August 25, 2006

It's a new Bloggingheads, with me and Matthew Yglesias!

Here it is. Topics and times:
Sloppy cases make bad law (09:13)

Pluto gets the ax (04:48)

Have Democrats lost the stem cell issue? (04:56)

Racists on a plane... (11:02)

...and on reality TV (04:09)

Are beauty pagents worse than dolls? (05:37)

Madrassas in America (06:22)

Joe Lieberman becomes a Republican (05:31)

19 comments:

Justin said...

Have Democrats lost the cell stem issue? Wha?

I really wish I had sound on my computer.

I don't know what you were discussing, but the issue a) still favors Democrats and b) was never going to be a major issue in 2006 or 2008. It's the type of stuff that dog days focus on, and then we move on to other stuff.

As for Joe Lieberman becoming a Republican - I'm not so sure. He still agrees with Democrats on just about every domestic policy issue - and that's what the Senate basically does, with Article II having so much more foreign policy power. He'll likely continue to be what he is if he wins the campaign - a guy who generally
votes with Democrats but stabs them in the back and makes them look bad.

d said...

Further proof that bloggers should be read (if even that) and not seen or heard.

VICTOR said...

d I ordinarily strongly agree with you, but bloggingheads (and anything not involving a blogger monologue) is quite bearable.

Daryl Herbert said...

The 1.2x speedup is great; I can't watch it at real speed.

You didn't mention in your plane discussion that this was precipitated by a passenger hearing one of the men say this was the last 30 minutes of their life.

This isn't the first time Arab Muslims have made jokes about terrorism and then thrown a hissy fit when people take them seriously. "Let's pretend we're terrorists to freak out the white people and then if they do anything about it, we get to have a field day calling them racists"

Justin: you can't have anything of value to say if all you did was read the section titles. Sorry.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

I smell Rose Mary Woods. 18 minute gap? Yeah, right.

Ann Althouse said...

Daryl: Thanks. I didn't know that quote. I wish I had.

D: I think we already know that d is no fan of the blog either.

Comment Dude said...

You might try spelling Matt's name correctly.

Editor Theorist said...

Matthew Iglesias - ooh er.

IMO Not-funny, not-insightful, self-righteous, whiny... I only made it half way through the Vlog.

Ann - please don't go on with this guy again!

Justin said...

It's okay Daryl, you didn't have anything of value to say and you did watch it, so I'm batting fine.

Normally if you think someone says something, the appropriate thing if you find it of little value is to ignore it, unless they were talking specifically to you, in which you should feel free to respond.

Though I'd also caution against offering insane, borderline racist offerings about how much fun it must be to be a persecuted minority, and how any indignation that a persecuted minority has must be contrived, as they all really enjoy the spectacle of them being racially profiled.

As to the claim that they were making a joke:

http://mcgath.blogspot.com/2006/08/monarch-incident-two-news-items.html

pretty much details everything I would have said about this. But I love how you simply assume (against logic and evidence) what a passanger accused of racism says in their defense as truth. I'm sure you do that of all people accused of bad actions, especcially when they aren't under oath.

And I hope that Althouse's accepting Daryl's quote, without sourcing, at face value, does not betray any prejudice based on her preferred view of the reality on the ground in this "war" against "terror".

Justin said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ann Althouse said...

Comment Dude: Thanks. Sorry about the misspelling. I blame high school Spanish.

Justin: I did accept Darryl's 'You didn't mention in your plane discussion that this was precipitated by a passenger hearing one of the men say this was the last 30 minutes of their life" (not his humorous restatement of it). I'm just trying to get the facts right, not look for confirmation of a world view or whatever. Watch the show to get a sense of my attitude about this.

Anyway, here's a recent BBC article giving some more background, and it indicates that the two guys may have been trying to scare people to have some fun:
Mr Zeb said he believed the scare was sparked by an elderly woman who had been sitting next to them on the plane.

She had asked them some questions, and then got up and walked to the cockpit, he said....

Amanda Dunleavy from Bolton, who was on the flight, said the pair aroused suspicion because of the way they acted when they were queuing.

