c4719)

  116. People can’t think of everybody quickly.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  117. Also David Brinkley

    I preferred Huntley, the boring one.

    lurker (cd7cd4)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1926 secs.