March 11, 2007

Blogging on Instapundit, I take my first political shot at...

John Edwards! I wasn't lying in wait to get Edwards. It's just that this WaPo article popped up today.

21 comments:

reality check said...

That's the best you got?

Your smears have to be stronger than that, and clearer too, because Glenn's readers are pretty stupid overall.

You do still have to make sure you have the plausible deniability.

I am concerned what you will do to his traffic if you keep up such mediocre work.

Anyway, congrats on being the last true honest Democrat smearing Democrats guest blogger on the true honest libertarian civil rights defending Instapundit's site.

Have you considered taking your blog to second life? You could do your smear routine there and become the second life's Instapundit and make a gazillion lindens.

Ann Althouse said...

Second Life is too confusing for me.

Bruce Hayden said...

Interesting Althouse over at Instapundit - a bit shorter and lighter than we see here. We shall see if TM can do some of the same. His Libby posts were getting longer, and longer, and longer.

Ann - I probably like this blog better though for you, as you seem to try to get discussions going here, whereas Instapundit doesn't have comments, and so Glenn (and now you ) tend to be pithier, and less deep, there.

I should admit my biases up front - my three favorite blogs are all run by law profs - these two, plus volokh.com. Maybe it comes from being stuck with your ilk in class for three years.

Joe Baby said...

Hirin' anti-Catholic bloggers, botchin' their firing/re-hiring/resignation, buyin' big big houses, gettin' all religious-y on beliefnet (last we'll probably hear on that topic), and cancellin' debates.

More John Edwards, please.

Kirby Olson said...

The Democrats know they have to pander to the politically correct to get nominated because the only people available to run the grass roots campaigns are idiots fresh out of college in tie-dyed t-shirts. This enables them to win the nomination, but then the electorate at large won't have them.

Meanwhile the right has to run the gauntlet of the religiously correct -- a much more flexible group since they are generally older and more shrewd.

I think Edwards' only hope was to move to a move Lieberman-like position so that he could attract responsible voters who actually make it to the polls.

reality check said...

Canceling debates? He became a hero for being the first to cancel that debate. That is what is known as insight and leadership.

It was a disaster waiting to happen and the Nevada Democratic Party should have their heads (and their wallets) examined.

Joe Baby said...

Hah! He's a hero to the lunatics who are driving the wagon train over a cliff. And Edwards is lashing them to run harder. Love it.

Oh, I know, the brilliance of Kos. Kos the strategic wizard. Guy who makes Bob Shrum look good by comparison.

Check out the LV Review Journal editorial.

TMink said...

Althouse, this just proves you are nothing but a right wing, Michael Savage quoting, Republican shill! That nazi, reichtard Glen, who only attracts brownshirts and flat earthers, was correct in tapping you to further poison the minds of those weak enough to be swayed by his "Heh" or "indeed."

If it were not so sad that you were so transparent in your attempted chicanery, I would laugh at you. I think I will anyway! Hah hah hah!

Trey (channeling Reality Check)

reality check said...

Yeah, Kos, the guy that won the house and senate in November.

Anyway, in the bluster of the LV editorial, here is the truth that slipped out:

"This hyperventilation results from the fact that far-left Democrats have no comparable media outlet,"

What does this tell you about how the LV Journal feels is the truth about Fox?

Democrats don't want a comparable Fox outlet. We don't scream and demand that the news needs to be filtered and more biased. We ask that the news be objective and admit any biases.

We're happy to think for ourselves.

reality check said...

Speaking of minds to poison Trey, are you working today?

MikeinSC said...

Hmm, so far, Edwards has cowered away from left-wing blogs and Fox News. And the campaign isn't even in full swing and FNC should introduce any piece involving him or any Democrat as "the candidate of the party who backed out of a debate because the news station was not pure enough for their tastes"

Yeah, I take him seriously as a potential commander-in-chief.
-=Mike

Joe Baby said...

Good gravy, I'm spewing coffee all over the screen.

Kos the valiant!? The defender of the faith, and the hero of the Battle of Washington (DC) of 2008?

Better be careful about saying that around San Fran Nan or Harry Reid. Heck, even Chuckles Schumer will kneecap you for alluding to that.

And hilarious -- absolutely hilarious* -- that Dems have no media allies or waterboys, want no biases, etc.

I only wish I had the decks clear this Sunday, so I could further disabuse you of your silliness.

*Hillary-ous, even...if your name is Rick Kaplan, George Stephanoupoulos, Ron Fournier, etc.

JSF said...

I've wrote a few posts seeing how the modern Democratic Party (1991-Present)is becoming more like Orwell's INGSOC. First, there is the Outer Party(i.e Kos and nutroots)and an Inner Party (Washingtonians). They want to control what people say (First ventured by the Clinton takeover of 900 FBI files -- Hmm, no prosocution there. Wonder why?) Trying to silence critics with a false history (Road to 9/11, anyone?) and casting out those who have opposed the Clintons (Lieberman spoke up against Pres. Clinton in 1997, thrown out in 2006).
Now, even though the Democrats own the Acadamia and MSM (tell me how many Conservative Reporters sit in Midtown Manhattan?), they wish to silence the few Republican voices in the Press (Fairness Doctrine for talk radio and propoganda against Fox News). I ask most Democrats here, do you believe in silencing voices that don't follow the Democrats? It seems by the actions of your leaders that the democrats want to stomp on the face of the future by silencing the opposition.

George said...

Ask Yourself...


What would King Leonidas think of Sen. Edwards....

TMink said...

Reality Check asked if I was at work today, poisoning minds. Nah, I am just mocking you pal. That is too easy to be work.

Trey

TMink said...

Actually, RC, I thought you would be flattered. Come on, it was a good job! I got the over the top rhetoric, the near rhyme neoligisms, the spinning off into irrelevency, the broad insults. I think I got you spot on. But I will leave it to other, disinterested parties to decide.

Did my post channeling Reality Check come close? Or was I too kind and restrained?

Trey

reality check said...

Sigh,

For a psychologist you have a pretty bad ear, Trey. It leads me to believe you probably aren't listening to your victims, probably are stereotyping them, probably judging them.

Joe Baby said...

I'd argue that a psychologist who couldn't classify or stereotype, and did not offer judgments or advice, ain't worth a damn.

RC, you should get in that business, especially since you can diagnose over the web. Low overhead, and all that.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Did Glenn Reynolds issue you an "Insta-Squeeze" while you're guest blogging?

TMink said...

Agreed Joe, but did my post at 11:03 am get Reality Check right?

RC just enjoys insulting me when I critique his posts or make fun of him. And he is upset that I am not a socialist because all psychologists are supposed to be don't ya know! So that makes me an abusive fraud in his eyes. It really breaks my heart.

But don't you think I did a good RC post?????

Trey

Mike said...

"I should make absolutely clear: Nothing has changed about John Edwards as a human being and my value system," he said. "It's exactly the same as it's always been, which is wanting to give people the chances that I've had."

Yes, everyone should have the opportunity to parade junk science in front of naive juries, bilking millions from mean old insurance companies and dishonest OB docs. RETCH.