She said: "They queued up for a good 40 or 50 minutes and then wandered off. They kept coming back, standing very, very close to people, intimidating them.

"The minute they got on [the plane] they started going under the seats and messing.

"When people began to take notice - and one young girl was really upset, crying - they just sat there laughing."

This doesn't say what they said to the "elderly women."

Daryl Herbert said...

It's interesting, Justin, that the post you cite to only supports what I'm saying:

According to all other accounts, they were speaking a language that "sounded like Arabic." Did they break into English or Spanish just long enough to let other people on the plane know of their secret terror plot?

Why would they switch to English, just long enough to let the passengers in on their plans?

Glenn Reynolds has already explained that making bogus threats is a useful strategy for terrorists. For someone who ideologically supports terrorists, but doesn't want to make the full commitment of a real attack, a false threat is a great way to help the cause.

Unlike you, I don't automatically assume that people accused of being "racists" are automatically guilty, lying, frightened, hysterical, overreacting, unthinking, sheeplike, etc.

It's well documented that British Muslims are in great numbers ideologically in favor of the terrorists. Are you going to deny that? And once you admit that, is it so crazy to think they might find enjoyment in making bogus threats? Especially with useful idiots like you to make sure the bogus threats have the proper end result (delegitimizing vigilance and security measures, delegitimizing political opinion skeptical of terrorism supporters, etc.)

Daryl Herbert said...

And further, Justin, as terrorism is the use of fear of violence (excepting war) to push a political agenda, one can accomplish that with bogus threats. One can make terrorist threats that are entirely bogus. One can be a terrorist (i.e. engaged in terrorism) without ever individually planning or carrying out a real attack.

And before you criticize my definition of terrorist as overbroad, consider it not in the context of al-Qaida, but in the context of Klansmen terrorizing black families. Isn't it possible to terrorize people without ever personally intending to be the one to carry out the actual attack? Isn't all terrorism reprehensible?

Simon said...

I don't think that I'd realized that Matt Yglesias is actually a teenager. Maybe it's the medium - Ann looks twenty years younger than she is, so maybe Yglesias is actually in his mid-thirties, but he sure doesn't look it here.

Simon said...

On the other hand, I LOVE his panda analogy for pluto! That's genius - topmarks, Yglesias.

Justin said...

I'm unsure, Ann, how a bunch of different people, all accused of racism, telling several contradictory stories that only have in common the impulse to blame the victims, as somehow validating each other's stories. Were they talking in Urdu or English? Was the problem that they acted shifty or acted boisterous. Did they make a threat that was overheard or did they stand around and look intimidating? Certainly, the idea that they did all of these things is highly unlikely, particularly since they managed to get on another flight after being escorted off just that day (and with the greatest of apologies).

Daryl, your argument, which now appears to actually consider the victims terrorists, is too absurd for words to describe.

Daryl Herbert said...

Justin Wrote: Daryl, your argument, which now appears to actually consider the victims terrorists, is too absurd for words to describe.

If these "victims" were deliberately making a bogus threat, then every single behavior described by the victimizers* makes perfect sense, and fits in perfectly with the argument that I expressed with words so succinctly in a previous post.

* the "victimizers" being multiple passengers, who all got off their plane and voluntarily delayed their own travels, and risked losing their tickets altogether, and all told similar stories of "victims" trying to appear threatening. "Victimizers" include husbands and wives, and even a nice old lady. Whom you are incapable as seeing as anything other than brutish racists.

Elizabeth said...

even a nice old lady

How do you know she was nice? There was an old lady, but you're stacking the deck a bit to declare her "nice" without having seen or heard her. You're assuming everyone involved is a character out of Frank Capra.

You cite the number of responding passengers as evidence these guys must have been acting as terrorists. Haven't you ever seen a mob reaction? Doesn't fear inspire panic in people, and can't panic spread?

I don't know that they overreacted, but I do know the stories I've read don't provide enough evidence to assume they didn't.

Jacob said...

Yglesias is in his mid twenties.